Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
and surfing.

On 07/22/2008 05:57 PM iceprince scribbled:

> Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
> familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
> speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
> and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
> keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
> post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
> and surfing.

price, lack of bloat, ability to do what /you/ want to do, not what
windoze tells you to do, security, much lower resources needs, speed,
security, stability, adaptability, expandability, security, immediate
response to changing conditions via upgrades, and did I mentin security?

but then, if you needed to ask, you probably need windoze...

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:57:11 +0200, iceprince wrote:

> Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
> familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
> speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU and
> RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and keyboard,
> HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and post email,
> some light office work and paying bills over the internet, and surfing.

Kubuntu will do all that for free and use/need less system resources. I do
exactly what you describe you would like to do on a $400.00 PC without
crashes, lockups or a need for anti-virus, anti-malware protection and
with decent speed.

iceprince wrote:
> Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
> familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
> speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
> and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
> keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
> post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
> and surfing.

Linux will give a stable platform to do the functions that you want to
do. Hardware detection is good and almost all of the drivers are on
board the installation disk. From your list I do not think you should
have any driver problems.Linux will run with much less utilization of
resources to do the same jobs that Windows does. HP printers almost
always have very good Linux support so your printer should be recognize
and configured with out a problem. Linux being a true network operation
system is more secure by design so you do not have to waste resources
running virus scanners and malware scanners. Almost all Window programs
have Linux replacements that are as good if not better . If you still
need to run a program that doesn't have a good Linux replacement you can
dual boot, leaving windows on your hard drive. The Linux way of finding
and installing programs leaves Windows in the dust. Linux uses a package
manager that consults a data base when you install or uninstall a
program. All dependences are automatically installed when you install a
program and removed only at uninstalling a program if no other program
depends on them. Packages (programs and librarys ) are stored in online
repositorys which are access for program installation. You can use local
disk or local repositorys too. This is why when you install or
uninstall a Linux program undesirable stuff like other programs stop
working rarely happen . But happens often with Windows. I use windows at
work and Linux at home and my Linux computers hardly every have problems
and when they do the online , local documentation is excellent and with
community support it is easy to trouble shoot and repair issues
yourself. That is not true with Windows . Give it a try . If it isn't
for you, you can remove the installation and it has cost you no money .

iceprince <isprins@home.no> wrote in
news:86qdnX0JPf96HBvV4p2dnAA@telenor.com:

> Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
> familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
> speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
> and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
> keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
> post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
> and surfing.

I'd recommend trying both Kubuntu (KDE) and Ubuntu (GNome) before deciding
to go with either, or Vista, if you will.

On my machine, v7.10, KDE runs noticibly slower than GNome.

The caveat being it is an Ubuntu (GNome) install w/KDE Desktop installed
also, not native KDE (Kubuntu).

DanS wrote:
> iceprince <isprins@home.no> wrote in
> news:86qdnX0JPf96HBvV4p2dnAA@telenor.com:
>
>
>> Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
>> familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
>> speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
>> and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
>> keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
>> post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
>> and surfing.
>>
>
> I'd recommend trying both Kubuntu (KDE) and Ubuntu (GNome) before deciding
> to go with either, or Vista, if you will.
>
> On my machine, v7.10, KDE runs noticibly slower than GNome.
>
> The caveat being it is an Ubuntu (GNome) install w/KDE Desktop installed
> also, not native KDE (Kubuntu).
>

That should not really make much difference.

On Wed, 23 Jul 2008 02:57:11 +0200, iceprince wrote:

> Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
> familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
> speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
> and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
> keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
> post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
> and surfing.

No compelling reason that I can see. If you have vista and you're happy
with it, then use it. If not, then try something else. I revolted when MS
started their insane activation policy with xp - I simply cannot abide
that. Now using Linux 100% on five home machines plus nine I admin at the
local library - and I've never regretted the change for a moment.

In article <86qdnX0JPf96HBvV4p2dnAA@telenor.com>, iceprince <isprins@home.no> wrote:
>Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
>familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
>speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
>and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
>keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
>post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
>and surfing.

Depends. For me, it's all about doing what I want with my computer how I
want. Once MS started to try to lock down what you could and couldn't do
(DRM is the classic here) I wanted nothing more to do with them. I haven't
regreted the choice. No worms/viruses/trojans is just a bonus. :)

Try it, you might like it. Not that much different in look/feel now.

"Stephen Cullum" <scullum@cfl.rr.com> wrote in message
news:48868adc$0$18114$9a6e19ea@unlimited.newshosti ng.com...
> iceprince wrote:
>> Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
>> familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
>> speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
>> and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
>> keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
>> post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
>> and surfing.
>
> Linux will give a stable platform to do the functions that you want to do.
> Hardware detection is good and almost all of the drivers are on board the
> installation disk. From your list I do not think you should have any
> driver problems.Linux will run with much less utilization of resources to
> do the same jobs that Windows does. HP printers almost always have very
> good Linux support so your printer should be recognize and configured with
> out a problem. Linux being a true network operation system is more secure
> by design so you do not have to waste resources running virus scanners and
> malware scanners. Almost all Window programs have Linux replacements that
> are as good if not better .

Conversely all the good "linux" (open source software is not linux specific)
programs run on windows too.

> If you still need to run a program that doesn't have a good Linux
> replacement you can dual boot, leaving windows on your hard drive.

If you have windows and need a windows program linux is just another problem
for most users.
This is why it doesn't appeal to the majority.
You have to have something to get on the net and find out about linux, once
you have that something there is little reason to change.

"Bruce Sinclair" <bruce.sinclair@NOSPAMORELSEagresearch.NOTco.NOTnz > wrote
in message news:g66g03$n6i$2@aioe.org...
> In article <86qdnX0JPf96HBvV4p2dnAA@telenor.com>, iceprince
> <isprins@home.no> wrote:
>>Hello, i wounder if anyone has opinions on why someone that is not
>>familiar with linux ( kubuntu hardy ) should choose it over vista. I am
>>speaking about resources and system load, the minimum specs on the CPU
>>and RAM, security and hardware detection ( usb,bluetooth mouse and
>>keyboard, HP PSC 2355 printer ) The computer will be used to read and
>>post email, some light office work and paying bills over the internet,
>>and surfing.
>
> Depends. For me, it's all about doing what I want with my computer how I
> want. Once MS started to try to lock down what you could and couldn't do
> (DRM is the classic here) I wanted nothing more to do with them.

That's OK as long as you understand what isn't going to work without DRM.
That includes things like the BBC iPlayer, Sky TVs player, iTunes and
anything else that requires DRM.
Just telling a newbie that not having DRM is good is a half truth at best.

> I haven't
> regreted the choice. No worms/viruses/trojans is just a bonus. :)

I have yet to get a worm/virus/trojan on windows.
They do exist for linux despite what some users claim and all users should
exercise care whichever OS they use.

>
> Try it, you might like it. Not that much different in look/feel now.

The look and feel are one reason to change, if they are the same why bother?
>