Why you should replace Windows 7 with Linux

[HAL2000]

Hello Olga, et al,

Well isn't this something else. I wanted to edit this post, and instead it froze at the opening line and deleted the rest.

I'll try and recap my post here.

First, this is an excellent thread, chock full of useful information for a long time Windows user thinking to migrate laterally to Linux instead of Windows 10. The takeaway for me is that I ought to look at SOLUS.

I have been evaluating about 10 different lightweight distros of Linux (Lubuntu Netbook Edition, Ubuntu, XPuntu, Zorin, Mint, MX, Bodhi, Linux Lite, LXLE, Q4OS/XPQ4 and now Puppy Linux.

It's been a real eye opening experience. My choice would have been Debian-based XPQ4, but for its very, very bad, no good inability to recognize and install drivers for so many devices, which otherwise are recognized and installed in Ubuntu-based distros like Linux Lite and LXLE.

Otherwise, XPQ4 is fast and Windows-themes easily and beautifully. It handles memory even better than Puppy (which just choked on a browser with several tabs open).

The other thing I wanted to say that any mass migration from Windows to Linux is a pipe dream, given the current state of Linux. I would like to change that, and say this from the perspective of one who used Windows for as long as it has existed, and before that DOS, BASIC and FORTRAN 77 (using card punch entry).

Most Windows users USE their computers the way old ladies and young girls use their cars. They don't care about knowing how the fuel injection or transmission works. They just want the car to work to get from point A to get to point B. And it helps if the car LOOKS nice and is comfortable too.

Linux, in its current state, doesn't take such users into account. It is code for geeks, by geeks. Its an OS for power users who love computers and code for their own sakes.

Linux can change all that if it can release one distro that has the look and feel of Windows, but with the cost savings, reliability and security of Linux.

Example: in the beginning was MS DOS on floppy disks and black screens with green or amber text. Like the Linux CLI, DOS had Command Lines.

Then there was Mac, with its small vertical computer with pictures and a mouse. Click and drag GUI. WINDOWS was MS's shameless copying of Mac's Look and Feel, but not so closely that it qualified for copyright protection. The rest is history.

Linux COULD do to MS what MS did to Mac. Copy enough of the WinXP/ Win7 look and feel so as to present a user friendly, familiar face, and ease the Windows users' transition to Linux.

Until that day comes, the Linux market share of the desktop / laptop market will remain about where it is now. About 2 percent of the market.

[HAL2000]

@ayespy:

Having used Windows since 1995, and other systems before that and since, I have to agree.

That said, I have made it my purpose to learn Linux, and I find it unnecessarily complicated compared to Windows. The upside for Linux, however, is that it can run speedily on even older systems with hardly any RAM required.

So there is a tradeoff with strengths and weaknesses for each system. As far as I am concerned, I am riding the Windows 7 horse (which still works fine for me) until it cannot be used on any public system.

One of the problems for Linux is that some Linux users have a Harry Potter-esque Deatheater sense of exclusivity of Linux, vis-a-vis 'filthy mudblood' Windows users, or simply the system itself.

But it's a counter-productive attitude to have if you want widespread adoption of Linux.

Make it prettier and easier to use (at least as easy to use as Windows). See if you can do with the CLI what Windows 95 did with DOS (that is, put a GUI face on it), and they can begin to see a mass migration of non-Geek users over into Linux. Of course, the very idea of that disturbs some Linux users, even if it should not.

[mib2berlin]

Hi, Linux is easy to use if somebody set it up for you.
I do this for my girlfriend and it work flawless for many years.
She ignore the "Updates are available" for months but I manage it from time to time.
My customers are Windows only and many of them does not even know what the Explorer is, not to mention CMD or user management. They ignore updates mostly, too.
Windows is easy to use as most Linux distros today but if one problem rise up most user stuck.
Check Windows problem manager, haha.
If this does not change I have a job.

Cheers, mib

[HAL2000]

@JohnConnorBear

Well, I can see that you are easily triggered, so I'd have that looked into if I were you.

You seem to think that I don't 'get' certain things. I am talking about the desktop / laptop market share. Then you talk about cellphones?

Certainly you can go off on a tangent and talk about Linux being used in Servers, kiosks and other devices, but the issue is Windows 7 users, isn't it?

You should not be defensive. Nothing I have said here is objectively offensive, but observations from years of assisting others with the set up and operation of their machines, in this includes government and military, but primarily the user market.

Certainly MS has had advantages in having its OS pre-loaded on new machines. It was expressly in business to sell software. Some have observed that it had vendor agreements that were tantamount to abuse of market position.

But by the same token, I recall, years ago, laptops offered for sale with Linux pre-loaded. Years ago, I recall boxed sets of Xandros Linux in CompUSA, and Barnes and Nobles books, with install disks, of Teach Yourself Redhat, Mandrake and so many more. Upon graduation from college, one of my first jobs, supporting job search was selling computers to consumers, One repeat customer would come in and buy top of the line machines, delete the OS and then install Linux.

IF Linux had been user-friendly and visually appealing, it would have caught on in much greater numbers than nearly 30 years at perhaps 2 percent.

No need to be defensive. And no need to be offensive.

These are simple observations, and urging someone who actually codes Linux to make a distro that would have mass appeal.

[HAL2000]

@mib2berlin "Linux is easy to use if somebody set it up for you."

Eingestimmt.

This is exactly what I am trying to do with a range of machines I intend to donate to a school. One challenge is that it's mostly older, 32-bit hardware, even if it's in good physical and electronic condition.

There are easily a dozen distros specifically coded to revitalize older hardware and can run on 1 GB of RAM or less (of course, more RAM is always better). LXLE, Linux Lite and XPQ4 are the distros which I found to run the fastest while still having a Windows-like desktop.

One of my very favorites was a German-based Q4OS, which was quite fast, even on very little RAM, and Windows-themed easily and beautifully, BUT could barely recognize a range of devices. Linux Lite quit supporting 32 bit systems, while LXLE was quite fast, easily recognized nearly every device I threw at it, but did not Windows-theme well at all.

I am currently trying Puppy, but am not impressed with it compared to the aforementioned distros. Indeed, researching Puppy brought me here and has given me the idea to try SOLUS.

mfG,

HAL_2000

[HAL2000]

@JohnConnorBear

Yes, you are a foreigner, and I've been a world traveler as a young adult and have also worked in corporate America and with governmental regulations / mergers / antitrust law (what the EU calls anti-monopoly law). And yes, concepts have meanings even before they are translated into any particular language. And you are evidently triggered and cannot make a point without being offensive.

Maybe you should try harder at supporting you point with historical references rather than projecting that someone else just doesn't get it.

So calm down. Don't take my observations personally. It's not a competition.

I will say this: the typical Windows user -- you know, the ones that make up 88 percent of the desktop laptop market in the USA -- are used to an intuitive, user-friendly and attractive user interface. They expect a familiar face.

On the machines I am setting up, I try to use the icons, themes, task bar and start button from Windows XP or Windows 7. I'm not sure how Vista or Win8 was received in Italy, but in the USA, users rebelled at the clogged slowness of Vista and the complete reconfiguration, deleting the familiar START button, in Win8.

Now, many users do not like what MS is doing with Win10. So, this is the big Linux chance to attract refugees from Redmond tyranny.

In order to do that. at least one distro needs to look LIKE Windows and have all the familiar menus and so forth.

Not yours of course. You can still use the Terminal to your hearts' content.

We are talking about potential adopters of Linux after leaving Windows 7.

At least that's what the OP was talking about, and I am too.

[HAL2000]

@JohnConnorBear

That's very odd that you should say such things. I've been testing out LXLE, Linux Lite and XPQ4 and they run fine on 1 GB of RAM, and can stream music and videos.

Remarkable, isn't it? These are first hand observations. So what am I to believe? You? Or my lying eyes?

I won't follow you into the weeds about the inane side points.

It's so late here, that it's early so I'm off to sleep. So just continue on without me.

[mib2berlin]

@JohnConnorBear
Hi, it is a bit nitpicking, nobody meant "I use Linux" bothering with the kernel, only.
The software you use is always the same, it does not matter which distribution you use.
Everybody knows this, Gimp is Gimp.
You are right about mass of distros, it is really a mess and I hate it.
Staying on the same distro for 20 years now and many others come and go, I test them mostly but forget about a few days after.
If somebody ask me for a "Linux" I send them to Kubuntu, even I don´t like it.
Hehe, most Windows user cant follow now anyway, therfore I stop posting.

Cheers, mib
Free software is not like free beer!

[A Former User]

@mib2berlin said:

Hi, it is a bit nitpicking, nobody meant "I use Linux" bothering with the kernel, only.

This reminds me of the recently so frequent ‘I use Arch, btw’ (nope, I still use Manjaro)

You are right about mass of distros, it is really a mess and I hate it.

Ain’t this one of the best things Linux can offer?

Staying on the same distro for 20 years now and many others come and go, I test them mostly but forget about a few days after.
If somebody ask me for a "Linux" I send them to Kubuntu, even I don´t like it.

Send them either to hell or to a distro choosing helper site

[TalGarik]

since linux is not a windows replacement, no one should replace windows with linux.
it's like suggesting to play tennis with safety shoes (you can do it of course, they call it masochism)

[Catweazle]

I have had both Windows and Linux over the years, I also had a Nokia with WindowsPhone (sad that MS has abandoned an excellent SO). But at the end of the day, in a current life that focuses 99% on the internet and on certain software, it is basically irrelevant which OS is used, important that it works for the purposes of the user. An office suite, a web page, a video or any application is handled the same in one as in the other.

[LonM]

@Catweazle said in Why you should replace Windows 7 with Linux:

An office suite

Not all are created equal. I was helping someone who has to use LibreOffice instead of MS Office (we both are used to using MS) - oh my, LibreOffice's interface is dated.

I spend several minutes trying to spot where the "change font colour" option was in the toolbar before giving up. Thankfully they have an easier to use ribbon interface which I eventually enabled.

[Gaëlle]

@HAL2000 sorry for the trouble. I found your original post in the history and put it back. I hope that's ok? Let me know if you need any further help.

[TalGarik]

@Catweazle before using - your list - ¨an office suite, a web page, a video or any application¨ you need an OS which boots every day without issues, which installs and updates the OS and the applications without hiccups requiring even a minimum of technical expertise. M&A's OS's do that, linux distros don't. I have spent years trying to convince friends and family to use linux, in time everyone of them has switched back to windows because windows ¨just works¨
the way I see it there are two reasons to use linux, a technical one (you have work to do which requires linux) and a political one (a quixotic stand against corporations) - if you don't fit into one of these categories linux will hurt your feet with no purpose (just like playing tennis wearing safety shoes).

[Catweazle]

@TalGarik said in Why you should replace Windows 7 with Linux:

@Catweazle before using - your list - ¨an office suite, a web page, a video or any application¨ you need an OS which boots every day without issues, which installs and updates the OS and the applications without hiccups requiring even a minimum of technical expertise. M&A's OS's do that, linux distros don't. I have spent years trying to convince friends and family to use linux, in time everyone of them has switched back to windows because windows ¨just works¨
the way I see it there are two reasons to use linux, a technical one (you have work to do which requires linux) and a political one (a quixotic stand against corporations) - if you don't fit into one of these categories linux will hurt your feet with no purpose (just like playing tennis wearing safety shoes).

The only difference is that MS by default includes all the necessary drivers, whether FOSS or not, while in Linux it is necessary to add proprietary drivers later.
As he said, I have used both Windows, as well as Linux (Kubuntu), and I have never had problems of any kind, despite massive daily use.
If it is true that at the OS level, Windows is somewhat more intuitive to use than Linux, but outside of this I have never had difficulties with Linux, nor the first day using it as newbee.

[Priest72]

That is exactly what i did years ago and i should of done it sooner.I went mint-buntu-slackware and then i have finally stuck with xenial puppy linux 32bit and it has been totally flawless.

[A Former User]

@TalGarik said:

you need an OS which boots every day without issues, which installs and updates the OS and the applications without hiccups requiring even a minimum of technical expertise. M&A's OS's do that, linux distros don't.

Then please let me know if you have any idea why my Manjaro install boots every day w/o problems & I can upgrade it via GUI just by clicking some (few) buttons & entering my password…

the way I see it there are two reasons to use linux, a technical one (you have work to do which requires linux) and a political one (a quixotic stand against corporations) - if you don't fit into one of these categories linux will hurt your feet with no purpose (just like playing tennis wearing safety shoes).

Using Linux causes mostly ‘incompatibility’ w/ the Microsoftised people around me (i.e. what I do doesn’t require me to use it) & if the only pain of using Windows was hating corporations, I’d probably be OK. That said, Linux is much more convenient for me.

---

Btw., nice signature. Do you use it voluntarily?

[Catweazle]

@LonM said in Why you should replace Windows 7 with Linux:

@Catweazle said in Why you should replace Windows 7 with Linux:

An office suite

Not all are created equal. I was helping someone who has to use LibreOffice instead of MS Office (we both are used to using MS) - oh my, LibreOffice's interface is dated.

I spend several minutes trying to spot where the "change font colour" option was in the toolbar before giving up. Thankfully they have an easier to use ribbon interface which I eventually enabled.

[pafflick]

@JohnConnorBear said in Why you should replace Windows 7 with Linux:

There is ONE reason for Windows: it gets pre-installed on every PC.

Well, actually, there's plenty of hardware that comes with no software whatsoever. The reason for this is that a lot of people go for the cheapest option available, therefore such hardware attracts a lot of customers. They'll end up getting Windows anyway (although, in many cases, they go for the "free" version from Pirate Bay or whatnot), but that's mainly because they're already familiar with it and got used to it over the years, due to its popularity (and multiple different reasons, many of which some of you have already mentioned here).

There's also the other group of customers who don't go for the pre-installed software, that is the people who build their own PC's. And there's hardly any software coming with certain components such as the CPUs, hard drives, memory, PSUs etc. You can get some free games with the graphic card at best. But I haven't seen any "Radeon RX 5700 + Windows 10 Pro" bundle so far...

Therefore, it's hard to credit the fact that Windows comes pre-installed on almost every "ready-to-use" computer for its popularity. It didn't use to be like that back in the days of Windows 95 & earlier. Nowadays it comes pre-installed because it's popular, not the other way around (although, it's true that those two factors kind of "fuel" each other over time).

@JohnConnorBear said in Why you should replace Windows 7 with Linux:

nowadays even the silliest Web page loads tens of JS libraries and huge slideshows, videos autoplaying everywhere and so on

That's just lazy/bad web-development, which, unfortunately, seems to be the scourge of our time. There are still people out there who have very limited access to the Internet, but since they're the minority of the Internet users, very few developers make the actual effort to make their websites and services well-optimized, to use as little bandwidth as necessary. Same is true for the software - it's built to just work "well enough" on an average machine, but it's rarely optimized to use as little resources as necessary since most of the machines can handle it well anyway...

[TalGarik]

@potmeklecbohdan I hope you realize that we are not here to comment our personal experiences using linux, we are commenting the feasibility of recommending linux as a replacement to a windows user: I am sure you get the difference
for a lifelong windows user just having to use constantly a password is a PITA, not to mention the implications and further disconcerting PITA should that former windows user decide one day to change that password: where are my browser settings? what is a keyring?
this is not fiction, this is simply the experience I have made during so many years trying to convince family/friends/colleagues to use linux: it does not work.
btw ¨linux is not a windows replacement¨ is what you can find on the home page of a lot of linux distros (probably tired of seeing their forums flooded by newbies who thought that linux was a windows replacement)