What's with Ubuntu, is it an viable option?
- Thread starter piquant
- Start date
-
- Tags
- windows to mac
Well... they're different. For a peecee my choice would be Ubuntu for its userfriendliness nad still being *nix. For a Mac it would be Mac OS X and for the same reasons.
Worthiness.. depends a lot on what you need to do, what you want to do and how. The best way to find out is try yourself - install Fusion, Parallels or VirtualBox and install Ubuntu in it, and see how it feels to use, and try to do what you need to do with it.
Worthiness.. depends a lot on what you need to do, what you want to do and how. The best way to find out is try yourself - install Fusion, Parallels or VirtualBox and install Ubuntu in it, and see how it feels to use, and try to do what you need to do with it.
Thank you for responding so fast. Having found someone who can really help, let me flesh out my dilemma. I've never had any experience with a PC, nor do I yearn to do so now. My current machine is the G3 iBook 600 and I don't want to spend $2000+ for another Mac. When I read about Ubuntu, I wondered if a much more reasonably priced PC running Ubuntu would fit the bill for me. The article i read made it sound like this OS is not unlike OS X including Apple Mail.
Pairing an email program that I know with Firefox really takes care of all my needs.
Pairing an email program that I know with Firefox really takes care of all my needs.
nixgeek
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
I use Ubuntu on a daily basis as my main OS on my work laptop. My kids run it on their PC and manage just fine. The only issues they ever encounter are probably issues they wouldn't be able to solve on Windows or OS X either. IMO, Ubuntu really has come along in such a short amount of time that it's a viable alternative. Mind you, if you have older Windows games and such you MIGHT possible be able to run them using WINE, but your mileage may vary. I've had some games for the kids that wouldn't run properly on WINE, though others have been successful.
But for everyday use (Internet, e-mail, chat, IM, document creation, etc.), it's pretty much good to go.
I've run Ubuntu on my iMac G5 as well, and though it runs great and I can manage with it, there are still some things missing that don't allow for a complete experience on the web (Adobe Flash comes to mind). There is an open source implementation of Flash called Gnash, but it's still not quite there yet.
But for everyday use (Internet, e-mail, chat, IM, document creation, etc.), it's pretty much good to go.
I've run Ubuntu on my iMac G5 as well, and though it runs great and I can manage with it, there are still some things missing that don't allow for a complete experience on the web (Adobe Flash comes to mind). There is an open source implementation of Flash called Gnash, but it's still not quite there yet.
nixgeek
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
Let me clarify. The lack of Adobe Flash is only on the PowerPC port of Ubuntu (or any other GNU/Linux distribution ported to PowerPC for that matter). All x86 versions of GNU/Linux can run Adobe Flash. There is a GNU/Linux version of Adobe Flash available on Adobe's site and in each distribution's respective repositories. For 64-bit x86, there is an alpha of Flash Player 10 that runs natively on x86_64. I've used it and I'm quite surprised at how well it runs even though it is alpha software.
As for the experience when coming from the Mac, that's subjective. There have been people that have tried it and enjoyed the experience, while there are others that find the desktop environments available in GNU/Linux to be very lacking compared to OS X's Finder. It all depends on your perception.
This is not sarcasm, I'm being sincere. I thank you for providing me with a valuable insight, which is to say: I better not mess around with Ubuntu. The reality is, I didn't understand a word of your first paragraph. Happily I fathomed the second. I think I'd better stay with Apple.
nixgeek
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
I didn't take it as sarcasm, honestly. I looked back at my post and I realized that I wasn't specific enough. Installation for Ubuntu on x86 is not much different than installing Windows XP, IMO.
Incidentally, you can use the stock x86 or AMD64 versions of Ubuntu on the Intel Macs without too much work.
But fair enough, you've made your decision.
Well - with the PPC you could try Q to test it with http://www.kju-app.org/ to test Ubuntu as a virtual machine (or even run it as such.. you could bypass the PPC limitation of Flash too since Q would enable you to use the x86 builds of the OS) and if you wouldn't be happy just delete the virtual machine and the application afterwards.
That's at least less intrusive than making Ubuntu it's own partition or reinstalling everything only to give it a try.
Or - you could download and burn the Live CD for Ubuntu - that would be even less space consuming and less intrusive. And simply do what you need to do test how you would like it. Really - trying is the best way to find out, but installing the whole OS to test is a bit too much hassle IMHO.
That's at least less intrusive than making Ubuntu it's own partition or reinstalling everything only to give it a try.
Or - you could download and burn the Live CD for Ubuntu - that would be even less space consuming and less intrusive. And simply do what you need to do test how you would like it. Really - trying is the best way to find out, but installing the whole OS to test is a bit too much hassle IMHO.
nixgeek
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
To add, on a friend's Windows laptop I installed Xubuntu (which is Ubuntu with the XFCE desktop as default) using the Wubi installer that came in the Live CD. He is now able to use Xubuntu without losing his ability to go back to Windows since Wubi installs Ubuntu as if it were any other program. After a week's use of Xubuntu, he's really taken to it and is enjoying the experience. He's also going to install Ubuntu on his brother's computer once I burn him a copy of the Live CD.
I almost wish there was a Mac OS X version of Wubi to allow people to try out Ubuntu at least on the Intel Macs, but considering that OS X also benefits from its Unix nature it might not be necessary.
I almost wish there was a Mac OS X version of Wubi to allow people to try out Ubuntu at least on the Intel Macs, but considering that OS X also benefits from its Unix nature it might not be necessary.
Mikuro
Crotchety UI Nitpicker
I think it's worth trying at least. As others have said, Ubuntu comes on a LiveCD. That means you can boot up from the CD and use it like a normal OS. You can browse the web, mess with settings, even install software. It's a great way to try it out. Then if you like it you can install it onto your hard drive. Ubuntu is no longer officially supported on PowerPC systems like your iBook, but it is still available here.
I've used a lot of Linux distros, including several versions of Ubuntu. It's hard to give a meaningful answer from anyone on how Linux compares to OS X or Windows, because everyone's needs and habits are different and I'm probably not what you'd call an "average" user. Most of the time I've spent in Linux has been fixing problems, but then I also experiment a LOT and have advanced needs, so maybe that's not so strange.
There are a lot of great things about Linux. You have an excellent selection of free software that works very well on Linux. OpenOffice on Linux is MUCH better than OpenOffice on OS X, for example. On OS X it's painfully slow (don't ask me why), but on Linux it's smooth and fast. I guess this shouldn't come as too great a surprise since most free open-source software is made for Linux first and foremost and then PORTED to other platforms. Most open-source software does not run as well on OS X as it does on Linux. That includes OpenOffice, GIMP, and even Firefox (IMHO).
Linux still has a lot of things that are hit-or-miss, though. Simple things that Mac (and even Windows) users take for granted are not always simple in Linux. For instance, I've tried lots of different distros, and each one seems to fail in a different way when it comes to sound. Sound is something that I've always just taken for granted as a Mac user -- it Just Works™ -- but on Linux, just getting a global volume control is an issue. It can be maddening. On the other hand, plenty of people seem to have no issues with it at all. Again, it's hit-or-miss. Some people seem to be unlucky. Mounting disks (and especially disk images) is also sometimes a trial in Linux, although I've personally found Ubuntu to be pretty good about it.
As for which Linux distro you should use. Ubuntu is a fairly good one. I recommend using their "LTS" (long term support) version, which tends to be more stable, rather than the latest version. Personally I like Debian (which is what Ubuntu is based on). The two are very similar, but I've found that Debian has the fewest glitches for me for whatever reason. I still recommend Ubuntu to other people a lot, though, because it's more newbie-oriented.
I've used a lot of Linux distros, including several versions of Ubuntu. It's hard to give a meaningful answer from anyone on how Linux compares to OS X or Windows, because everyone's needs and habits are different and I'm probably not what you'd call an "average" user. Most of the time I've spent in Linux has been fixing problems, but then I also experiment a LOT and have advanced needs, so maybe that's not so strange.
There are a lot of great things about Linux. You have an excellent selection of free software that works very well on Linux. OpenOffice on Linux is MUCH better than OpenOffice on OS X, for example. On OS X it's painfully slow (don't ask me why), but on Linux it's smooth and fast. I guess this shouldn't come as too great a surprise since most free open-source software is made for Linux first and foremost and then PORTED to other platforms. Most open-source software does not run as well on OS X as it does on Linux. That includes OpenOffice, GIMP, and even Firefox (IMHO).
Linux still has a lot of things that are hit-or-miss, though. Simple things that Mac (and even Windows) users take for granted are not always simple in Linux. For instance, I've tried lots of different distros, and each one seems to fail in a different way when it comes to sound. Sound is something that I've always just taken for granted as a Mac user -- it Just Works™ -- but on Linux, just getting a global volume control is an issue. It can be maddening. On the other hand, plenty of people seem to have no issues with it at all. Again, it's hit-or-miss. Some people seem to be unlucky. Mounting disks (and especially disk images) is also sometimes a trial in Linux, although I've personally found Ubuntu to be pretty good about it.
As for which Linux distro you should use. Ubuntu is a fairly good one. I recommend using their "LTS" (long term support) version, which tends to be more stable, rather than the latest version. Personally I like Debian (which is what Ubuntu is based on). The two are very similar, but I've found that Debian has the fewest glitches for me for whatever reason. I still recommend Ubuntu to other people a lot, though, because it's more newbie-oriented.
nightcrawler58
Registered
but, I had to say, that I have all of them, Ubuntu, Apple, Windoze.. but the Linux I personally think rocks is PCLOS 2007, and due for an upgrade soon. it is rpm's rather than debian, so that makes it more like red hat/fedora/ suse. at any rate
nixgeek
Mac of the SubGenius! :-)
Yes, I've heard fantastic things about PCLinuxOS. It looks as though 2009.1 was released, so that covers the need for it to be updated. However, there is the issue that it only runs on x86 computers, meaning only on Intel-based Macs. This would leave the PowerPC-based Macs out in the cold. Fortunately, there are other distributions that support PowerPC officially (Fedora, Debian, openSUSE, Yellow Dog) and through the community (Ubuntu).
I own a MBP..(snow leopard)..A Dell XPS400(Ubuntu) and a Pavillion(WINXP)..THE Pavillion was free, got it on free cycle. I put Ubuntu on the Dell after a a strange situation with MBR, and I was unable to reinstall, no matter what I did.(Dell disk, new Windows disks..nothing worked, except the Ubuntu) Well I didnt want a useless piece of hardware on my desk so I installed the Linux-Ubuntu. The only thing I havent ben able to do is. use my Webcam onit. (Who cares?) I am able to access files on my local net...I can cpy and paste from each to the other. I can print using CUPs(I have three printers..Canon..two HPs).My experience level.....I deliver pizzas. Some college. I am a hobbyist. But I have no special comp trng. My favorite..the MAC. Then the Ubuntu...I kick windows to the bottom because I am sick of Antivirus 2009 ruining everything. Worms, viruses..etc. I dont worry on the Unix based systems. Installing Ubuntu is a breeze. No learning curve to speak of. About like using Windows 98 and then using XP. The only thing I miss on the Unixes is the great windows progrm..Irfanview..but then theres Wine!
In terms of usability (installation and every day use), Ubuntu probably rivals Windows XP.
If you can manage it, find an old junker computer somewhere and try installing Ubuntu. It's far enough along that anyone curious should give it a try to see if they like the feel of it.
If you can manage it, find an old junker computer somewhere and try installing Ubuntu. It's far enough along that anyone curious should give it a try to see if they like the feel of it.