Ubuntu does what Microsoft couldn't?

Ubuntu for tablets revealed with split screen multi-tasking, preview for Nexus slates coming this week

This is very different to what Windows offers, for example, with its separate WP8, RT and Windows 8 versions. In fact, Mark Shuttleworth claims to have "cracked this one in a way that has eluded Microsoft," not least because Ubuntu's approach means that smartphone- and tablet-sized apps can run side-by-side on the same device in split screen mode. For example, you could have the Skype phone app running at the same time as a tablet document editor. This feature will be called "side stage," and judging from the video -- which is all we have to go on at this point -- it looks like a nifty approach to multi-tasking, and perhaps slightly more flexible that Samsung's multi-window solution in TouchWiz.

Ubuntu for tablets revealed with split screen multi-tasking, preview for Nexus slates coming this week

I think there will be interesting times ahead.

 

[Ray8]

Be that as it may, they get loaded without your permission, operate without your permission and at no time are you given any explanation as to their function. It's only when finding them by accident and then searching for what they are, do you learn anything. I've completely removed them from my system, I don't need Google crap residing on my PCs unless I authorise such.

All my software gets updated when I say so, not when some software company thinks it should be done. It's not paranoia, but sensible housekeeping and being on top of what's going on in your system. But I must say, I don't trust Google one nanosecond.

 

[pparks1]

Be that as it may, they get loaded without your permission, operate without your permission and at no time are you given any explanation as to their function. It's only when finding them by accident and then searching for what they are, do you learn anything. I've completely removed them from my system, I don't need Google crap residing on my PCs unless I authorise such.

Holy hell dude. Seriously, have you installed any other software onto your computer? Everything comes with a bunch of stuff that is installed, and never are you told what they do. Do you honestly mean to tell me that if I pulled up the list of *.exe's from the C:\windows directory alone you could explain what each and every application does and exactly when it runs and without a doubt never runs without your express consent?

I don't need Google crap residing on my PCs unless I authorise such.

And they wouldn't be there either unless you decided to load a Google application. From my investigation on a Microsoft Windows PC, a Linux machine and Apple OSX...there isn't a single Google application installed on any of them by default.

All my software gets updated when I say so, not when some software company thinks it should be done. It's not paranoia, but sensible housekeeping and being on top of what's going on in your system.

Well, keep in mind the sheer number of people who are unaware of when updates come out or what the ramifications are of not running them. Perhaps a piece of software had a critical bug that neither you nor I knew about. Would you really rather just sit there unpatched and be shocked if something were to go wrong, or would you rather be proactively patched against a problem before it happens? From your responses above, I would assume you just want to sit there with your pants down...but I would expect that you will feel that you are 100% on top of everything on your PC and would never be caught in a compromised situation. I've been around computers long enough to know that I would rather be automatically protected, because I don't have the time, energy or know how to ensure I'm 100% safe. Or at least as safe as I can be from known problems and exploits.

Do you use Antivirus or antimalware software? Do you NOT allow it to provide new definition files automatically on a regular basis? Do you use Windows update? Have you disabled the automatic check for updates and installation of them? Are you the type who spends countless hours reading about each and every update to ensure it's applicable to you? And do you file away the information later so in the event that you install a new piece of software later, you can re-evaluate your security risks of previous skipped updates.

But I must say, I don't trust Google one nanosecond.

And that is your right. But I can honestly say that you haven't been able to present one tangible piece of evidence that would persuade me to question them. I'm not more or less concerned about them than ever before.

 

[lehnerus2000]

As long as Google isn't "accidentally" collecting your financial details (and other passwords and logins).
They got caught "accidentally" creating a database of unsecured WAPs.

If people run an unsecured WAP, that is their issue.

Agreed.
However, Google shouldn't be creating a database of that info, so that it can be accessed by criminals, who can then use it to perpetrate crimes (e.g. ID theft, illegal file transfers, etc.).

Once a database is created it will be misused, either by the creators or by people accessing it illegally.

Given the track record of giant companies (Google, MS, Sony, etc.) regarding data security; the less they know, the better.

While I do agree and especially with things such as credit cards, debit cards, social security numbers, etc......like you said, it's lots of big companies that have lots of information about you. I don't honestly believe that Google has put me in any more jeopardy than anything else.

I recently had a debit card compromised. I caught it right when it happened, it was 2 transactions for $47 to Walmart.com (a site I have never ever purchased from). I shut down my card, I filed a police report, I disputed the charges with my bank and I got my money back. I got a new debit card, I changed my online sites to use it, and I have continued to use my card. Sure, I could have gone to nothing but cash and become truly paranoid, but I just dealt with the situation, and have moved on. There were safeguards and measures in place and the end result wasn't too terrible for me, just slightly inconvenient. But the convenience of using that debit card for the past 10 years certainly outweighed this one experience.

I didn't mean to imply that Google were worse than other "troublemakers" (MS, Sony, Governments, etc.).

I didn't trust the Internet (regarding financial transactions) before I did my Networking course.
I definitely don't trust it now that I've finished my course.

It costs criminals and troublemakers, nothing to spend their time and effort attempting to access systems.
Corporations and Governments always cut corners, just to save "a few nickels and dimes".

Good security costs a lot of money:

• Initial implementation
• Constant intrusion monitoring and testing
• Upgrading (to remain "competitive")

I can think of several "improvements" to malware that I haven't read about.
Maybe they've already been implemented and they are effective.
If I can think of them, I'm sure other people can too.

 

[Ray8]

Holy hell dude. Seriously, have you installed any other software onto your computer? Everything comes with a bunch of stuff that is installed, and never are you told what they do. Do you honestly mean to tell me that if I pulled up the list of *.exe's from the C:\windows directory alone you could explain what each and every application does and exactly when it runs and without a doubt never runs without your express consent?

I have shed loads of software loaded on all of my PCs, but Google has been the only one to install software that directly accesses the internet without letting me know that it's done that and that it will access the internet without telling me. Yes, I have authorised a number of programs to automatically access the internet for updates etc, but that has been my choice.

Even Microsoft allows you to control automatic updates and so does every other program I have, except Google. Google software does not allow you to control automatic updates, and whatever else it may do, and so there are pages of advice on the internet to tell people how to disable and get rid of this software. That, in itself, says something.

Maybe it is paranoia, but when it comes to Google, I think that may be a healthy paranoia.

 

[pparks1]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Just because software is automatically updating, doesn't mean it's bad or spying on you. Firefox auto updates now as far as I know.

 

[Ray8]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Just because software is automatically updating, doesn't mean it's bad or spying on you. Firefox auto updates now as far as I know.

No, Firefox asks you. Do as you will, I will never trust Google.

 

[Tepid]

Just for the record, I am trying out Linux Mint 14 Cinnamon. The wubi installer actually works, have had to reinstall cause I made the first one too small.

I still have the same issue with my usb wireless mouse, have to unplug it and plug back in. bummer, seems it's a Linux wide thing possibly.
We will see how this goes. and if it could be a good contendar for touch.

 

[jimbo45]

Hi there
Can't understand the point of this thread -- OS'es all have their strengths and weaknesses and some are very specialized indeed -- for instance would you use Windows (any version) for running a large international Airline reservation system or an online stock trading system where literally millions of transactions are executed in a very short time and the data has to be always up to date in real time.

If Ubuntu does stuff that Windows doesn't do --ask yourself the following

1) Does Windows NEED to do it.
2) Do You Need to do it
3) if you need to do it can you write an application in Windows to do it
4) why don't you just use Ubuntu for the job you need to do.

I personally haven't found anything I NEED to do that Windows can't do. I'm not saying that for some purposes that Ubuntu (or another Linux or even another OS) isn't better at the job -- for example even these days windows networking is light years behind nearly every Linux I've ever seen--but as a general purpose OS that fits the expectations of over 80% of the worlds basic computer users I don't think Ms has done a bad job --and we'd all be a lot worse off without Windows.

That's no excuse however for Ms to sit back --Windows does need to be continually improved and developed -- and the whole hassle with mobile and touch devices with the W8 GUI shows that Ms is attempting to transition between the rigid desktop model and computing in 21st century. It won't get it right first time through but I think W8 is going in the right direction -- for others you can stick to W7 or XP if you like or even switch to Ubuntu.

W8 is a first iteration -- I'm sure some of the early issues will get addressed. Where Ms went totally bonkers is in W2012 server which if you install the desktop experience (Optional on W2102 server) you get the Metro screens just like W8 -- now on a server which most people use in command line mode anyway Metro has got to be totally and utterly BONKERS.

Cheers
jimbo

 

[lehnerus2000]

Firefox

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Just because software is automatically updating, doesn't mean it's bad or spying on you. Firefox auto updates now as far as I know.

No, Firefox asks you. Do as you will, I will never trust Google.

You're both correct.

You can set it in the Options ("Options" > "Advanced" > "Updates" tab).

 

[pparks1]

I guess we will have to agree to disagree. Just because software is automatically updating, doesn't mean it's bad or spying on you. Firefox auto updates now as far as I know.

No, Firefox asks you. Do as you will, I will never trust Google.

You're both correct.

You can set it in the Options ("Options" > "Advanced" > "Updates" tab).

Thank you for the clarification. I read somewhere that FF was moving to automatic updates too. As you can guess, I see more benefit than downfall with this plan.

 

[R0bR]

Google's primary money maker is Ads and the better they can target consumers the more money they make. Google's personal information privacy policies are the worst in the industry and there is plenty of info on the internet to support that. They need that information to drive there Ad business and they go to great lengths to try and get it.

Google's Reading Your Email: Learn How, Why, & How to Stop It | myID.com

Google has an arrogance about it as well going on record saying if users don't like their privacy policies they don't have to use their services. I could care less if Google wants to target ads based on my search criteria, but it's a whole different matter when I see ads pop up in Gmail having to do with info within the body of my emails. I don't like their practices and stopped using all their services last year.

 

[Coke Robot]

Hi there
Can't understand the point of this thread -- OS'es all have their strengths and weaknesses and some are very specialized indeed -- for instance would you use Windows (any version) for running a large international Airline reservation system or an online stock trading system where literally millions of transactions are executed in a very short time and the data has to be always up to date in real time.

If Ubuntu does stuff that Windows doesn't do --ask yourself the following

1) Does Windows NEED to do it.
2) Do You Need to do it
3) if you need to do it can you write an application in Windows to do it
4) why don't you just use Ubuntu for the job you need to do.

I personally haven't found anything I NEED to do that Windows can't do. I'm not saying that for some purposes that Ubuntu (or another Linux or even another OS) isn't better at the job -- for example even these days windows networking is light years behind nearly every Linux I've ever seen--but as a general purpose OS that fits the expectations of over 80% of the worlds basic computer users I don't think Ms has done a bad job --and we'd all be a lot worse off without Windows.

That's no excuse however for Ms to sit back --Windows does need to be continually improved and developed -- and the whole hassle with mobile and touch devices with the W8 GUI shows that Ms is attempting to transition between the rigid desktop model and computing in 21st century. It won't get it right first time through but I think W8 is going in the right direction -- for others you can stick to W7 or XP if you like or even switch to Ubuntu.

W8 is a first iteration -- I'm sure some of the early issues will get addressed. Where Ms went totally bonkers is in W2012 server which if you install the desktop experience (Optional on W2102 server) you get the Metro screens just like W8 -- now on a server which most people use in command line mode anyway Metro has got to be totally and utterly BONKERS.

Cheers
jimbo

Windows Server 2012 was changed in the same way as Windows 8 as to keep UIs consistent. The Start Screen though on Server 2012 is more Desktop centric than the client OS, as you can't install apps and don't have WinRT coding like Share and Devices.

 

[BillWindows]

I tried Ubuntu and Mint on a 5 year old Notebook yesterday and can't believe how much they slow it down. XP runs like a charm on it very fluid and quick and yet both Linux versions slow it down to a crawl.

I thought this is strange so I tried an older Ubuntu 11.04 on it and it ran decidedly better, looks like Linux is starting to get bloated.

I'm going to try and run Windows 8 on it just for fun, but I've got a feeling it will run better than Linux.

 

[pparks1]

I tried Ubuntu and Mint on a 5 year old Notebook yesterday and can't believe how much they slow it down. XP runs like a charm on it very fluid and quick and yet both Linux versions slow it down to a crawl.

I thought this is strange so I tried an older Ubuntu 11.04 on it and it ran decidedly better, looks like Linux is starting to get bloated.

I'm going to try and run Windows 8 on it just for fun, but I've got a feeling it will run better than Linux.

XP is old missing lots of new features new distros are aware of. Slowness might have been unity interface or mate/cinnamon depending upon which you picked.

And don't forget 8 gives appearance of fast start, while many services and sick are truly not ready.

I'm not saying Linux is certainly better, but it could probably run a lot better than you are seeing.

 

[Ray8]

I put Vista back on my old Fujitsu P1610 and compared to Mint, it's like a old tractor vs a Ferrari. I've not had one PC yet where any version of Windows is faster than Linux.

 

[BillWindows]

I put Vista back on my old Fujitsu P1610 and compared to Mint, it's like a old tractor vs a Ferrari. I've not had one PC yet where any version of Windows is faster than Linux.

Well that shows how much you know Ray, I put that same Ubuntu 11.04 on an old Netbook about 18 months ago and even then XP ran a bit better on that Netbook.

About a month ago I did a repair job on old AMD desktop around 1.6 GHZ(about 5 years old) installed Vista, and after about two days of updates, I couldn't believe how well it ran. I'm pretty sure even that would have run better than either Ubuntu or Mint.
Actually I had to let go of my licence for Vista, I now wish I hadn't.

 

[BillWindows]

I tried Ubuntu and Mint on a 5 year old Notebook yesterday and can't believe how much they slow it down. XP runs like a charm on it very fluid and quick and yet both Linux versions slow it down to a crawl.

I thought this is strange so I tried an older Ubuntu 11.04 on it and it ran decidedly better, looks like Linux is starting to get bloated.

I'm going to try and run Windows 8 on it just for fun, but I've got a feeling it will run better than Linux.

XP is old missing lots of new features new distros are aware of. Slowness might have been unity interface or mate/cinnamon depending upon which you picked.

And don't forget 8 gives appearance of fast start, while many services and sick are truly not ready.

I'm not saying Linux is certainly better, but it could probably run a lot better than you are seeing.

It was mate, but I doubt either would have made a difference as Mint was just as slow.

Windows 8 doesn't just boot faster, it's faster at everything and doesn't seem to slow down when adding a lot of programmes like the older Windows versions did.

Actually Linux and Mint are pretty disappointing, I thought they'd do a lot better. Neither picked up wireless either and I couldn't be bothered trying to set it up.

 

[Ray8]

Yeah, I guess you know exactly how my systems work.

 

[pparks1]

It was mate, but I doubt either would have made a difference as Mint was just as slow.

Mint is the distro that uses Mate. It's unfortunate that it was slow for you, in my experience it's pretty darn quick.

Windows 8 doesn't just boot faster, it's faster at everything and doesn't seem to slow down when adding a lot of programmes like the older Windows versions did.

I never really noticed Windows 7 slowing down much with a bunch of stuff installed. I guess we will have to give Windows 8 12-18 months of crud build up to know for sure whether it performs the same.

Actually Linux and Mint are pretty disappointing, I thought they'd do a lot better. Neither picked up wireless either and I couldn't be bothered trying to set it up.

Well, they certainly aren't Windows. I've had pretty good luck with them picking up wireless, but I tend to insist upon machines with Intel or the Dell 15xx series wireless adapters as they have good Linux support. Honestly though, the majority of Linux machines I run are hardwired desktops.

I'm sure a lot comes down to experience. I've been professionally supporting Linux servers since 1998 or so. I've got a lot of experience under my belt.

 

[BillWindows]

Yeah, I guess you know exactly how my systems work.

Id say pretty much like a motherboard with a PSU attached, video card, or maybe on board video, some ram and a HDD all packed into a case.

Whoops forgot the CPU, dual core or quad core, air cooled or water cooled(depends if you know a plumber) or maybe just a very good heat sink.