They use it for some time and never have any problems. They make it look amazing using Compiz Fusion, then change the easily accessible setup options to make it even faster. Should for some strange reason they have a problem they boot in recovery mode and fix it fast. Voila, it works.
Ubuntu rocks!!!
Ubuntu as slick as Win7, Mac OS X
Summary
Just like Microsoft has taken the blowtorch to Vista to produce the lightning-quick Windows 7, which so far runs well even on older hardware, Ubuntu has picked up its own game.
Topics
Here's what the official press release won't tell you about Ubuntu 9.04, which formally hit the streets overnight: its designers have polished the hell out of its user interface since the last release in October.
So much so, in fact, that I am starting to prefer using my Ubuntu "Jaunty Jackalope" desktop over the similarly slick Windows 7 beta (which I am currently running full-time on one desktop) and Mac OS X Leopard operating systems, which I also use regularly.
I left Windows Vista, XP and even Debian lying bruised and battered by the roadside some time ago.
You won't be able to notice the vast improvement in Ubuntu's desktop experience over the past six months by browsing screenshot galleries of 9.04 or looking at new feature lists. What I'm talking about is that elusive slick and speedy feel you get from applications launching fast, windows moving around without jerkiness and everything simply being where it should be in the user interface.
Launching and using Firefox on Ubuntu 8.10 on my 2GHz Core 2 Duo-based machine with 2GB of RAM, a 7200rpm hard disk and an Nvidia GeForce 8800GTS always seemed to feel like I was going back a few years to a time when web browsers were not considered something you always had open to service web applications like Gmail and Bloglines.
It was the same with Windows Vista.
Now, just like Microsoft has taken the blowtorch to Vista to produce the lightning-quick Windows 7, which so far runs well even on older hardware, Ubuntu has picked up its own game.
I particularly noticed the Ubuntu difference when I put the operating system to the test by simultaneously launching and using multiple applications, listening to music and more while using my spare CPU cycles in the background to encode high-definition video with Mencoder. Ubuntu still felt very fast ... even with traditionally sluggy pieces of software like OpenOffice.org.
It's not just the speed changes, however, that has got me excited about Ubuntu 9.04. It's also the subtle additions to the interface; the logical move of shut down and reboot options to the far right of the menu; the slick new notifications system; the seamless (finally!) integration of the Nvidia accelerated drivers and the cleaned-up options and package install systems.
Want Adobe Flash or other proprietary software like multimedia codecs on Ubuntu? Just search for them in the one location, under their own names. No downloading anything from any websites. No package management or dependencies. No apt-get. Point and click.
I'm not a Linux novice (in fact, I'm a former Linux and FreeBSD systems administrator), and I've been using Linux on the desktop since the late 1990s. I usually run a combination of Ubuntu and Windows on my PC, and the latest Mac OS X on my laptop.
So I'm in a position to notice step changes in user interface behaviour like the one that Ubuntu has brought to the table with 9.04. In short, Ubuntu is now as slick and beautiful as Mac OS X or Windows 7.
As we've noted in earlier articles, Microsoft has also brought its best to the table with Windows 7. However, it's a pity Apple didn't seem to do so with Leopard ... like some reviewers, I felt Steve Job's latest operating system opus added a lot of new features, but also some unfortunate erratic behavior that muddied Mac OS X's position as a user interface leader.
As MacWorld has noted, the new Stacks feature in Leopard's Dock is a "mess" and replaced the formerly utilitarian approach to keeping folders in the Dock with a "snazzy but generally less useful pop-up window".
The new "Spaces" feature in Leopard is nothing new; it provides multiple virtual desktop work spaces which Unix has had for decades; but I found Apple's implementation erratic.
Then too, there was the speed price some users paid in Leopard for all the upgrade, although that could just be the older hardware penalty. On my 1.5GHz G4 laptop with 1280MB of RAM, Leopard runs sluggishly, whereas Tiger runs like a dream. As I don't use any of the new features, the upgrade seemed worthless.
When you consider Microsoft's remarkable rebirth with Windows 7 and the fact that Ubuntu is free, open source and runs on anything, you would have to wonder what sort of rabbit Steve Jobs will have to pull out of his hat with Snow Leopard to keep growing Mac OS X's share. Sure, there are some apps missing on Linux (say, Photoshop). But the same can be said of Mac OS X in certain areas, and VMware and CrossOver solve a lot of problems.
Looking back to the genesis of Ubuntu 9.04 six months ago, I suspect that its subtle but powerful changes are due to the new user interface team that Ubuntu founder Mark Shuttleworth said at the time he would put in place. If so, that team has already earned its pay checks and even more, and we're looking forward to seeing what another six months of development will produce.
In the meantime, kudos to Ubuntu 9.04: you got game.
This article was originally published on ZDNet Australia.
Talkback Most Recent of 293 Talkback(s)
-
InAction Man24th Apr 2009 -
Get Adobe onboard and watch Linux Fly.
Linux really needs some big AAA aplications.
If adobe would launch CS4 master suite for Linux I know I would certainly go for it.
Even if they only launched photoshop and dreamweaver to start with, the response would be immense.
I can live without Office (whats a word processor) but I don't want to relearn a web authoring development application, likewise with photoshop.
Get these on board and it will decimate Apple.
I guess Jobs has signed a behind the scenes deal with Adobe....
Bozzer26th Apr 2009 -
True
As much as I like Apple, largely because of it being a *nix, if Adobe
launched Photoshop for Linux it would not make any sense for me to
stay with Apple. I would have my *nix, and Photoshop, being a
photographer I use daily.
cashaww26th Apr 2009 -
"For CrossOver Linux, I found that it ran Macromedia's Studio MX very well"
http://www.highdots.com/forums/macromedia-dreamweaver/dreamweaver-linux-cs4-256386-2.html
"For CrossOver Linux, I found that it ran Macromedia's Studio MX very well (Not
Studio MX 2004 --- that has compatibility issues) and Photoshop 7.0 very well.
Of course, these work on Wine as well and that's free. And the newest version
of CrossOver I think supports PS CS2 and if PWhipp is right, DW CS3."
The situation DOES cause one to wonder, what is Adobe and Macromedia receiving "under the table" to NOT support Linux? ("29 million estimated users worldwide, and I would suspect a majority of those are programmers based on the nature of the "Linux Geek".
Seems like a potentially large customer base that Adobe isn't
marketing to, plus the added benefit of putting a thumb in the eye of the clueless folks over in MS land.....")
Its not that Linux needs to "get on board". Its that the software industry marketing needs to get "off board" the backscratching syndrome, and simply supply quality software to everyone in honest competition.
"You scratch my back and I'll scratch yours" is an age old well known quasi-legal marketing scam that has become a prerequisite to modern corporate business.
Ethics presently have no value.
Ole Man26th Apr 2009 -
Try Gimp 2.6.6
I find it will do almost anything you can do in CS4. Some of the things you can do, seem a little clumsy coming from CS4, but you can do almost everything for a whole lot less.
mjolnar@...27th Apr 2009 -
I will have to hand to Ubuntu, recovery works quite nicely!
I was updating to 9.04 or whatever the newest is last night. I pulled the cord out of the laptop thinking the battery had been changed but apparently the battery was not plugged into the laptop all of the way so it wasn't charging, and Bzzzt, laptop went off about 3/4 of the way through updating. OH GOD! I thought.
When I restarted it would log me in but nothing else. Restarted it into recovery mode, ran fsck, and repaired packages, it did some downloading and such, restarted normal and I had the new Ubuntu!! Very Nice! I thought I was going to have to go through an entire re-intall, re-configure, la-la-la, but no! I must admit I was quite happy!
Kid Icarus-210970508580879202452138022674931st May 2009 -
Ubuntu will be puting more price pressure on Windows as it gets more
polished, and more people know what Linux and Ubuntu are. The biggest question is how low is MS willing to go to maintain market share? Will they go as low as they did with netbooks?
DonnieBoy24th Apr 2009 -
All M$ has is . . .
. . . is market share.
sporkfighter27th Apr 2009 -
You'd think windows 7 was released
"As we've noted in earlier articles, Microsoft has also
brought its best to the table with Windows 7."
the way it is talked about on ZDNet.
"Ubuntu as slick as Win7, Mac OS X"
I'm a big Linux fan, but this position is difficult to justify.
Supporting info:
Ubuntu slick on newish 2GHz Core Duo (2GB), Leopard
slow on seven year old 1.5GHz G4 (1GB) laptop. Really?
" the logical move of shut down and reboot options to the
far right of the menu; the slick new notifications system;
the seamless (finally!) integration of the Nvidia accelerated
drivers and the cleaned-up options and package install
systems."
All good, but was this all that was required to raise to Mac
OS X?
Time to take a breath and reflect.
Richard Flude24th Apr 2009 -
If you look at things individually...
...then you won't see it. I see what he is getting at and its hard to describe. This is why I just laugh when someone says "oh there weren't many changes in Ubuntu..." for whatever upgrade. There are always all sorts of small polish changes all over the place that add up to an interesting experience. In this release however there seems to be an overall different feeling out of the OS from responsiveness to overall look and feel even though nothing is lunging out at you.
storm14k24th Apr 2009 -
My Personal Experience.
Let me first say that from the articles I've read and Microsoft history I think we can safety assume little difference between Windows 7 and a fully patched Vista running on a standardized compatible hardware platform matching Microsoft's ideal hardware specs. Most of the improvements have been in hardware compatibility and fixing stability issues, and there is a beta out there, and MS has posted white papers. So I think a comparison can in fact be made pretty easily.
I think a lot of people judge the quality of an Operating System based on how closely it matches the "Ideal Microsoft Experience" which seems unfair. UBUNTU has a lot of things that when you learn them are better and lets face it, MS doesn't even match their own ideal. Personally,
I'm testing UBUNTU myself now. It hasn't been easy. I had Java apps that were supposedly cross-platform that didn't work because they were designed in Windows for Windows and Mac only. I've had to relearn everything I know about graphic design apps to use GIMP instead of Photoshop. I miss VBA, Excel, and Access macros; and I don't really have a replacement App in Linux I like yet.
On the other hand. There is the whole flavor thing in Windows I don't have to deal with. Wine on UBUNTU is awsome and it makes a beautiful media station with no security pop-up prompts or anything. (Yeah I said media!! It just makes a lot of the bad things go away and the good things get better without Direct X or Active Script) It is virus proof so I make visiting family use it everytime they come so I don't get weather bug installed when they visit. I do 90% of what I need now and have never crash, or blue screen, or get a warning telling me I'm not genuine enough to update. So I'm sticking with it.
It had some advantages on the Mac too. I could operate much quicker with less effort, securely; OSX always reminded me of navigating through jello, especially for administrative tasks. The system is clean and straight forward, where Mac tries to look new age and trendy to the point of gaudiness. It even setup a little quicker and with Synaptic, added all my software to boot.
Plus, it ran some cool games. I got World of Warcraft, World of Padman, Grid 2, and a couple others.
Socratesfoot24th Apr 2009 -
Windows Slick? My ass
It rather amazes me in these debates that no viruses and no need for spyware patrol software never get considered. Both degrade performance. If the argument is that Linux will eventually need these there is the counter-argument that eventually Linux will do everything Macs and PCs do and for free. If we are talking about now. Lack of viruses and spyware are major pluses for Linux, less support for applications a minus. Oh and my Linux boxes have never shown the degrading performance over time that every Windows installation I have ever had suffered from.
INGOTIAN25th Apr 2009 -
working for your OS
I never had a degrading performance from Windows. But of course, the reason I didn't is yet another plus for Linux that's never added into the mix.
In order to keep Windows running at peak performance, I was running an antimalware scan nightly, running every aspect of Advanced Windowscare as well as running SmartDefrag at the end and once a month I'd run a full virus scan.
Advanced Windowscare was maintaining my registry, keeping me spyware free, cleaning my cache, tweaking Windows settings and a few other things. It also let me check the registry to be sure it was defragged as well.
With Linux, I turn on my machine, do my work, turn off my machine when I'm done if I'd like. Since I have a desktop, I tend to just leave it running constantly, even at night when I'm sleeping, connected to the internet. That's also not something I'd be comfortable doing with a Windows PC.
tmsbrdrs27th Apr 2009 -
Wastage
I tend to just leave it running constantly, even at night when I'm sleeping, connected to the internet.
In a concerted effort to destroy the environment!
TRiG.
Timothy (TRiG)28th Apr 2009 -
Yeah, visiting porn sites would really infect your PC with viruses..
My Windows PC never got infected with viruses and malware.
transposeIT28th Apr 2009
Talkback - Tell Us What You Think
The best of ZDNet, delivered
ZDNet Newsletters
Get the best of ZDNet delivered straight to your inbox
Facebook Activity
