Got a new computer with Windows 8 - it's like landing on a different planet

[johnwash1]

Don't know if you're aware but Windows 8 is due to be replaced with Windows 9 beginning of next year:
http://www.smh.com.au/digital-life/c...122-317fo.html

Replaced? Only for new buyers, surely?

Whereas if you used Ubuntu, it's not just free to start with, you get free upgrades for life!

Why not download an Ubuntu DVD and try it out, no need to install it on your hard disk, you can give it a try out.

[harold69]

Where do you download these Ubuntu Operating Systems? No comments on my being dumb either.

[cheaver]

Where do you download these Ubuntu Operating Systems? No comments on my being dumb either.

http://www.ubuntu.com/download/desktop

But have a look at Mint also?

http://www.linuxmint.com/download.php


.

[cambrensis]

Where do you download these Ubuntu Operating Systems? No comments on my being dumb either.

I suggest you check out the Zorin version. Like Mint it uses the Ubuntu kernel, but the interface may be switched to operate similarly to XP or like Windows 7 so that the learning curve is not as steep. It is extremely friendly to the new user. Use a small program "Lili usb creator" with the zorin image and put the cd on to the flash stick.

You may then boot "live" into the flash drive to practise using the system. If you take to it you can install from the same flash drive, dual booting with your Windows, or you may erase the original system and replace. You will find that your spreadsheets will load into it quite easily and be saved back as easily. That way you could transfer little by little.

If you need more information, just shout!

[cambrensis]

Forgot to add...zorin-os.com - and ...linuxliveusb.com/en/...for the two items you will need aside from the flash drive/pendrive/thumb drive.

[PetBazaar]

Is it just me, or are the last few posts in this thread an advert for anything but Linux.

I mean, with Windows you get XP (RIP), Vista, 7 and 8. You might get Home Edition, or Premium or whatever, but they are in effect just the same thing. Maybe a little enhanced or a little restricted. But everyone knows pretty much what they're getting.

In the last few posts we've had: Ubuntu; Xorin; and Mint. Others (not in the last couple of posts) would suggest that you try Suse or Debian or Redhat. And before long you can add Fedora or PCLinuxOS or CentOS to that list. Or, if you're feeling adventurous, you could install any one of 285 different variants of Linux.

Can't the Linux community just settle on one or two versions. Maybe then, the general public might be a bit more confident in giving it a whirl.

[cambrensis]

Is it just me, or are the last few posts in this thread an advert for anything but Linux........

In the last few posts we've had: Ubuntu; Xorin; and Mint. Others (not in the last couple of posts) would suggest that you try Suse or Debian or Redhat. And before long you can add Fedora or PCLinuxOS or CentOS to that list. Or, if you're feeling adventurous, you could install any one of 285 different variants of Linux.

Can't the Linux community just settle on one or two versions. Maybe then, the general public might be a bit more confident in giving it a whirl.

As I said in the earlier post...Mint uses the Ubuntu kernel; as a matter of fact so does Zorin. Just about all flavours available run on the Ubuntu kernel or the Debian kernel, so there are nowhere near the number of "versions" you think there are.

There is a major apprehension here. You will find that the differences apply largely to the usage intended for the flavour involved; it works similarly to Windows naming which is not merely XP, 7 and 8; I have 3 different editions of 7 on the go here, 2 of XP (there are others!) and so on. There are several editions of windows server around as well - and have been for some years.

The difference is that in Linux development instead of using the same name with the addition of "family edition", "professional", "ultimate", or even "media center" (sic), etc, a different title is used, often to suggest the "angle" of the development team. "Mint" for example suggests a fresh approach! ( Think "Daz", "Persil" (parsley), etc. )

"Android", with its little green man, is now a household name. It is Linux There are small "keys" or "dongles" similar to a flash drive that you may plug into a modern TV to make it "smart"; there are also small boxes which perform the same function: "Now", Chromecast", "Roku", etc. All run Linux. All of them do a similar job; there's no need for all to be exactly the same. After all - "any colour you like so long as it's black" did not last long as the market for motor vehicles shows.

The reason I picked on "Zorin" was as stated in the post I made, so I shall not repeat that. It might be worth adding though, that just about any version of Linux may be mounted as I suggested and tried out. One of the things that frightens most people about trying out Linux is that there can be a steep learning curve in adding software. With "Zorin" adding software is simply a click process, similar to adding an "app" to a smartphone. The user does not have to sit down with a mountain of instructions, or join a user group for support, but may decide whether it is to be run as XP or 7 - or if a Linux "junkie" may select a "gnome" interface.

Incidentally, Debian is in use in some versions of Ubuntu (see Kubuntu for example) and Redhat is very big in both the Business and Science communities now.

[billsstamps]

I like Linux, and Ubuntu is easy enough to learn for me.

What recommendations do you have about drivers for scanners and printers, Cambrensis? I went back to Windows because some of my key peripherals did not have Linux drivers.

[johnwash1]

I like Linux, and Ubuntu is easy enough to learn for me.

What recommendations do you have about drivers for scanners and printers, Cambrensis? I went back to Windows because some of my key peripherals did not have Linux drivers.

Manufacturers are now picking up that there's many millions of Linux users out there and supporting drivers for their products. Some distributions, e.g. Ubuntu, you may plug in a device and it just works, instantly, far less fuss than Windows. Also the manufacturer's own web site may have Linux drivers. HP has been good about this for years. I've also had success with Canon and Epson, though their installs weren't as well documented.

That all said, older equipment often isn't well supported. But that's true with MS as well. I've found many people getting rid of printers and scanners because Windows 7 or 8 don't have drivers. The manufacturer is happy to sell you another printer rather than put effort in on drivers for old ones.

In principle anyone can write a Linux driver for your old scanner/printer. But if the maker didn't release techie information about the device, the only way an independent author can construct a driver is by "reverse engineering". If "reverse engineering" sounds like standing on your head in a hammock, well, that's a nice coincidence because it is indeed that difficult or more so... it means a huge amount of detective work.

Bill, if your scanner or printer didn't work with Linux you should complain to the manufacturer. Make it very clear to them that the next time you're buying, they won't be on the shortlist unless they have a real commitment to writing drivers for Linux. Ensure this message gets through to the support people and especially to the marketing and product development people.

[johnwash1]

Is it just me, or are the last few posts in this thread an advert for anything but Linux.

I mean, with Windows you get XP (RIP), Vista, 7 and 8. You might get Home Edition, or Premium or whatever, but they are in effect just the same thing. Maybe a little enhanced or a little restricted. But everyone knows pretty much what they're getting.

In the last few posts we've had: Ubuntu; Xorin; and Mint. Others (not in the last couple of posts) would suggest that you try Suse or Debian or Redhat. And before long you can add Fedora or PCLinuxOS or CentOS to that list. Or, if you're feeling adventurous, you could install any one of 285 different variants of Linux.

Can't the Linux community just settle on one or two versions. Maybe then, the general public might be a bit more confident in giving it a whirl.

Settling on one or two versions would indeed be nice for the new users you're talking about. If you know a helpful person who's already running one of those variants (users call them 'distros') then you have a nice simple 'choice'... use the same one. Fundamentally the differences aren't huge and using the same version as your friend will keep them motivated to help.

But no, the community as a whole won't settle on just a few versions. Even restricting our discussion to desktop versions, there are many different ways of doing things (simple example: perhaps you prefer pointing at things with a mouse, perhaps I prefer keyboard shortcuts) and so you surely have to agree that people differ in their tastes. Look at how many different breakfast cereals sell successfully! With a proprietary operating system the supplier decides what versions to sell. With Linux, ANYONE can decide what they think is a good version and spread it around. Many many people do. Most fail, some become popular. I used to use Ubuntu, but I've switched to Crunchbang Linux. (And on a server I use Debian.) For my needs and prefs I prefer Crunchbang over Ubuntu, but Crunchbang is not a good starting place for most new users.

You'd like to cut down the choices. I understand. But would that actually make Linux more popular? Apple Macs offer just ONE version of operating system. Apple Macs sell in good numbers, but nowhere near Microsoft. So reducing choices doesn't necessarily win you friends, I don't accept your logic.

But I do agree that the way forward for someone thinking about Linux is to narrow their own options down and ignore the many distracting versions.