Community poll forum: Would you consider using Linux instead of Windows or Mac OS?

My USERs group is conducting a study on Linux. If from this class I find it is a viable alternative then my next system will run it. I have severe concerns about Vista and Microsoft's Big brother attitude. I presently run XP and will keep it as long as I have this machine. It's th next one I'm concerned about. Either Linux or MAC?
Jack

I've been around long enough to see these operating systems come and go.

I'd love to try Linux, but I'm loath to, unless I can switch full time. I just can't do that unless I can run photoshop on it, as this is supposed to be what I use a computer for. Yeah I know about Gimp, even Gimpshop, but it lacks a few of the features that I depend on, a real shame as I'm a complete convert to the opensource cause, and Gimpshop is amazing.

I've got one PC at home with multiple interchangeable hard drives. At the moment, I've got two with OpenSUSE 10.2, one running KDE and the other running Gnome. The third drive carries Windows XP Pro. I had a Windows Vista installation on one of the two Linux drives, but it was so stale when compared to what I saw in Linux that I installed the second OpenSUSE copy over it. I'm getting a great deal of fun out of digging into Linux in these two desktop environments; it's almost as much fun as when I was first learning about PCs over twenty years ago.

Here's the conclusion I've come to--if you want to be involved in what's on the leading edge of desktop operating systems, use a current distro of Linux. If, on the other hand, you want to be content with more of the same-old-same-old, only a little fancier and a _whole_ lot more demanding of your hardware, get Vista. If you just want to get your work done, play some games, and not obsess over your PC, use Windows XP, and then go out and live your life.

The reply posted on the CNET e-mail broadcast inspired me to take the plunge; I have ordered the Knoppix 5.1 DVD-ROM to give the system a good test drive. I am really quite thrilled that I have felt able to take the first step, which is all thanks to your inspiration.

Kindest regards

Roger

Sir
I am still unable to understand people saying that linux is not user-friendly...any doubts download a live cd of ubuntu and test it...then u will understand...maybe certain things dont come out of the box like mp3 playing capability and certain other codecs and certain things..but it doesnt u cant set up those things..u can do it in a jiffy...all u need is a little bit of patience to go thro a couple of forums dedicated to the linux distro...ok now coming back to the hardware problem there are so many forums out there for linux who are willing to help the people...so u can just give them ur hardware details and what distro is compatible...i have found ubuntu rocking...there were periods when i had reinstalled my windows xp and i could not find my motherboard cd...just imagine this situation...i was helpless..i could not hear any audio because i could not install the driver for it and the display was awful since i could not install my display driver also...i went crazy...but my linux wow....it has the alsa for sound and there was no problem for display...now would u call this a better hardware support or ur xp??see i m not against windows or anything like that....i m trying to convince people how good an operating system linux is and an open source OS can win only when people lay their faith on it and use it..all i wud like to say is that it might be tough for a couple of days after u install linux on ur pc to get everything working but once u start getting a couple of things right u will get everything right and i promise u wud not log on to windows and for everyone's kind information all the eyecandy that has been added in windows vista has been around in the market in linux for a couple of years and has been there in Mac OS for around 6 years or so and they have been running even on low profile computers like mine...i hope i m not offending anybody by this post...i respect windows and microsoft and bill gates as much as anybody does...i m just presenting my view on the alternative to windows in this open world...hope everybody takes this post in the rite sense...
regards
shankar narayanan

I switched to Mac from Windows and think its great. I can do command line if I want, but am happy with OSX. The best decision I made was switching from XP to OSx.

I have used several Linux distributions in the past and I liked all of them. The majority of them were GUI-based such as Red Hat and Mandrake, but I have used some non-GUI ones too. I love open source software for game development (such as Blender and Ogre) because they work just as well as the expensive products Maya puts out for my needs and they cost 1000 dollars less (i.e. nothing). Would I use Linux and open source software exclusively? Absolutely not.

My friends and family who are not so technically inclined often ask me, "What kind of computer should I buy?", "How do I fix this problem?", "Should I buy Vista?", "Should I upgrade my hardware?", etc., and because I provide tech support services to so many people, I'm expected to know what the latest trends are. I can't very well tell someone who asks me, "No, you shouldn't use Vista; try Linux." if I haven't used Vista myself.

It often frustrates me when die-hard open source fanatics tell their friends and families to use Linux, or when people who won't buy anything besides a Mac tell their friends to buy Macs without ever considering what the person's needs are, what their skill level is, or how willing they are to learn new systems. Here is an example of why you should consider the user's needs. My mother asked what computer she should upgrade to, I told her to buy a Mac. It would be better for her needs since she does a lot of graphical work, it runs Microsoft Office perfectly well, and she wanted to save space on her desk. However, when my fiancs mother asked me if she should upgrade to a Mac, I said no. I justified it by explaining the cost, the learning curve, and the lack of software support for the programs she uses most often, which don't come in Mac versions. I have also suggested Linux for people who don't have any problems learning new software and just need something cheap to make their computers run.

In short, each OS has its advantages and disadvantages, and recommending or using only one of them is a detriment to those who rely on you, the "technical person" for advice.

You are correct when you say using one thing to the exclusion of anything else presents problems for those who would rely on a person for tech support/advice.

Still, as a DieHard(TM) Linux user (not fanatic or zealot, but a happy user) I maintain an XP and w2k machine as well -- otherwise I could not honestly say to the world what OS makes me the most productive and is the most pleasing for me to use. I purchased my sister and her family a Mac (simply nephew-proof).

The computer solutions I help others with are based upon their needs and requirements, not my personal preferences. I am frequently frustrated by people who lump all computer X users into one group.

I have tried several distros. My main issues are probably common. Windows main advantage is that I put a disk in, and install it. It loads drivers and programs, and the world is great. You need software, everyone has windows software, and the same holds true for MAC's.

Then there is Linux. Everything is over the net. Support, software, drivers, you can be at the mercy of some one on the net that may or may not know what they are talking about. I have seen fixes that made no sense.

So, while I like the concept of Linux, until some of these things stabilize, I will probably be a windows user. One other reason, I support 75 AIX systems at work and really don't want to go home and have to fix my home pc.

A big "con" is that finding and downloading software and drivers is painful. The sites often assume you know a lot about their particular style and application already. I have had many times when I installed something only to find that it did not work because "I should have known" to install something else 1st. Further, documentation is often terrible and/or out of date. It is not anyone's fault, it is just the nature of lots of people volunteering to work on a project, and some tasks are a lot less fun than others.

please send an email and will try to get you the driver for your webcam. Was surprised my old Kensington Webcam worked straight out using CamStream.

Don't get me wrong, there are things about each OS that I like. I like how in OSX I can keep my mail program running all the time without the window taking up real estate. I like how Windows handles pictures and video better than Mac or Linux and I really love the new start menu in Vista. Ubuntu is a very well done version of Linux and for the most part is usable with a few exceptions. First off, Grub is aweful. It is dangerious and can destroy your data very easily and without warning or anyway to undo. This is not acceptable for a main strea average user. Also, until I no longer have to compile programs for linux and modify my kernal to get things to work, it will never be a main stream os.

Linux is better than it used to be, but it still fails in critical areas. It's really run out of time to come of age. Windows and OSX are just as good in just about every way and better in many ways.

I haven't switched to Linux because I have to remain compatible with my employer's windows software. I have installed a couple of different version of Linux but never had the time to really learn all facets.

My biggest frustration is that I cannot locate drivers and software for my printers and other equipment that takes advantage of all the features. It appears that equipment manufacturers are just not interested in including software that will run under Linux.

I have been using Linux since RH 4, and Windows since 2.11. I have learned not to be too religious about what OS was better and why. As I was once a developer on OS/2 Warp, I learned this lesson well.

Being a programmer I have learned that if you are not current with technologies, programming languages, and methods it impacts both your marketability and your ability to 'do the job'.

At home and work I have both Windows and Linux boxes. I use whatever I need for the job. If it is programming I use either. For casual web browsing and e-mail I use the Winbox. For gaming I use our game console(s), and rarely use either Linux or Windows.

As 'web applications' become more popular, and are OS neutral, it will boil down to what OS will provide the best speed, services and usability.

Vista and Linux both suffer from the lack of drivers for legacy or oddball hardware. But, more and more, hardware providers are supplying both Windows and Linux drivers for their products.

In the end the choice of OS, for the general consumer, boils down to familiarity, usability, and cost. For the techie, it is whatever floats their boat for the moment.

The next best Frisbeee (re: OS) may be none of the above...