Looking for a user friendly OS

[PaulieG]

i'm looking for a user friendly OS alternative to windows to try. I've never used anything except for windows. I'd like something that I can dual boot with and that has good stable drivers for video cards etc. Suggestions?

 

[Dippyskoodlez]

i'm looking for a user friendly OS alternative to windows to try. I've never used anything except for windows. I'd like something that I can dual boot with and that has good stable drivers for video cards etc. Suggestions?

A mac.

Or Ubuntu.

 

[Jimmy 2004]

Ubuntu would be my second choice after Windows. Ubuntu is fine for dual booting, and you don't need to mess with drivers too much. Probably the most user friendly Linux (Kubuntu is another option, but I would stick to normal Ubuntu myself).

IMO Windows is better, but it's nice to give Ubuntu a try - I'll be installing the new version myself sometime over the next few days.

 

[zekrahminator]

Ubuntu is definitely worth a try, but if that doesn't work, Kubuntu boots fine.

Just remember to partition your drive correctly, or else you'll over-write your Windows .

Kubuntu on my main rig reminded me that the $100 spent on a Windows license is worth every penny .

 

[Jimmy 2004]

Kubuntu on my main rig reminded me that the $100 spent on a Windows license is worth every penny .

It's true. Windows Linux for gamers and people who want a simple OS. Linux is improving but Windows is still better.

 

[Ripper3]

Yeah but then again, since there aren't many games developers working on Linux compatible games, it kinda stands to reason that gaming on Linux is kinda... crap... even with Wine and Cedega (they don't support SM3.0 yet, but at least the popular games are supported quite well, Steam games, WoW, etc.)

Windows is simple, true, and Linux is definately making its way there. Then again, Linux was originally made with people like Linus Torvalds in mind (and of course, the fact he developed it for himself doesn't help usability), rather than John Smith (or John Doe if you prefer).

 

[ktr]

ID ftw! Best gaming company, makes great games for both windows and linux (and mac...)

Wolfenstein: Enemy territroy works great on linux, better than windows. W:ET has been on top 10 games played for 4-5 years now (perhaps bigger than bf2/2142). Also UT2k4 play great on it too and that's a highly played game. I got CSS and other steam games to work under wine just fine. It plays in DX8 (you can force dx9, but buggy), but it plays great.

Why bother with windows now

 

[Ripper3]

ID ftw! Best gaming company, makes great games for both windows and linux (and mac...)

Wolfenstein: Enemy territroy works great on linux, better than windows. W:ET has been on top 10 games played for 4-5 years now (perhaps bigger than bf2/2142). Also UT2k4 play great on it too and that's a highly played game. I got CSS and other steam games to work under wine just fine. It plays in DX8 (you can force dx9, but buggy), but it plays great.

Why bother with windows now

Yeah, I completely forgot about Enemy Territory and UT, mostly because I never really played them... well, at a LAN I played UT2k4, and I played ET a few times, but never very good at them.
Never managed to get them working under Linux though, without some weird hiccups.
Same goes for Quake 4... I couldn't get it to work under Ubuntu... well, I gave up easily, and I was working under 64-bit Ubuntu <_< >_> but the principal is that it SHOULD have worked!

 

[ktr]

perhaps its your ati graphics card...

damn you ati and you non-existant linux drivers.

 

[Ripper3]

I had an Nvidia back then, twas a 6600 PCI-E just before you go further into it, heh.
In fact, I've had less trouble with ATi drivers under Linux than I have with NVidia ones... which is the exact opposite of other people for some strange reason.

 

[ktr]

Yeah, I completely forgot about Enemy Territory and UT, mostly because I never really played them... well, at a LAN I played UT2k4, and I played ET a few times, but never very good at them.
Never managed to get them working under Linux though, without some weird hiccups.
Same goes for Quake 4... I couldn't get it to work under Ubuntu... well, I gave up easily, and I was working under 64-bit Ubuntu <_< >_> but the principal is that it SHOULD have worked!

did you install the 32bit lib's?

 

[DIBL]

Kubuntu or Ubuntu. Harder to set up the OS, by far -- depending on your hardware, but you only need to do it once. I bought a $549 emachines PC and $279 LCD monitor for it last week, for an elderly family member who only wants to send e-mail and browse the 'net, and set up Kubuntu on Saturday morning, with nothing but Firefox showing on the desktop. I needed to spend an hour researching the correct driver for the integrated Intel GM950 video chip, so that the monitor would display 1440x900. Hung an el-cheapo Canon printer on it, and I was done for under $1,000. I hear fiddling with wireless this and Bluetooth that can be a little more challenging. Spyware and virus concerns are pretty much history, in my life -- I sure don't miss that crap!

 

[Jimmy 2004]

Harder to set up the OS, by far

True, drivers can be difficult. But actually installing the OS is far easier than XP, one good thing about Linux - proper GUI installations are nice.

Going to download the new Ubuntu myself tonight and might install it later or tomorrow.

 

[Ripper3]

ktr: Yeah, I did. Teh 32-bit libs were installed. But I got interested just now, had a look, and seems that my problem stemmed from a problem in Ubuntu itself some problem with a sound lib, so I might try it again some time (I haven't played or tried to play Q4 since then... it's been sitting around with the other games for ages... may aswell put it to good use).

DIBL: Yeah, Linux is great for casual use, and I'm trying to set my dad u with a Linux machine, but I don't know if AutoRoute will work in Wine, if it doesn't then my dad's not going to want to move onto Linux at all until it works, but glad you've managed to turn someone to Linux, heheh.
I heard the wireless stuff is confusing and difficult if you have certain unsupported chipsets, but luckily, the most common chipsets already have pretty good support in Ubuntu. RT500 chipset for example works natively now. Bluetooth should work right away in most cases.

Jimmy: Drivers aren't so difficult with some of the automated installers, but you've got to find the right ones first, that's even more confusing.
The GUI install is alright, but the fact you can actually run the rest of the apps off CD while installing Ubuntu is just brilliant. Much better than with Breezy. That was simply blue screen, white text. Figure the rest out yourself.

 

[ktr]

I would recommend just using the 32bit ubuntu. http://www.phoronix.com/scan.php?page=article&item=616&num=1

almost no difference.

Also, ET needs to be redirected to use the OSS, there is a command you can put in the et scrip so it can execute it before launching.

rm ~/.etwolf/*/profiles/*/profile.pid
echo "et.x86 0 0 direct" > /proc/asound/card0/pcm0p/oss
echo "et.x86 0 0 disable" > /proc/asound/card0/pcm0c/oss

I just put the first line there if you have the problem of every time you launch ET, your settings get reseted. common problem.

open et shell script with you favorite text editor and add those lines before the line "exec ./et.x86 "$@""

 

[Deleted member 3]

My preferences go to Ecomstation and Zeta.

 

[Ripper3]

Thanks ktr. I'll try it when I next have a go with Ubuntu.
I was using 64-bit at the time because I didn't think I'd be gaming, so I was just seeing performance differences, if any.

Dan, that eComStation looks like it could be interesting. I never used OS/2 personally, but I hear it's great, so might give eCom a try.
I second the choice of Zeta though, as I always kind of liked BeOS.

 

[DIBL]

Going to download the new Ubuntu myself tonight and might install it later or tomorrow.

I recommend the "Alternate" installation CD -- it gives you a little more control over partitioning and the placement of the Grub menu.

 

[Jimmy 2004]

I recommend the "Alternate" installation CD -- it gives you a little more control over partitioning and the placement of the Grub menu.

I'll take a look at that then - I've always just used the standard CD when I install. Is the 64-bit version still rubbish? Last time I used Ubuntu the 32-bit version had much more support.

But there is a flaw in my plans... I have no blank CDs or DVDs so I can't install it yet . I'll either go out and buy some later or work out if you can install Ubuntu from a USB drive. Anyone know if you can?

 

[Ripper3]

I believe you cannot, no. Well, as far as I can remember that is.
The 64-bit version has improved somewhat, but you really do still need to install the 32-bit libs, but alot more programs are now available as 64-bit native (except Opera but then again, Flash and Shockwave only work under 32-bit browsers, so no real loss).
If you don't want as much hassle, just use 32-bit.

 

[DIBL]

Yep -- what Ripper3 said ...

 

[Deleted member 3]

I believe you cannot, no. Well, as far as I can remember that is.
The 64-bit version has improved somewhat, but you really do still need to install the 32-bit libs, but alot more programs are now available as 64-bit native (except Opera but then again, Flash and Shockwave only work under 32-bit browsers, so no real loss).
If you don't want as much hassle, just use 32-bit.

The question is a user friendly alternative OS, I would say the whole hassle with libraries and such is exactly the thing that isn't wanted.

 

[DIBL]

"User friendliness", like beauty, is pretty subjective -- that's for sure. I saw an insightful quote in the book I bought to get me through the first 30 days with Linux: "Windows is user-friendly, but Linux is expert-friendly." There's a lot of truth in it.

Perhaps the question for Paulieg is "User-friendly BEFORE or AFTER you have learned how to work with it?"