In our society, the pace of technological advancement has never been faster. I’ll skip the history lesson on Microsoft’s tremendous significance on the unbelievably explosive PC industry. If it is one thing we can all agree on, is that we should use the right tool for the right job. As an XBOX loving, .NET coding, Microsoft admirer let me just jump right into my tale of installing Linux Ubuntu.
First off, a bit of a disclaimer. This is just an introductory post I’m doing on Linux, and I’m just dipping my toe in the water. I won’t be touching any Linux source code. I won’t use anything other than the GNOME desktop. Also, I don’t plan to port any data from my Windows machine. I plan to wipe Windows, and use it anew like a typical user buying a new PC would. The only difference being, I’ll do the installation of the OS (operating system) myself.
Linux has had a good reputation of working well on older hardware, with some trouble running on newer hardware. Therefore, I dusted off an old Dell Latitude C400 I had recently put Vista on. This once well-rated notebook could now best be described as a doorstop. This notebook always ran Windows XP Professional well, and I had previously put Vista on it. In fact, for a computer over six years old, it ran Vista very well. I’ve generally had a good experience with running Vista on older hardware.
Installing Linux has always had a bad rap. It is definitely improved, but it could stand to be a bit more user friendly for all the grandparents out there. There was a fair amount of technical onscreen mumbo-jumbo, which hiding would make for a better experience. In general, it was fairly easy, and the prompts are minimal. I’m not sure that anyone who has never done this before would feel entirely confident installing a dual-boot configuration. The entire process took about half an hour, generally the same amount of time as the Vista installation.
Here are a few technical gems. I like the fact it fits just under the standard 700 MB CD size. This is great for older computers. For whatever reason, my DVD drives tend to go bad over time, whereas CD drives always live. Windows lacks one installation feature that is very nice, the Live CD boot capability. This allows you to boot with the CD and run Linux as if it was installed, all the while it doesn’t change anything on your hard drive. Very slick. It is perfect for evaluating Linux. Similarly, you can boot a Linux installation off a USB thumb drive, save your work and shut down without ever changing the physical computer. This is a great alternative to carrying your entire computer or relying on Remote Desktop on another computer.
So, here I go, I’m logging in. Video? Check. Sound? Check? What about my ancient PCMCIA wireless 802.11b card? Yes, this notebook has no built in Wi-Fi support, and I’m using the ancient wireless 802.11b standard. Like Vista, it works — no problem. I can pull the card in and out; it redetects the wireless network and reconnects with no problem. So far, so good. Even the sole, pathetic USB 1.1 port works. My travel USB drive and mouse work with it free and clear.
Surely, I can find a problem. Nay, I will find a problem! I click the “Network” icon. It appears to have found my NAS and every Windows computer on my home network. I click on an MP3 file. Hmmm, no codec is installed. I understand the legality why. However, it does offer a simple pop-up dialog offering some suggestions. After a quick unattended download, it works! Now to play a video, surely it won’t play this proprietary Microsoft MWV file. Lo and behold, it does.
This is just my opinion, but one thing strikes me as unusual. It’s fairly clear that Vista and Ubuntu share a lot of similar cosmetics. Ubuntu has a “Recent Documents,” much like the “Start” menu has always had. The icons for documents have a thumbnail that represents the information inside the document, much like Vista. The taskbar of running applications looks very similar as well. Right clicking on the desktop gives a lot of the same options as Windows. I’m not trying to turn this into a he-said she-said, “they stole this” argument. I’m just a bit surprised it acts as much like Windows as it does. Come to think of it, I’m not surprised. It is in “Linux’s” best interest to make a transition from Windows as seamless as possible.
Doing that, might not be so hard. This Linux distribution I selected has some of the most practical applications. It includes Firefox for Internet browsing, which is a strong rival and superior to Internet Explorer in many ways. It contains OpenOffice for basic word processing, spreadsheets and presentations. It appears capable, although definitely not as full featured as Microsoft Office. I was able to edit documents between the two office suites with no problem.
Over the course of a few days, I did encounter the occasional lockup. Every now and then, an application would hang. I did peruse the help file, to determine how to customize the panels to my liking. The help file, hmmm, not always so helpful. So Linux did seem like Windows in more ways than one.
Having said that, I like free. I could see me using this for free. I could see me setting up this for every computer in my parent’s small business. For just about any software challenge, a FOSS (free and open source software) solution exists. I typically check SourceForge first when I need something. Linux is a more than capable OS, which wasn’t always the case in the past.
Bill Gates once famously said that Windows 90%+ market share wasn’t a monopoly, at least not in the traditional sense. One thing is certain, Microsoft does have some strong competition. That is a good thing. With that comes more innovation. Whichever operating system I ultimately choose to use down the road, it is clear the personal computer is only going to get better.
July 28th, 2008 at 3:59 pm
Thank you for your article.
That’s why I will choose Dell for my next Linux laptop.
Keep up the good work Dell Engineers!
Christos
July 28th, 2008 at 10:50 pm
Very good article and oh so true.