I still haven’t tried the Windows 7 beta, but everywhere I look I see more and more people speaking very positively about it (our own Dave Freeman positively shines with happiness talking about it). Truth be told, I’m not very interested in operating systems these days: the overwhelming majority of things I use my computers for are done through my web browser, so the OS is becoming less and less relevant to me. I use Ubuntu, and am reasonably happy with it, but according to some Windows 7 will put the final nail in the coffin of desktop Linux.
Nick Farrell, over at the Inquirer, makes the bold claim that Windows 7 is enough to kill Linux on the desktop. I’m left a little perplexed about this claim after reading his thoughts, though. He enumerates a number of small hiccups he experienced, and doesn’t gush about Windows 7 as enthusiastically as the title suggests. Oh, I get it! He’s trolling!
If Microsoft had released Windows 7 instead of Vista there would have been no rise of Ubuntu or OSX. Now, alas, it is only a matter of time until people come back to the claws of [Microsoft]. The Linux crowd were too busy talking about their superiority on the server and ignored the desktop to the OS’s eventual doom. Windows 7 is as pretty as Apple stuff, just as easy to use, and does not treat you like a moron.
Computers, in general, treat people like morons regardless of the operating system. This is because computers are artificial constructs which offer few analogues to every day life. We suffer through all kinds of poorly implemented metaphors and abstractions to get computers to do what we want them to do. Some metaphors feel more natural for some sets of users, which is why there’s such passionate attack and defense around the major operating systems. And that’s why, I think, Windows 7 is unlikely to kill anything.
I genuinely have high hopes for Windows 7. I’m eager to see some fresh new moves from Redmond. But I also wonder how much longer we’ll even be talking about operating systems as discrete things…
Yes, trolling, but let’s not be that silly. A FREE OS will always have at least some people on it. And nobody swore off Windows because of Vista; they just stuck with XP.
Yeah, those 6 points of market share Apple picked up all came from old Atari users…
LOL!!
Killing Off Linux? Really? You used Bandwidth to write this?
Here’s a great follow-up article: “No.”
uh, more importantly – why is techcrunch reposting an article from some other site and presenting it as ‘food for thought’ as if somebody here thought up the subject as worthy of debate…dudes, come up with your OWN ideas for content and discussion….
This is trivial. According to reports, Vista has done better than Microsoft ever expected, and yet Mac OS X continues to gain market share.
hope all those MS users are excited to pay $100+ for a service pack
Mac users have been paying $129 for service packs for years, and Snow Leopard certainly sounds as much like a service pack as Windows 7 is.
According to what reports is Vista doing better than Microsoft expected? Due to problems at launch, bad press, and the rise of netbooks, Vista is doing far worse than Microsoft expected. That’s why they’re releasing Windows 7 after only 18 months.
None of that addresses how Windows 7 will impact Linux on the desktop. I think that the real problem for Linux is that it’s always a step or two behind Windows (and Mac). It’s not as easy to use, and the hardware support is always lacking. With Windows 7, just as Linux was starting to catch up, Microsoft has moved the goal post.
Linux will never reach parity, but if Linux could just provide something that’s even 90% as good as their closed-source competitors, there might me an opportunity for significant adoption of Linux on the desktop. Ubuntu was getting close when the primary competition was Windows XP. They’re nowhere close to Windows 7.
“It’s not as easy to use, and the hardware support is always lacking.”
Ever used Ubuntu before?
Maybe you should try the system before you start posting these idiotic statements.
@Nobody important: Just tried to install Ubuntu on my laptop :
- i tried 5 times, got problems on setting up the partitions, the network, and when i finally succeed to log in, my WiFi wasn’t working neither my printer.
To compare, Windows 7 took 45min to install, and when the install was finished, i got absolutely nothing to install, everything was already there :WiFi, sound, video card, …
And i admit that i was really surprised by that, i got a really bad experience with Vista, but 7, woot, only a Beta and it’s already kicking ass.
Yah, god, FREE and the best support group out there. “Final nail?” Where is the first one?
Brand new system on Ubuntu was completely out-of-the-box for me. No searching and getting crazy. However, that is half the fun once one gets into Linux. But it is not needed much any more with the quality of the distros. No index garbage, no wipe and re-installs… guh. I work IT with Windows netowrks for a living and it is a break when I get home to my Linux box.
I particularly love Ubuntu for what they are doing and as of so far it is better than windows vista.
Only problem is hardware support DOES suck. Especially wi-fi drivers. It is just ridiculous. Since I am patient and I know the full potential of Ubuntu i worked at getting my wireless card to work.
Most people won’t even bother with this though and they are a step or two behind, it is true. They need to stop bashing the proprietary drivers and start making deals with them.
Otherwise linux is going nowhere
I’m actually surprised that Ubuntu didn’t get any of that action. Vista was a flop Apple picked up about 5% and we’ve (the Linux community) have been hovering at 3.8% forever.
Yeah. And y Linux? Can’t u pick something of it’s own size? It should be against macs. I doubt if windows 7 would even be a competition to mac.
And 4 those by culdnt get it ubuntu up be running after installation? Read their hardware compatibility list.
Lesee…
When I first installed Ubuntu, sound wouldent work, video aceeleration woulden’t work, wifi woulden’t work…
No drivers I could Google anywhere would work, Ubuntu would FAIL TO BOOT if I attempted to load the drivers in ndiswrapper…
Yes, I would say hardware support is lacking
Give me a driver for Sony Ericsson USB for Ubuntu??
I think Apple is gaining marketshare more because of their hardware than their software.
Moreover, lots of Windows users wanted their hardware, but couldn’t stand OS X. Once Apple switched to Intel processors and allowed users to run Windows on their hardware, this is when they started gaining significant market share.
If I were to buy a laptop I would love to get a new aluminum MacBook. But of course, I would run Windows 7 on it.
Trust met, Apple’s software is not what is gaining them marketshare.
I can back up that hardware-based boost. At my school, almost everyone with a Mac dual boots into Windows b/c they either can’t stand OSX, prefer Windows, or just like using the same OS they’ve grown used to (Windows).
They fawn over the look of the hardware, but most of them are indifferent to the software prettiness, b/c that shit only matters for the first 15 minutes.
I agree – I’ve been a Microsoft languages developer for 12 years, am starting to do projects in several open source languages, and am also developing for the iPhone.
Having a Mac lets me work from whatever platform I need to.
I’d like to see you back that up.
personally I don’t like Ubuntu I normally use LinuxMint which uses the ubuntu Kernal, bits from fedora, open suse and other linux OS and from all that they managed to make a pretty decant OS and it also supports hardware, drivers and media formats pretty well ^^.
I will be interested to see how the final version of win7 runs, vista was pretty nasty when it came to using 3d based application and rendering.
Nothing will ever “kill” Linux. So long as it has an enthusiastic community of people using it who can also program or simply maintain it, its not going anywhere. And projects like Ubuntu are proof that anyone can use Linux – and have a great experience.
And people like me are proof that Ubuntu is nothing but an imcompatible headache.
I hate people that go “Well (insert software here) never gave me trouble!”
Congratulations, it never gave YOU trouble, that dosen’t mean it dosen’t give others trouble.
Not our fault you are too retarded to do a google search, and most likely find something that will help.
I’ve been using Windows 7 on my Fujitsu P1610 and a Gateway MX6956 that I had laying around, and it’s most definitely miles beyond Vista (and I use Vista on my work machine, a Dell XPS M1330 with absolutely no problems).
I’ve tinkered with Ubuntu in the past, and find it to be a great OS. Like you, Scott, I do 90% of my work in the browser, and could probably do the remaining 10% if I really wanted to, so OS is largely irrelevant.
I *do* agree that Microsoft should have likely skipped Vista altogether, but then again, that would mean we’d all STILL be using XP, and that’s a long time for MS to not release anything new.
As soon as it’s an official release, I’ll be updating all my computers (currently 5 in the house) to Windows 7. It’s pretty like Vista, easy and stable like XP (even the beta), and I rather like most of it.
Will it actually ‘kill off’ Ubuntu? Of course not.
@Bob – Sounds like you been drinking Steve’s Apple Juice and you are happy to pay $129 dollars for your Service Packs. While apples does many of the changes on the surface, windows does alot on the core of the system that people fail to appreciate. Now as far as Apple Gaining Marketshare, good for them but then again they sure have big coffers for advertising so surely they have to get some marketshare but that will stop soon enough.
@ Steve – you made a good point on the fact that people stuck with XP and really didn’t swore windows off .
I think it’s a sure bet that many that went to Apple or Linux will be coming back to Windows. Vista did not become the success it should have been because of the memory hog it is(needs tweaking to fix that) – to me it has been great and see a vast amount of improvement over XP – never had a Blue Screen and it’s running as smooth since i first installed it.
It is a sure bet that Windows 7 will rock…
Scott – as far as us talking about Operating systems i think that the thought that we are going to be dependent on the cloud has been much exagerated. I think OS will be here for many years to come so i don’t see us or at least the geek community moving and depending on a cloud computing environment. I think it is a mistake to be dependent on a system like that and i wouldn’t like to have all my stuff in the clouds, but a combination of both is definitely nice to have.
@nick, Since each OS X version has added major sets of new features I don’t really consider them service packs, any more than Vista is a “service pack” for XP.
But you’re free, if you wish, to pay hundreds of dollars for the “Ultimate” version of an OS that immediately NEEDS service packs. And subscriptions to anti-virus systems. And… you get the idea.
But I guess you could save some money by buying one of the innumerable cheaper, crippled versions…
“@nick, Since each OS X version has added major sets of new features I don’t really consider them service packs, any more than Vista is a “service pack” for XP.”
Different versions of Windows are entirely different versions of the os, sometimes wiht major factors compeltely rewritten (like sound in Vista).
Service packs include a lot of changes and updates as well…. but are about on par as installing Snow Leopard over Tiger or however the feline naming system of MACOSX goes.
The difference is we don’t need to pay for the service packs.
“But you’re free, if you wish, to pay hundreds of dollars for the “Ultimate” version of an OS that immediately NEEDS service packs. And subscriptions to anti-virus systems. And… you get the idea.
But I guess you could save some money by buying one of the innumerable cheaper, crippled versions…”
Don’t forget the incredibly overpriced hardware you are REQUIRED to buy in order to run the OS on instead of being able to build your own with cheaper but still quality parts.
The freeware virus scanners such as AntiVir or Avira are more than enough for the causul user, and are you trying to tell me that you never have any patches/updates to install on a fresh OSX installation? At least our service packs are free instead of being charged for them so our os has the name of another cat.
Actually, there’s more difference under the hood between any two named versions of OSX than between XP, Vista or Windows 7. Particularly, Windows 7 is just Vista with some of the idiot removed (and that’s a good thing, as long as they don’t charge full price).
I am a “Linux guy” and I have to say that I am still deeply frustrated with the status of Linux on the desktop. There are still far too many concessions to make for most people to use it full time.
I would pay the wine group, codeweavers, etc. up to double the price of a Vista license for a decent compatibility layer for Windows on Linux.
Anyway, I have Windows 7 beta 1 in a VM and it is nice and super fast… Fast because it is stripped down. I would be pleasantly surprised if they shipped it that way but I’m sure they will bloat it up by the release date.
Just as an example: To test a game I needed to download the DirectX SDK because it only came with a small translation layer installed.
The way I see it, there is only ONE way that Linux will EVER succeed on the desktop like Windows and MACOSX has….. however……. this is the LAST thing any Linux lover would EVER want to happen to the os…
…. ditch the terminal, no more command prompt
….
Now that you have all finished screaming “NOOOOOOOO” and gotten your pitchforks ready, hear me out.
I like the command line as well, I still use the command prompt shell in Windows every now and then.
Problem is, the majority of computer users, the VAST VAST majority do not want to have anything to do with it. I mean, Best Buy’s geek squad has made a fortuine over people who are too lazy to click a “backup data” button, do you think they would evne TRY to understand a commandline? I have been using DOS commands since 1995 and STILL find the Linux terminal to be a bit much at times.
The average user wants a GUI
I am not talking about completely removing the terminal, but severly SEVERLY downplaying it, removing it’s use 99% of the time if not 100%.
And I don’t mean a GUI frontend over a terminal app either.
If Linux wants to compete with Windows and OSX on the desktop with the average user, it has to give up one of its key features that peopel currently like.
It needs to go almost completely GUI based, the terminal being reduced to being about as needed as it is in Vista.
Basically, you have to make Linux more like Windows or MACOSX to make it appeal to the average user, make it simpler, make it automated, make it refuse to allow you to mess with sensative parts of the system unless you click “Allow”…
…. and you and I well know that this will NEVER happen, most Linux users would rather give up their right arm than the terminal or shift to a heavily gui-based simplified version of Linux.
I understand the point you’re making, but the way Linux is built is fundamentally different. The phrase “small pieces, loosely joined” indicates that Linux is a collection of discrete pieces, each focused on one or two things, all of which work together to produce the cohesive whole.
Whereas Windows was built from the ground up as a graphical operating system, Linux has a graphical user interface that runs on top of the command line. In theory, this allows you to select the GUI system you like best. In reality, there aren’t that many GUIs from which to select.
You’re right that a more GUI-centric approach will appeal to more users. There have been great strides made toward this, but there’s still a long way to go.
And I don’t think it’s so much that Linux users specifically want to use the command line; rather I think it’s that many Linux users greatly value (and utilize) the power and convenience of the command line to get stuff done. It’s almost always faster to use the command line to do what you want than to use a GUI — mousing and clicking through through successive windows takes a lot longer than keying in a few commands.
I think it’s possible to find a comfortable middle ground: a GUI-only means of operating and maintaining a Linux system, while still providing access to all the nitty-gritty power-user stuff inside. I believe people are working toward this, but it’s still some ways off.
I disagree with nearly every task being easier with a command line than with a GUI, and this is coming from someone who extensively uses the Command Prompt in Windows 2000, XP and Vista.
Yes, there are some tasks that are faster to do, namely managing files with a pattern in their filename and/or extension or working with all the files in a directory, but the GUI from my expirence trumps the commandline in most other features, especially in managing multiple files with NO pattern to them.
On top of that, its far less confusing in some circumstances.
For example:
Recently I was re-partitioning the harddrive in my laptop. I quad-boot it and have several utility partitions as well as OS, attempting to use a text-based app to manage these instad of a graphical GUI app that can show me a virtual representation of the partions in relation to the other was far far easier for me than mentually making note of all the beginning and end sectors a Linux terminal partition app would give me and forming a mental picture of how the partitions are set up.
I am not trying to claim that Linux do or do not prefer to always use the command line, its just that Linux so far, evne Ubuntu, places far too much of an emphesis on it and many GUI apps are just frontends with a terminal underneath.
But for the average user this needs to be downplayed, I am not saying remove it completely, but basically reduce its need so much taht the ONLY time it would be needed is when a Linux poweruser or expert that is very adept at the Terminal opens it up manually to perform an action. Kinda like how it works in Windows with the Command Prompt shell.
It does not matter how good Windows 7 is. What matters is if people decide to upgrade. And like the Crunch Gear blogger suggested, OS’s are no longer relevant in todays computers. All they are is a portal to allow us to get to the internet. In my opnion, OS’s are going to continue to decline in sales. Seriously, why upgrade an OS when they come for ‘free’ with cheap new hardware. I can even see a day soon where touch screen netbooks that are being run on Android. This will allow for even cheaper hardware, since no OS costs will be involved anymore. I am amazed the OS market is still as strong as it is. Seem like an aging dinosaur to me.
You are such a rambling moron.
“Windows 7 will kill desktop Linux?”…….. What the hell kind of statement is that? Nick Farrell doesn’t know what he’s talking about. Linux and Ubuntu had been around long before Windows Vista was released and they arn’t going away when Windows 7 comes out.
@Rob:
I guess the appropriate sentence would be “Windows 7 will kill the HOPES of a desktop Linux”.
Sure they have and will always be around, but with Windows fixed, there’s no need to switch, hence they’ll stay nicely tucked in their niche markets.
All software get obsolete pretty fast these days. Someone remind me, how long has linux had the same core?
Windows 7 wont kill desktop Linux, Linux might just get old!!!
No
Sorry, but I see no reason to get rid of Linux just yet. For most of us that keep in contact with technology news, you will remember that we saw very similar reviews of Vista – and while Vista is doing okay, I still prefer to run XP Pro and have it on all my computers except my wife’s. She is happy with Vista but she is happy with anything that can get her online to myspace, her email, and pogo.
I have a feeling that by the time Wondows 7 comes out, it will probably be so loaded with crap and security holes, as is so typical with MS products, that people will be thinking, yet again, why didn’t I just install XP on it…
Give it a few years after release and they may get all the holes fixed in it….
Typical Software Company Business Operation:
1. Idea
2. Flow
3. Code
4. Test
5. Debug
6. Test
7. Debug
8. Repeat 4-7 until operational
9. Release Alpha
10. Fix
11. Release Beta
12. Fix
13. Release Functional Software
Microsoft Operation:
1. Idea
2. Code
3. Release
4. Fix/Service Pack
5. Go to 3 until new product is ready and then abandon.
I guess you can admire them for their simplified flow though….
Except perhaps replace 1. With “Buy small company with good idea” and 2. With “Hack it so it can sort of run VB and almost integrate with Word and Excel”. I cannot remember when MS last had an idea for a product.
I have to agree that the OS is no longer relevant. The browser/web app is king.
That said, I will probably install Windows 7 anyway.
I just posted a little blurb about windows 7 on vincenttobiaz.com
I am just glad Microsoft, and indeed Apple, seem to be polishing their operating systems rather than chucking more features at them, whilst everyone gets a nice feeling when gloating to others about their new upgrades, they aren’t usually as world-changing as often described.
I don’t think Linux will go away anytime soon, however I agree that it won’t take off on the desktop, in it’s current state anyway.
What I’d like to see from Linux, and correct me if this already exists, is an OS which consists of nothing more than enough to setup networking and display a Webkit-based browser. Maybe a dock-like launcher (now Windows 7 has copied that too…) for different sites, but apart from that, just a clean, simple OS that instantly boots.
Ryan, take a look at KioskCD: http://kioskcd.com/ It’s not exactly what you want, but it’s an example of how such an embedded OS might work.
You can’t just ignore the history of windows and linux and say everything will be changed just because this upcoming windows has a few nifty features. This honestly is just sensationalist nonsense.
No, Windows 7 won’t kill Linux on the desktop any more than it already has. The problem is that Linux isn’t really ON the desktop yet.
Yes, we have Ubuntu, and several other very nice distros. But as nice as they are, they are still beyond the reach of the vast majority of end users:
–The hardware compatibility isn’t there. We still have to use low performance generic drivers for much of the graphics hardware on the market, for example.
–The UI is still not as smooth or polished as the offerings from Microsoft and Apple. Although the latest Gnome desktops, and others, are fairly functional, they still require far too much knowledge to plug in the real bells and whistles. The file managers are still a bit clunky.
–There is still to much “techie” terminology involved. There is still too much dependence on knowing what a daemon/service is. There is still to much reliance on editing configuration files. The terminal window is still necessary to do some things.
I’m a long-time Unix/Linux guy, with my Unix experience going back over 20 years. For years I ran a Unix network in my dorm room, then my apartment, and then my house. So I DO know what I’m talking about. And I can say, without reservation, that much of what I take for granted is simply out of reach of the average computer user. My wife, who is very computer savvy, is never going to be a Linux desktop user. She wants a polished UI. She wants her familiar apps to just work. When she wants to add a printer, she doesn’t want to have to know about the 3-4 different protocols that can used to discover, attach, and use a network printer. She wants the stupid-proof simplicy of Windows. And she’s not alone.
As much as I love Linux, in my honest moments I have to admit that when it comes to the desktop it is very much an enthusiast operating system. And I expect that it will continue to be, at least for a very long time. It will continue to develop and mature. But the commercial operating systems are always going to be a few steps ahead of it.
It’s also worth keeping in mind that there is a financial aspect here. Ubuntu has brought desktop Linux out of the “super enthusiast” category, and into simply the “enthusiast” category. Before Canonical came along nothing was even close. But how long with Canonical be with us? They have never turned a profit. In fact they’ve never come close. Canonical is operating on the good will of one benefactor. He says he’s in it for the long run. But charity is never forever. At some point somebody has to pay the bills. We’ll see how that goes.
Point one is BS: driver support is getting better every release. That isn’t Linux’s fault anyway.
Point two is completely subjective. I think Ubuntu looks fine out of the box.
Point three is wrong as well. When in Ubuntu do you have to edit configuration files? Yeah, I thought not.
Linux isn’t what it was two years ago. Or even one year ago, for that matter.
“That isn’t Linux’s fault anyway.”
Which is precisely the problem. You’re pointing fingers, and users don’t care. They just want things to work.
Which is a major reason why Linux desktop market penetration is down to 0.86%.
Point one is valid. Driver support sucks. Video is choppy and tears on my Ubuntu because I use an Ati card. Wifi is a hit or miss thing.
Point 2: Ubuntu is an ugly ass os. the only thing it looks better than is the windows classic theme.
Point 3. @nothing important, maybe you haven’t used Ubuntu that much yet. For some thing you HAVE to go to the terminal or edit config files. Your claims are ridiculous.
The reason Linux will never get more popular on desktop is the guys behind Linux and their ‘freedom’ mentality. They can shub that where it belongs, the end user wont give a shit about such an OS or software unless it just does what the user wants.
Look, as I said, I’m a Linux user. I run Ubuntu Intrepid on 3 of my 5 desktops, and on one of my two servers. What I wrote was NOT from the perspective of somebody that hates Linux, loves Windows, and isn’t willing to bend. It was written from the standpoint of somebody who enthusiastically uses Linux, but is also rational enough to recognize some of its shortcomings.
Point #1 is ENTIRELY valid! Without being very careful about the graphics hardware that I buy, I often end up running generic graphics drivers, and the performance frankly sucks. Wifi is the same way. The response of too many Linux evangelists is “well just because the wifi drivers that you have are terrible is not a problem! All you have to do is launch your package manager, find wifi-0.1.07_US_Deb-137.deb, unstall it, then go to http://www.myobscurelinuxdistro.org, find the Hardy distribution, download the tarball, open a terminal window, untar it (remembering to add in that little ’sudo’ command), then install build-essential, choose one of 6 different text editors, edit the makefile, then set the veriables for your kernal location, run make, run make install, reboot, and hope that it works. If it doesn’t, try the following….” Sorry, that works for me but not for 99.99999 percent of computer users. Until that changes, Linux will never own the desktop. And it IS Linux’s fault. There are so many distributions, and so many branches, that few commerial hardware vendors are willing to write optimized drivers. Same goes for software. Yes, I know how to find and install the apps that I want/need to get my work done. But when my father needs a new app to get a job done, he’s not going to go through the same hell that it takes to fix his wifi drivers. He wants to go to Best Buy and buy a box off a shelf. He can’t do that for Linux. Until he can, Linux is not an option for him, or most other desktop computer users.
Point #2 is also valid. Yes, you are correct that it is somewhat subjective. But it’s also true that in general the desktop managers in Linux lack sophistication. And there are too damned many of them. “Don’t like Gnome? No problem! Just uninstall it and download and install MyObsureDesktop! Ah, but don’t forget that half of your apps won’t work anymore.” The numerous options available are one of the strengths of Linux. But they are also one of its weaknesses.
Point #3 is ENTIRELY valid! When do I have to edit configuration files? Well, let’s see… YESTERDAY! Yeah, yesterday. When I upgraded my laptop from Hardy to Intrepid, the SD card would no longer mount. The solution was to manually edit fstab to comment out the mount point for a default device in the file that doesn’t actually exist on the laptop. So yes, I do friggin’ know what I’m talking about.
Look, I’m not trying to bash (no pun intended) Linux. I use it. I love it. And I know that it’s not yet appropriate for most users. You are entirely correct that Linux is not what it was two years ago, or a year ago. But neither is Windows or OS X. And both of them are ahead of Linux in terms of the total user experience, and both are continuing to advance.
Don’t entirely agree with you. I’m not a Linux evangelist, nor even an enthusiast, but have been happily using Ubuntu for the last 4 years, without any trouble. I even have my relatively non technical girlfriend using it happily. For what we use it for, it just works, and is a lot faster than XP on the same machine.
As for how long Mr Shuttleworth will keep financing Ubuntu. I don’t know, but the user base support network and the distribution’s forks will continue for many years yet, and I can see Canonical carrying on for far longer than Redmond will carry on supporting Vista for.
Will Windows 7 kill the Linux desktop. No. Most people using Linux are people like me. People wanting to get the most out of their current hardware. I probably will use Windows 7 in the future, when I get a new computer, and it’s installed by default. But I and other Linux desktop users will probably stick whichever flavour of Linux is popular at the time on it, and dual boot. After all, the day to day things like surfing the web are a lot more secure under Linux. Whilst the Windows side of things is far better at playing games on.
Wow just as I was getting into Linux, still living in a bi-OS household, no way I’m ever switching to Mac. Machines not worth the price, having to relearn the most basic behaviors…& still having programs that were ported not work very well.
As much as I would like to wean myself off of MS, looks like they keep “pulling me back in”
so if he’s trolling what are you doing? trolling with a troll as bait? sweet.
OSs treat people like morons because some people that use them need it simple (I’m looking at you, Abuelo). Or does Farrell think that OSs should treat us all like astro physicists?
Great to hear about a good Windows OS, on the heals of the new, better IE 8. Welcome to the present, Microsoft. Now don’t wait 7 years to come back to it.
I feel totally Rickrolled!
I’m sorry, but this title is retarded. I’m a network admin, I have been into computers my whole life and have used everything from a 286 to vista, Red Hat 4 (or whever the commerically available one from the early 90’s was) to the latest verison of Ubuntu, and Apple IIe to Leopard; and the very idea that a MINOR updated verison of Vista to function better is going to remove an entire branch of computing is laughable.
Oh, I get it! You’re trolling!
yeah, mentioning Linux, Microsoft and “kill desktop linux” in the same post is thinly disguised. This content pathetic and frankly underscores a trending decline in the journalistic integrity of the techcrunch satellite sites.
That’s some nice link baiting, as seen from my RSS, Mr. Merrill
The answer to your question, obviously is “no” since the current economy will *accelerate* Linux desktop adoption both home and enterprise.
No one will tolerate Microsoft’s outrageously expensive licensing Ponzi schemes with budget crunches.
Windows 7 may be “well received” by Windows zealots and tech media pundits ( who rely on Microsoft’s advertising dollars ) but the ten of millions of IT professionals and regular home users who rejected Vista will find no reason to adopt “Vist 2.0″.
Do people even read these posts anymore, or do you just scan the headline in your RSS and make up the actual gist of the post in your mind? The author is a Linux user. I didn’t see him claim Windows 7 would kill Linux. Refer to the last line of paragraph four (his third paragraph).
And all the economy is doing is stopping companies from adopting any new OS. There isn’t a mass shift towards Linux, its just that nobody is moving from XP to Vista.
I don’t mean to sound condescending, but there are tremendous costs associated with any major OS shift. Companies like Novell and Red Hat do their best to make the shift as painless as possible, but there is only so much they can do about third party apps and such.
Of course Windows 7 will kill Linux, just like SUVs killed compact cars.
No, dumbass.
Windows 7 may kill Linux for the everyday desktop user but for anyone beyond a desktop user, hell no.
The utilities and terminal control that Linux gives you is beyond comparison to the windows command line.
It would be nice if Windows actually put some effort into power users and developers.
It has. It’s networking management capabilities are the reason it’s still number one for enterprise (not webservers, i mean actual business operations).
I played with Windows System7 on a Dell system I got used years ago. I had gotten 1600×1200 with the onboard video under Ubuntu. I tried System7 and it would only give me 640×480 at 16bit, which stunk. So found an old AGP card to give me a better resolution, but the AGP is the old and busted. I have up to 1600 again, but everything is tinted yellow.
OK, bad hardware, but just running what Ubuntu gives me on a CD, I have a really good system, while it took a DVD for Windows System Seven and I don’t have enough good drivers to make the system usable. It’s a nice toy, but won’t be a usable system until I pay for lots of stuff Ubuntu gives for free. I don’t run Windows for real unless I have to and I don’t forsee that happening soon.
There is not such thing as Windows System 7, especially not from a few years ago. Plus…Windows 7 and Vista default to 800×600 with the standard display adapter driver.
Sounds like you got scammed dude.
I installed the Windows System 7 beta, which I downloaded from Microsoft last week. I’m calling it System 7 in reference to Apple’s System 7, making people hope for a Windows OS X eventually. And I guess it thought the onboard display adapter on my Optiplex GX260 was substandard, because the only resolution in the dropdown was 640×480.
Like most people, I use what I know. At work, that’s XP. At home, I use OS X. My wife knows how to use both, but my child deserves some simplicity. As far as software goes, I think OS X and Apple compatible software is better thought out and better polished. That is not the main reason to go for Apple and largely ignore Windows and Linux.
Apple’s hardware/software marriage does it for me. A solid package that does things we want it to do as a family. I used to like hardware for what it was, and software for what it was, but now at last I feel I am using a home computer. Look at the iPhone and the iPod. Who cares about features? It’s the overall experience of being able to do the things you want to do with the least possible effort. I wish every coder the best of luck, a happy life and lots of cash. But for me, I couldn’t care less what OS will get that extra percentage point of market share, as long as there are smart (or at least not as dumb as most) integrated packages on the market for a reasonable price.
I installed Windows 7 on a VMWare and assigned only 1GB ram. (I have hardly used Vista, so cant really compare.) I was however impressed with the UI and ease/flexibility of customization. I also liked that they have a Shell which kind of takes in a few *nix commands. However, the way it rejects a command and spit out Error on the screen seemed like an Error case not handled. I guess its still in Beta.
“I also liked that they have a Shell which kind of takes in a few *nix commands. However, the way it rejects a command and spit out Error on the screen seemed like an Error case not handled. I guess its still in Beta.”
…. have you never used DOS?
That is basically what the command line is
Powershell is not DOS.
Its not DOS running in en encapsulated shell but its more or less what DOS was with a few small changes here and there.
In earlier versions of Windows 95/98 it almost literally WAS DOS running in an encapsulated shell.
just dont compare linux and windows . they both are great OSes and there is no point comparing them…
I am currently playing with windows 7, it crashes.. Allot. But, I’m commenting on this website using Fedroa 10. I love linux (which is why my cats name is “linux”. Both operating systems have their place on earth, linux runs the net and windows browses the net (kinda). Noted, when microsoft was adding more computers they were not windows machines.. he he (Sun Servers)
I have a dog named Java :)
Sun servers running Windows Server ;-)
That is just silly – I have been using Ubuntu for a few years; well before the release of Vista, and I am one who thinks that XP was possibly MS’s best release to date (amazing what happens when you put a new skin on Windows 2000).
Ubuntu gets better with each release, and many of the issues that lead to headaches (like driver issues – ESPECIALLY wifi & printer issues) are already much improved, and will continue to improve with each six month update. It is not perfect, but neither is the competition, and it isn’t going anywhere.
FYI – just recently purchased a Dell Inspiron Laptop that can preinstalled with Ubuntu – wecam, wifi, printing, network sharing all worked flawlessly out of the box, and I think we’ll see more vendors adding these lines over the years (albeit slowly).
“I am one who thinks that XP was possibly MS’s best release to date (amazing what happens when you put a new skin on Windows 2000).”
I don’t think anybody can help you if you think XP is just 2000 reskinned and that XP is the best software MS has made since.
“FYI – just recently purchased a Dell Inspiron Laptop that can preinstalled with Ubuntu – wecam, wifi, printing, network sharing all worked flawlessly out of the box, and I think we’ll see more vendors adding these lines over the years (albeit slowly).”
…. are you honestly expecting for a vendor to sell a compuer system with a preinstalled OS that does NOT have support for all of it’s hardware?
Claiming your preinstalled version of Linux supports all your laptop’s hardware is nothing to brag about.
Windows 7, much like Vista, will only be able to kill itself. Competition with Ubuntu is a non-issue IMO.
Someone is in denial…
I’ve been trying out the beta, your right, its not bad. But, I’m using Windows XP at the moment, sooner or later I’m going to have to upgrade to a new operating system. So if I’m going to have to learn how to use a new operating system anyway, am I going to go with the free one or the one which costs the earth. Granted I’m slightly biased as I do use linux desktops and servers as part of my work so I’m not a total newbie but I still have a lot to learn.
I have all sorts of operating systems here in my house: OS X, Vista, XP, Debian. I was playing around with SuSE, RedHat and even Slackware a long time ago. I had so much hopes for the shiny new desktops the Linux community was able to develop (anyone remember Enlightenment?).
However, the truth is that people don’t switch simply because of the desktop. It’s the applications that make an OS worthwhile. So, for Linux this means extremely good and secure handling of network and server. For office use this is probably Windows. Let’s face it: most people couldn’t care less about the many options a Linux system is offering. Sometimes the “one way” is better than “too many options”–even if that one sucks. Just imagine your mother calling you about a problem with Gnome when all you know is KDE?
For true multiuser systems, there’s hardly any better system than Linux (can’t talk too much about OS X here). But how many people really need that?
The true killer app for Windows will always be Office. Even if you’re a gamer, you just want to have that Word or Excel stuff. And if there’s one thing MS knows all too well about, it is eye candy. Showing the regular computer users how to operate a Bourne or Korn Shell is just too much. And without those, you’re hardly using any Linux at all which really doesn’t make a difference for you to switch.
So, the question should be: will the browser kill Windows? And that’s probably also not going to happen–especially not with Google starting to come up with their own browser, eventually just making Firefox’s life harder. As much as I regret this, but MS is here to stay. But luckily, Linux will stay as well.
Heck no. They already had to issue a security patch that fixes MP3 corruption on this beta. But skipped plugging a hole in a file-sharing protocol that it had already fixed in previous versions!
Same old (Security hole, Vulnerability haven) Windows OS.
and further more … No! If anything, this will spawn more competitive development. When Enlightenment 17 goes stable in 2020 :) we will see a huge shift in desktop capabilities.
Right on! I am glad that my copy of Ubuntu dosen’t have to be updated on practically a daily basis and is completley flawless…… oh wait…..
Dude, it’s a BETA. It did say that right at the top, bottom, and middle of the page that you downloaded it from. BETA. Read that again. BETA.
Tell me Windows 7 will be a big improvement over Vista and I’ll believe you.
Tell me that it will “kill” ANYTHING, except perhaps older computers whose users try to run it, and I KNOW you’re an undercover marketing person for Microsoft.
Try to relate Windows with blowing up a computer and I KNOW you are an undercover Linux fanboy…
Wow! most CrunchGear posts have no more than 5 comments on them. But with a headline like this, you can count on the Linux fanatics and the Windows fanboys to come and pump it up.
Recently I was so sick of Vista and it’s chronic slowness and bloated’ness that I decided to try Ubuntu 8.10 as a full time OS.
I expected to be crawling back to Vista again within a few days, but found was that Ubuntu is surprisingly usable as a full time OS, and I never had much desire to go back to Vista except for .NET development and a few games.
So I nuked Vista and installed Windows 7 beta to give it a try. It certainly is a big improvement on Vista, but amazingly I find that I don’t have the desire to keep using Windows, and I am considering going back to Ubuntu again as my full time OS, I actually “miss” Ubuntu.
I am a big Windows fan and for me to say that is a big surprise to me. (I’ve always dabbled in Linux as a secondary OS for many years).
As always, I did have to do a few things that require a bit of Linux know how to get the most out of Ubuntu. If Linux vendors would just hurry up and smooth out the rough edges they’d have a very viable OS.
Even if Linux isn’t adopted by power users and people who want to play games, if they could get it pre-installed on cheap computers then they’ll get a foothold which they can use in order to get more software development happening.
So yeah, I don’t think Windows 7 will “kill” Linux by any means, it might slow adoption, but I believe that the Linux community is it’s own worst enemy in terms of getting it installed as a every day desktop OS.
Wait… I’m confused. Is the Linux desktop alive?
Try this: walk around 100 coffee shops and look at what OS people are running. If you see a few hundred screens, I would be surprised if you saw more than 2 running Linux.
and I live in the Bay Area!
Sadly your right. While Linux ( Ubuntu in particular ) has made leaps and bounds in the last 5 years technically, it’s got no PR department, No advertising budget to speak of and doesn’t have the luxury of calling its self Mojave after a crappy iteration.
Don’t forget that its too complicated to use for most of the people in these coffee shops, I would say THAT is it’s biggest problem with adaption.
people use linux? lol
http://cashcratescam.com
I will tell you why windows 7 matters. Do you have electricity in your house? If so windows matters. Most powerplants still use XP. They and the software called the distributed controled systems (DCS) never bothered to work with Vista but the sentiment is with Windows 7 they will upgrade. Not sure how that applies but it is interesting to me…probably because I sell to that industry…
I think that the better windows is, the more apple and Linux desktop developers will have to work on improving there product.
In the end I don’t think any of them will “die”, but instead the end user will benefit.
let me see, you design a lousy furniture and got bashing and on your next design, you made an amazing job – boom, and you’re a star now because your previous lousy job is the benchmark.
Just like Apple ipod, nothing fancy, candy looking, add a new feature which they are suppose to include long time ago – boom… its a winning strategy!
iPhone 3G anyone?
In and era when practially EVERY cellphone sold in the US has had 3G and GPS as a standard for years Apple comes out witha phone heavily reliant on web access and mapping with no 3G or GPS…. and people PRAISED it.
Then they come out with a new iPhone that has these missing STANDARD features added….. for the cost of upgrading of course….. and they are praised AGAIN.
This is why I hate Apple…. mostly because of it’s brainwashed fanboys.
At this rate Apple can release a car with no radio, AC, movable windows, or wipers and they will be praised because of how fancy it looks…….. then praised again when they release the next version that has these included…..
A year ago I was on widows I never complained other than the usual virus/malware infections. I started using ubuntu, and it is a great experience, moreover it is free and if you are a developer you can digg deep into OS its fun.
Though I still use windows for work as Flash CS3 wont work on ubuntu.
And the ubuntu community is awesome, they help you out when you are stuck somewhere.
And linux will never die out for me.
“according to some Windows 7 will put the final nail in the coffin of desktop Linux. ”
This is not tech news. This is a worthless post.
“Tell me Windows 7 will be a big improvement over Vista and I’ll believe you.”
Ooooh be careful what you wish for :D Windows Vista is just like Windows 95 and Windows ME in the past.. a merely stepping stone
WHO GIVES A F*CK!
You people are retarded wasting time arguing over something that is so irrelevant.
You don’t argue over what car manufacturer is the best, you just pick and choose one to your need, so why the hell would you argue over what OS is the best and what one isn’t, when really every single one does EXACTLY the same thing, just in a slightly different way.
Hmm… I believe the truth is people DO argue about what car manufacturer is best all the time. Just google ‘Toyota vs Ford’… :) How can you pick intelligently unless you know what each does well… right?
i just hope windows 7 got something for the virus.. after getting infected most of the time i decided to switch to ubuntu.
You should have read the documentation.
They advise you to install any free anti-virus software right after the installation and update the computer so to get the mp3 fix.
No one should be using a beta as their main OS any how, I dualboot with Vista as my main one still, although personally I haven’t had the need to go back to it yet, I can even run my programs which are on my Vista harddrive with no problem.
Been using Windows since 95, haven’t had an infection yet, I actually know how to use my antivirus software.
Might I recommend AntiVir or Avast? Both are freeware.
If you REALLY want a good one however, and don’t mind paying a small yearly fee, I would recommend Nod32.
Cyber Akuma you are a windows fanboy. About the guy who said loading Windows 7 will blow up an old computer, I would say he is right as all new versions of Windows require more RAM, more CPU, to do the same crappy work. Viruses are always a problem with windows. Sure in the days of 95 I could look at the the limited task list and know when a illegal process existed. But, since then I’ve had spyware/virus problem gallore with windows. Who wants to spend the time every weekend running a stinking virus scanner because windows is too stupid to protect the kernel files? Further, I tried Ubuntu and had some issues with the wireless card etc. There was a learning curve, but I likened it to the pain of windows always running virus scanners performing millions of backups etc. The difference is that Windows is perpetual hell of a time sink, whereas setting up the wireless drivers was a day of work. Since I invested the learning curve I no longer have to keep up with the Microsoft Jones, and I have a super fast computer, with no virus problems. I don’t have to upgrade every three years, for a 150 dollar fee. And the application openoffice is much better than Word. Firefox kicks I.E. butt hands down, if you don’t believe it look at the ratings. I love linux and now that I invested the up front time on Ubuntu, I will never go back to Windows (Never!). Further, when I go home (to my dads) I will install a dual boot of Ubuntu with all its eyecandy on my parents home computer. Because I know that in two years, Microsoft will stop supporting its piece of crap software and start publishing more exploits for windows hackers to obsolete it, all the while offering a supported model at $500.00 upgrade. At this time I will tell my Dad, boot into Ubuntu linux. And he will see how nice free can be. No going to the store for fixie supportable windows blow version for the same old functionality and more hardware needed to support it. Linux will continue to grow because of people like me, always offering it as a substitue (cheap, fast) and safer than virus prone Windows. Even if I have to install it myself on all my friends and families computers. Whats the best advertising? Word of mouth baby! Of course Windows lovers will always resort to get a virus scanner, but this is really unnecessary and just as bad as people ignoring wireless support problems in linux. People are sick of buggy/disabled features of Microsoft. In my opinion, why linux will win in the end is simple economics. As the price goes down the demand goes up. Linux represents free and at some point its adoption will be unavoidable. Linux is a guerilla warfare against the goliath, it antagonizes and can dump a product for free whereas whenever the goliath tries this he will be in court for monopolistic anti-dumping. Netbooks (Linux) are deleting Microsofts revenue and profits, they are having to give away software to keep market share against Linux. But in so doing they are losing business against themself. People say how long can Ubuntu last, maybe not long but there will be another linux vendor to replace them. Better question is how long can Microsoft last when it needs money to support Redmond development. But can’t without losing market share to free? Linux does not need this infusion, its already free and still competing quite nicely. Microsoft is hemorraging trying to stop the blood loss infered by linux adoption in cheap markets including third world. Further I believe that the operating systems and Word are saturated business models. I don’t see where Microsoft could convince me that they have that much lead anyway, and if I really want their crappy software I’d install it on a virtual machine (like free Sun Virtualbox). Further, if I was as corrupt as Microsoft and wanted their virus prone software, I’d bittorent it for free. Because everyone knows its your fault if you don’t back it up on preinstalled computers and it dies due to its virus/worm issues. Golly shucks, I didn’t run my virus scanner this weekend, I guess I deserve losing my Microsoft sucks. Better get my reinstall disk…oops no disk..have to buy it again? Forget electronic lockers or backup disks (which they don’t support anymore), why would anyone ever want to pay Redmond for their paranoid schizo control freak ways? No reinstallation disk? Well I got a solution, to all my friends, download Ubuntu. Then you can have a better OS anyway and if it dies you won’t be fretting how you are going to reinstall it without Dell/HP etc giving you a restore CD (which they don’t anymore!) for a fee. Thanks Microsux. Your a disease, a virus, and economics will eat you alive. Now please continue to eat your self alive to try to control Linux adoption. This should be real fun.