UNIMPRESSED WITH UBUNTU 11.1
1/13/12
I've decided that the way to go for running both Ubuntu and Windows 7 on my
home PC is to use <a href="/linkto.shtml?virtualbox.org">Virtual Box</a>.  If you
google "Virtual Box" and then the name of whatever OS you want to install, you'll
quickly find instructions for how to install that OS using Virtual Box.  It works great.
I installed
Ubuntu not long ago and can now build linux distros right on my home PC rather than
having to putty to a remote linux server, and I don't have to re-boot.  I just
run Ubuntu in a Window, and the performance is very respectable.  It also allows me to experiment
with Ubuntu's latest desktop platform (11.1), which I couldn't do via putty.
<br><br>
I don't have a whole lot of positives
to say about Ubuntu's GUI environment (aka Gnome Nautilus).
<b>The guys who do Ubuntu need to spend some time
in the Windows 7 GUI and copy it,</b> particularly with regards to the start menu and right-click
context menus that come up for files, apps, and shortcuts.  I'm not saying this because
I'm used to Windows.  I'm saying this because after years of refinement,
Microsoft has done a great job of figuring
out how to make the GUI look simple and clean but at the same time put a lot of
capabilities for advanced users into the context menus where they are easy to find.
Ubuntu, on the other hand, has gone to a level of
simplicity that I find extremely frustrating as an advanced user.  I can't find any
of the usual "under the hood" features that I can often quickly find in Windows.
It took me several minutes just to find
the terminal shell, for example.
<br><br>
For a guy who is used to Windows and who likes to develop command-line
executables, I have to say that <b>Windows has this dialed in.</b>  Not only can I incorporate
an icon into the .exe file in Windows, but users can download the exes directly to their
desktops and run them
right away with no install necessary.  This is not at all the case with Ubuntu
or Mac OSX.  Just look at how many more steps are involved for
<a href="/k2pdfopt/help/mac.shtml">OSX</a> and 
<a href="/k2pdfopt/help/ubuntu.shtml">Ubuntu</a> just to make a command-line
application work from the desktop!  Ubuntu is especially bad.
Why isn't there a "run command" menu item in an obvious place?
(Who on earth is going to guess to type Alt-F2 to get the run-a-command box?)
And why can't I choose any program I want (via a file browser) for "Open With..." like in
Windows?  And why can't Gnome Nautilus figure out when I'm double-clicking on a command-line
executable and automatically open up gnome-terminal for it?  Windows has effectively been doing
this for <i>over a decade</i>, and in my opinion, they got it right, because I never
even had to think about it until I had to deal with Ubuntu and OSX.
<br><br>
On the other hand, I do like some Ubuntu features, for example the software updating
and the feature where Ubuntu tells you the command for installing an application when
you try to run it and don't have it.  That is very handy and worked well.
The appearance is clean and
professional overall, as well.  That's what's frustrating--Ubuntu has a lot of apps and
many features that are very professional, but it's the little things--the dotting of
the i's and the crossing of the t's, e.g. elegantly accomodating both novice and advanced users,
that are holding them back from that broader
appeal that will be required to win over the Windows majority.