Operating systems: Windows 7/8 Vs Ubuntu

[Manticore]

I recently purchased a laptop without touch screen. Which operating system is better for it: Windows 7, Windows 8, or Ubuntu?

Well, OverEdge, the answer to that question depends entirely on what you intend to do with it. If 99% of what you need to do can be done from a browser, the operating system itself isn’t very important. If you do, however, prefer to play DirectX-based games and/or use productivity software such as Adobe Premiere Pro or Photoshop, then you might consider whether or not you know enough about Ubuntu and the workarounds for making Windows applications available on it to make that transition work for you.

The differences between these three operating systems comes down to experience. Do you prefer the traditional desktop present in Windows 7 over the Modern UI of Windows 8? Without a touch screen computer, you might also consider just how useful the new features of Windows 8 will be to you when you’re still using a trackpad and a keyboard. For most users, Windows 7 is still just fine. It will run all the programs you already own on Windows at the loss of the latest apps made for the Modern UI. At this point, those apps don’t exactly make it worth switching over. It’ll take some time before developers shift their focus from desktop programs to the new interface, and it’s more likely that Windows 8 will continue to exist as a schizophrenic environment than something truly based in one environment or another.

Ubuntu shows some interesting promise. While I don’t personally use it every day, I do have it installed through a virtual machine on my iMac and have a large appreciation for the innovation present on the platform. If a love for open source runs through your veins, then the case could be made to make Ubuntu your platform of choice. Be mindful, however, of driver issues brought on by manufacturers not fully supporting Linux. Some of the latest processors and wireless devices out there may still have small compatibility issues that you’ll need to know how to work around. This is much less of a problem than it was five years ago, but it’s worth checking user forums to find out if your laptop will work seamlessly with the OS. The same could be said for Windows 8, which may work differently with existing hardware despite an overwhelming amount of support overlap between Vista/7 and Windows 8 drivers.

As much as I’d like to give you a clear answer, the choice is entirely your own. If you feel that Ubuntu offers you the flexibility and control you’d prefer over Windows 7 or 8, then it may well be the best choice for you. If, on the other hand, you’d rather stick to the Windows ecosystem and either go with the tried and true Windows 7 or the new experience featured on Windows 8, then that could be a better choice.

Windows 7 Vs. Windows 8 Vs. Ubuntu for Laptops - LockerGnome

When Windows 8 is released on 26 October, it will be the third straight time a major Windows version is launched close to the release of arguably the world's most popular Linux distro - Ubuntu.
Ubuntu and Canonical have come a long way since their 7.04 Feisty Fawn release, which followed Microsoft's Windows Vista.
Back then, Canonical failed to capitalise on Vista's universal rejection by its users. If reviews of the Windows 8 Consumer Preview are any indication, it'll be a very cold winter for Microsoft.
But, more importantly for the Linux community, does Ubuntu 12.04 have what it takes to position itself as a more usable alternative?

The Ubuntu advantage

It's ironic how the one feature in recent Ubuntu releases that might have lost it some users will now work in its favour and attract new users by the bucket-load. We are, obviously, talking about Unity.
Microsoft's revolutionary Metro desktop is already facing criticism similar to that Canonical fielded when it introduced Unity on the desktop. They listened, learned and they evolved.
Furthermore, Windows 8 is a major departure from how Microsoft does desktops - offline installations that could connect to each other. Now, with Windows 8, you have an online desktop designed to deliver the best of the cloud to your visually new desktop. It can do things in a way that no version of Windows ever could before. And we in the Linux world know what that means, right?
Be it with KDE 4, Gnome 3, or Unity, suddenly introducing new paradigms and a dramatic new way of doing things displeases users. And while the changes might be new to Windows, they have long been mainstays on the Linux desktop in general, and Ubuntu in particular.
In this feature, we'll attempt to ascertain if Ubuntu's maturity and flexibility, and its range of options will score over Windows 8's radically different new desktop paradigms.

Customising the desktop

With 12.04, Ubuntu has refined further its simplified consolidated System Settings window. Users can now make the launcher a permanent fixture on the desktop, as well as tweak its behaviour for multi-monitor set-ups, which was a much-requested feature by Linux users.
This was well received by our bunch of testers, who had pre-conceived notions about the difficulty of setting up Linux.
Their experience with setting up Windows 8 was rather interesting. Their first instinct was to look for the Control Panel, which isn't readily accessible, at least under the Consumer Preview. It shows up when you bring up the Charms bar under the Desktop view, but not under the main Start screen. This discrepancy wasn't noticed by many users.
Like Ubuntu 12.04, Windows 8, too, tries to simplify its settings options, with the most common settings accessible from under the Charms bar. Other advanced settings, such as the BitLocker encryption, are still accessible via the Control Panel, or you can search directly for them from the Start screen.
While most didn't figure out the location of the Charms bar on their own, all our testers appreciated Windows 8's style of segregating its settings, making commonly used settings more readily accessible than less frequently used ones.
Accessing hidden features

Another similarity between Ubuntu 12.04 and Windows 8 is their focus on making less visible features, buried beneath nested menus, easily accessible.
Windows 8 is tackling this issue by adding an MS Office-like Ribbon to its Windows Explorer, while Ubuntu's solution is the Heads Up Display (HUD). Still, most of our testers preferred to stick to the Context menu when working with Windows Explorer.
According to Microsoft, Windows Explorer has more than 200 functions (a fact we shared with our testers), but many simply continued using it to just look at and launch files.
Surprisingly, HUD got more looks than we expected, even though it forces people to abandon the mouse and use the keyboard.
Linux users in general, and Ubuntu users in particular, appreciated the time-saving facet of HUD and how it seamlessly performs system-wide settings, such as setting up VPN, as well as app-specific actions such as saving a document or opening a bookmarked page.

complete article
Windows 8 vs Ubuntu: battle of the operating systems: Cloud integration | News | TechRadar

 

[A.Rafay]

Yaar tum roz koi na koi cheez lete rahtey ho....kabhi smartphone. ..kabhi mac..kabhi laptop! Just like me

 

[Darth Vader]

8 awesome Easy AND QUICK

Yaar tum roz koi na koi cheez lete rahtey ho....kabhi smartphone. ..kabhi mac..kabhi laptop! Just like me

market me har roz kuch na kuch ata rahta hai ab banda keya karee banda akhir banda he hai lol

 

[DroneAcharya]

The thread title should be something on the lines of "OS Decision making for noobs" or "A Dumbasses guide in choosing an OS based on WYSIWYG parameters" ; Any CS guy or SysAd out there would shudder to remotely even have WinE (Windows Emulator), let alone choosing Windows as a part of his OS.

 

[Jade]

Try lubuntu.

 

[DroneAcharya]

Try lubuntu.

Somehow, Debian and other variants of it including the KDE version (KUbuntu) and Ubuntu as well are much more stable than say Fedora, when it comes to updates. Also Windows users who just need a Browser and a Keypad to get them going will never experience the bliss of working on Kernels and writing modules/patches to have their own customization done for whatever modules they need to do it for.

 

[1ndy]

Gaming > Win7
Work > Linux (anyone of your choice)

 

[Developereo]

I have always found *nix UI to be lethargic and horrendous compared to Microsoft or Apple.

That hasn't changed, primarily because *nix UI is driven by the arrogance of a small group of nerds who dictate "this is how you should use the system" as opposed to the Microsoft/Apple philosophy of actually listening to users.

I found the silliness about HUD particularly amusing -- this is what the original Mac had, back in the 80s. So much for innovation!

 

[Ayush]

windows 8.

 

[EagleEyes]

windows 8.

Are you running windows 8? How is it compared to windows 7?

 

[scrumpy]

I have always found *nix UI to be lethargic and horrendous compared to Microsoft or Apple.

That hasn't changed, primarily because *nix UI is driven by the arrogance of a small group of nerds who dictate "this is how you should use the system" as opposed to the Microsoft/Apple philosophy of actually listening to users.

I found the silliness about HUD particularly amusing -- this is what the original Mac had, back in the 80s. So much for innovation!

I would dispute this claim. There is a lot of choice in window managers available on Linux systems. If you don't like unity, you can chose from gnome, XFCE, KDE, window maker, etc. The GUI interface is just one part of the operating system and it can be easily replaced by some other. OS X itself has unix roots and you drop into a unix shell and run the usual unix commands.

In the end I guess it all boils down to what you are familiar with. I primarily run Fedora on Gnome. A while back I had bought a Mac of ebay and tried using it. The unfamiliarity with the system meant that it was frustrating to use it. Plus I also missed repo tools like yum/apt and hated the idea of going to each individual site to download what I needed to run. Some of these seem to be fixed with the app store in later versions. Similar frustrations are also present when I run windows where I miss the unix command line the most.

 

[Ayush]

Are you running windows 8? How is it compared to windows 7?

no,but many of my friends are.
i found it to be faster than windows 7.the apps open faster in windows 8.but personally i prefer windows 7.i hate the window like display of windows 8.also i miss the start menu,but many of my friends have installed some third party app,which brings it back.

so,if you are performance oriented and dont mind the tiles like look of windows 8,then you should go for it.it is better.

but if you like your pc the old way,then windows 7 aint bad either.

this might help webby,even i am confused whether i should upgrade,but at the moment it is windows 7 for me.

Windows 8 vs. Windows 7 - Speed And Performance Testing | Usability Geek

 

[Sinnerman108]

Somehow, Debian and other variants of it including the KDE version (KUbuntu) and Ubuntu as well are much more stable than say Fedora, when it comes to updates. Also Windows users who just need a Browser and a Keypad to get them going will never experience the bliss of working on Kernels and writing modules/patches to have their own customization done for whatever modules they need to do it for.

Wrong.
The difference between Fedora (Redhat) and others is the source base.
Fedora is a community project and acts as a test bed for the RedHat kernels.

I have always found *nix UI to be lethargic and horrendous compared to Microsoft or Apple.

That hasn't changed, primarily because *nix UI is driven by the arrogance of a small group of nerds who dictate "this is how you should use the system" as opposed to the Microsoft/Apple philosophy of actually listening to users.

I found the silliness about HUD particularly amusing -- this is what the original Mac had, back in the 80s. So much for innovation!

1. Unix systems were never meant to be GUI driven. GUI is for dumdums who can't learn to use the actual OS.

2. Used KDE of late ? it is far more swankier than others ..and doesn't demand a kilogram of RAM chips !

 

[Developereo]

I would dispute this claim. There is a lot of choice in window managers available on Linux systems.

I just run Ubuntu server and Windows 7. Development on Windows GUI and deployment on minimal Ubuntu server.

1. Unix systems were never meant to be GUI driven. GUI is for dumdums who can't learn to use the actual OS.

GUI comes in useful for debugging - especially multi-threaded apps. I have been able to get by with developing/debugging on Windows and deploying on non-gui Ubuntu server but, at some point, I will need to start debugging live apps. Will need to look into remote gdb since I want to keep the Ubuntu install minimal.

2. Used KDE of late ? it is far more swankier than others ..and doesn't demand a kilogram of RAM chips !

I use Ubuntu as a production box so I prefer to keep it minimal as far as possible -- just Ubuntu server + needed packages.

 

[DroneAcharya]

Wrong.
The difference between Fedora (Redhat) and others is the source base.
Fedora is a community project and acts as a test bed for the RedHat kernels.

So is Debian, Ubuntu or other variants of it. Also Fedora or Debian or Ubuntu all derive from a common Linux Kernel version code base. That being said, Ubuntu is a lot more tied up to using using proprietary code from say NVIDIA and the likes, whereas Fedora is still free to developing your own code to exploit CUDA's arch. for your own development (signed off through the community of course), or getting third-party software from RPM Fusion. Which in hindsight is double edged sword for the non-savvy user. Ubuntu on the whole is a pleasure to use for startup admins due to a host of tools available at their disposal, but if you need a hands-on control on day-day tasks in setting up your own Server environment then Fedora/RHEL is the way to go.