Ubuntu and friends vs Vista - out of the box experiences reviewed
I normally evaluate how usable a Linux distro is by putting it through some "normal" but quite limited tests. Playing videos is normally one of the more "difficult" aspects of operating system life so I make this a focal point. The video is obtained by connecting to my current Windows-based network which is a nice test in itself.
The review is also written from the test environment and published - meaning an Internet connection is crucial, as is access (and use of) various applications to get the job done. Out of the box experience is where the merits are...
How does Vista cope with my normal Linux tests? (Quick review)
As normal reviews take place within VMware; this one was no different. Vista was given a 20gb hard-drive share and 512mb of RAM (as Dell are still selling machines with Vista and 512mb). Unfortunately I encountered what I thought were severe Vista errors upon attempting to network the install; instead it just needed VMTools installing (something no Linux distro has needed I might add). With that done I was ok to get started.
Connecting to my current network
Vista seems to be able to connect to networks outside of it's current workgroup - something that didn't matter seeing as "force-of-habit" ensured I'd already changed that aspect of the system. Once it had VMTools installed it obtained an Internet connection without issue and accessing Samba shares was as easy as you would expect.
Playing a video
Grabbing a video and playing it was problematic. I ended up downloading VLC player to get the job done. Basically I played with Vista enough to make some direct comparisons between "Microsoft's finest" and some of the leading Linux distros.
Comparing Vista to leading Linux releases
The last time I ventured into Vista was RC2 and that was some time ago, so I thought it was about time I actually installed the flagship release and give it a once over - unfortunately (for it) I'm much better informed on usable distros these days so I can make direct comparisons between the two factions.
Grounds for direct comparisons
I've tested both in identical environments (512mb of RAM in a VMWare session) and both Linux and Vista have been tested without Aero and Beryl/Compiz respectively. What I've been after is raw usability rather than misleading "razzle-dazzle".
Networking
The smart money would be on Vista to win this hands down given the decent job XP did of networking, compared to the stereotypically difficult way Linux makes you do everything. This myth can be comfortably dispelled. Oddly enough I found Ubuntu Feisty Fawn to be easier to network than Vista. A slightly odd notion considering that I was networking to a Windows Samba-share network... Ubuntu was able to show me all the options and was able to connect to the one of my choice without delay. Vista managed this too but I had some issues configuring my network devices (which I have to chalk up to VMWare).
Multimedia
Vista doesn't come with preloaded Codecs (not that I'm aware anyway) and was unable to play DVD-ripped episodes of Family Guy post-install. This meant that I needed to venture onto the Internet to get the job done (VLC player was my saviour). Ubuntu sourced the relevent codecs on the fly and downloaded them on demand, PCLinuxOS and SimplyMepis both managed to play the video directly after the install. Vista isn't advertised as needing an Internet connection to get the job done whereas that is largely common knowledge with Ubuntu. Out of the box performance: Vista 0 - 1 PCLinuxOS/SimplyMepis.
Installed Applications
This became an issue when attempting the normal review process because I rely on using installed applications to edit images, write and format the review. Unfortunately the most Vista gives you from the off is Notepad and Paint. Nice to see things have come on a long way since XP/2000/98. Ubuntu, PCLinuxoS and SimplyMepis all offer a comfortable set of applications to get the job done. OpenOffice is the equivalent of having MSOffice bundled in with the Vista install, GIMP is like having Photoshop thrown in too. Vista isn't exactly a lightweight install yet it comes with fewer installed applications than some of the really lightweight Linux releases... Not good.
Annoyances with both platforms
Both have their annoying aspects, even the most dedicated fans would agree this much when being objective.
Annoyances with Linux (referring to PCLOS, Ubuntu and SimplyMepis specifically)
The main annoyance with Linux would be installing "complicated" applications that fall outside of the comfort-zone that is Synaptic (or similar) which can result in the rare but complicated world of Terminal use. The Terminal is the command-line interface that most people seem to associate with modern Linux - yet I can honestly say I've not had to use the Terminal yet this year... But there's always the possibility that you may need it.
Annoyances with Vista
Vista needed to authorise EVERY single action with me which became very frustrating and potentially ruined the user experience. I'm an advanced user and I don't need to confirm whether I meant to do things unless there are potentially hazardous. Further annoyances are how limited it is out of the box. I'll discuss why in my 'out of the box' conclusions.
Conclusions: Linux vs. Vista for out of the box functionality
I think it's been foolish of Microsoft to deliver XP all over again in terms of out-of-the-box applications. OSX delivers more and Linux certainly does too, making Vista the weakest out of all the available platforms. It relies on you either stumping up for commercial apps and installing those or having the knowledge to find things like Paint.net, OpenOffice, GIMP etc. Not many "average" users have this information to hand so they're automatically forced into further expenditure or several hours of research.
Vista is alright but I think it relies too heavily on the "wow" factor of the Aero interface ("the wow is now" etc) and that's always a weak argument. Aero isn't 'that' impressive either when compared to the things Beryl is doing (especially when the resource usages are compared too).
Ubuntu has an awful lot of good things going for it and is probably a better direct comparison to Vista - considering Dell have now agreed to sell machines with it on.
Today's technology needs to offer as much as possible for as little effort as possible and the popular Linux releases are moving in the same direction as Apple in getting this right; I can't help but feel that Microsoft missed the point too much with Vista. Yes, you can quite happily install Vista without issue and have it running and looking very sexy on modern hardware but that's where it ends. To do anything more you need to draw on knowledge that not all users will have (what free software is available and where to get it). This implies you have an Internet connection which (believe it or not) is still an issue for an awful lot of users around the world. No Internet connection = lots of money to spend for those unfortunate Vista users.
Not so with "out-of-the-box" focused Linux releases like PCLinuxOS, which offer a comprehensive suite of free software bundled with the install. Free, as easy to use and more functional straight out of the box? It's not hard to see why modern Linux distros are being praised by the media (like USAToday).
Someone once said that Microsoft didn't just cut the corners, they rounded them too and that feels like such an apt (forgive the pun) metaphor for the current situation. Aero is nice but it's not a reason to buy an operating system. Vista is good in it's own way, but I wouldn't recommend it to anyone now unless they need their hand holding every step of the way. Those people would be nudged in the direction of Apple.
Enjoy this article? Why not subscribe to the full RSS feed?
