All Things Digital

Skip to main content.

Personal Technology

Personal Technology from The Wall Street Journal

Linux’s Free System Is Now Easier to Use, But Not for Everyone

This column is written for mainstream, nontechie users of digital technology. These folks aren’t necessarily novices, and they aren’t afraid of computers. They also aren’t stupid. They simply want their digital products to operate as promised, with as little maintenance and hassle as possible.

So, I have steered away from recommending Linux, the free computer operating system that is the darling of many techies and IT managers, and a challenger to Microsoft’s dominant Windows and Apple’s resurgent Macintosh operating system, OS X. Linux, which runs on the same hardware as Windows, has always required much more technical expertise and a yen for tinkering than average users possess.

Lately, however, I’ve received a steady stream of emails from readers urging me to take a look at a variant of Linux called Ubuntu, which, these folks claimed, is finally polished enough for a mainstream user to handle. My interest increased when Dell began to sell a few computer models preloaded with Ubuntu instead of Windows.

I’ve been testing one of those Dell Ubuntu computers, a laptop called the Inspiron 1420N. I evaluated it strictly from the point of view of an average user, someone who wouldn’t want to enter text commands, hunt the Web for drivers and enabling software, or learn a whole new user interface. I focused on Ubuntu and the software programs that come bundled with it, not on the hardware, which is a pretty typical Dell laptop.

My verdict: Even in the relatively slick Ubuntu variation, Linux is still too rough around the edges for the vast majority of computer users. While Ubuntu looks a lot like Windows or Mac OS X, it is full of little complications and hassles that will quickly frustrate most people who just want to use their computers, not maintain or tweak them.

Before every passionate Linux fan attacks that conclusion, let me note that even the folks who make and sell Ubuntu agree with it. Mark Shuttleworth, the South African-born founder of the Ubuntu project, told me this week that “it would be reasonable to say that this is not ready for the mass market.” And Dell’s Web site for its Ubuntu computers warns that these machines are for “for advanced users and tech enthusiasts.”

So, what do I mean when I say Ubuntu is too rough around the edges for average users? Here are some examples.

There is no control panel for adjusting the way the touch pad works, and I found it so sensitive that I was constantly launching programs and opening windows accidentally by touching the thing. Every time the computer awoke from sleep, the volume control software crashed and had to be reloaded.

When I tried to play common audio and video files, such as MP3 songs, I was told I had to first download special files called codecs that are built into Windows and Mac computers. I was warned that some of these codecs might be “bad” or “ugly.”

To get the computer to recognize my Kodak camera and Apple iPod, I had to reboot it several times. When it did find the iPod, it wasn’t able to synchronize with it. Playing videos was a bad experience, with lots of flickering and freezing. Oh, and there’s no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.

The Ubuntu-equipped Inspiron 1420N starts at $744, but the configuration that Dell lent me for testing sells for $1,415. The same unit equipped with Windows Vista costs $1,524. The Ubuntu version includes OpenOffice, the free office suite that competes with Microsoft Office. Dell charges an added $149 for Microsoft Office.

Ubuntu and other versions of Linux have several advantages. Unlike Windows and OS X, they’re free. Unlike Mac OS X, they can be run on the least-expensive popular hardware configurations. Unlike Windows, but like the Mac, they are essentially free of viruses and spyware. And unlike Windows and Mac OS X, they are built and constantly improved by a world-wide network of developers, professional and amateur — the so-called open-source concept that produced the excellent Firefox Web browser.

It makes sense that all the best software brains can’t be located in just two places: Redmond, Wash., where Microsoft is based, and Cupertino, Calif., Apple’s base. And plenty of people reading this have had lots of frustrations with the two better-known operating systems, especially Windows, whose latest iteration, Vista, is disappointing in many ways.

But open source is a two-edged sword. While it draws on smart developers from many places, nobody is ultimately responsible for the quality of the product, and open-source developers often have an imperfect feel for how average people use software. A European company called Canonical is the “commercial sponsor” of Ubuntu and provides support. But it’s largely focused on corporate and techie users. Average Ubuntu users are likely to have to wade through online forums, often written in technical language, to get help.

Dell and Canonical tell me there are complex workarounds for some of the problems I encountered, and that built-in improvements are planned for others. But for now, I still advise mainstream, nontechnical users to avoid Linux.

Email me at mossberg@wsj.com. Find all my columns and videos online free at the new All Things Digital web site, http://walt.allthingsd.com.

We’ve launched a new commenting tool, Disqus. For the full story on all of its functionality, click here. To begin commenting right away, you can log in below using Facebook Connect or Disqus—you can also log in using an existing AllThingsD account. Learn more about how Disqus collects and uses information in connection with the comments tool.
  • My first love is the Mac and OS X, but I do also use Windows and other OSes at work such as Solaris and OpenVMS. I have tried Ubuntu several releases ago and I have to say that I was quite impressed with how much better the experience was than other Linux boxes I've tried in the past. While it's no Mac or Windows it's a whole lot closer than or Linux systems I've tried.

    My recommendation is to not be afraid to give it a try. It's pretty easy but does have a few slighty rough spots.

    If Dell fixes the driver issues like were mentioned in Walt's review then it could be quite usable if purchased from Dell in such a combo.
  • Good review of Linux Ubuntu, but I don't fully agree. I use the Ubuntu and Red Hat distributions of GNU/Linux, like them both and find them easy to use. I also use Vista Business on a tablet PC that I just bought and XP Professional. I like them both.

    Of all I find the Ubuntu OS the best overall, requiring virtually no technophilia to use effectively.
  • I think Walt Mossberg knows what he's talking about and is on-target that Ubuntu (Linux) is not ready for mainstream users, and I doubt that any Linux users would give that comment a second thought. However, consider that Linux is not ready for the "mainstream" user because the "mainstream" user is by definition a former Windows or Mac user. Has anyone done a review of OSes with first-time computer users to truly determine what terms like "user-friendly" even mean? The term is thrown about like the definition is clear, but if you talk to people to determine what they would consider a user-friendly OS, you'll get as many different responses as there are personal preferences. Let's face it: A computer is a multi-purpose device. It's not a word processor, although it can be used as one. It's not a jukebox, although it can be used as one. To the end of driving a multi-purpose device, the key consideration for an OS should be flexibility, with reliability and ease of use as lesser considerations. With that definition, Linux stops the competition cold in its tracks.
  • "...But open source is a two-edged sword. While it draws on smart developers from many places, nobody is ultimately responsible for the quality of the product, and open-source developers often have an imperfect feel for how average people use software...."

    True.

    But have you ever tried making Microsoft or even Apple responsible for "quality" of the software they provided you with (and you paid quite a load of money for, after all)?

    And, being a completely "non-techie" user, what do you do once you encounter one of these "rough edges" in Microsoft Windows? Reinstall your system and hope for the best?

    I am not sure this is an issue related to Linux but to the basic philosophy "software" is treated right now: I think looking at software as a "commercial product" you just take and use without thinking twice is basically wrong, simply because this "product" is way too complex, too difficult to be fully comprehendable by someone who is just a consumer. Perhaps we should rather focus on "software" as a "service" again - and, talking about that, once you do have someone who takes care of your system, who makes everything the way _you_ want it, I bet you won't have a Linux environment worse than a Windows or MacOS X one.
  • "... The Ubuntu version includes OpenOffice, the free office suite that competes with Microsoft Office. Dell charges an added $149 for Microsoft Office."

    This is a bit off-topic, but you should give requesting a refund of the money a try. It might be easier than you think as this story shows: http://www.thealternative.ch/tiki-index.php?pag...
  • IMHO, you can't have an accurate picture of the state of GNU/Linux by testing a single distribution. There are other distros for new users coming from Windows. Try, for instance, PCLinuXOS (now rising to the top in DistroWatch) . It uses KDE (more similar to windows and easier to configure than GNOME, the default Ubuntu desktop environment) , it has a full-featured control center (taken from Mandriva) and Synaptic, the graphical frontend of apt (but adapted to rpm packages) and a big unified repository with local mirrors, so installing programs is very easy and reliable. Nearly all the codecs you may need are included, and those which are not included (w32 and libdvdcss) can be downloaded from the official repositories .Hardware recognition is also very good. You can try it and even use it in live CD, before installing. It's a community distribution without corporate backing, that's why you can see a "donate" button in their website, but donating is completely optional.The only difference is that it gives you access to faster download servers (they have to pay for them, that's why they charge you for that) , but regular servers are just fine. Their forums are smaller than Ubuntu's, but very helpful, and even better are their irc channels in freenode (#pclinuxos and #pclinuxos-support). Their internationalization is not as good as Ubuntu's, for the moment, but I've found it good enough (my first language is Spanish).
  • I certainly agree that setting up one's own Linux installation has more hurdles than setting up a Windows installation. Most Linux distributions come with a wealth of options (both in terms of configuration and in terms of freely installable programs), and only a small subset of these options are wanted by any given user.

    So far, Ubuntu is the closest to having a default installation that "just works" -- but it's unfair to pin blame on Linux alone if the laptop sold to you doesn't function "out of the box".

    Most people use Windows systems that are either actively managed by an IT department or that were configured and (hopefully!) tested by the OEM from which they purchased their computer.

    I'd assert that the average Windows or Mac user never installs his or her own OS, and therefore never does the base configuration that is required to make all of the hardware work correctly. If a Linux machine that you purchased isn't working "out of the box", then your OEM has failed you. They're supposed to configure it -- that's what happens with Windows.

    The reality is that an unconfigured Linux system is a) scarier and harder to configure for a non-techie and b) can be configured in many more ways than an unconfigured Windows system. However, "average users" flourish when using a Linux installation that they don't have the manage or configure -- I've seen it happen many times. Average users don't like to mess with settings, and they shouldn't have to.

    In a managed environment, the Linux desktop is ready. A single system administrator can configure an army of desktop computers to be more usable than Windows or OSX _and_ require no user-based management. Likewise, OEMs can definitely do a better job of determining with what default configuration their computers should ship. In the interim, it's up to techies like me to make the online forum support experience both pleasurable and expedient.
  • Not only is the Open-Source-Idea a double-edged sword, but also this review.

    As I understand it, you need only one click to install the required codecs. Much simpler than on Windows or Mac, where you have to search, download and install these things. In Ubuntu you have the Synaptics Package Manager, where you can download almost all of the available software for Ubuntu. It is simply a matter of a hand full of mouseclicks. Uninstalling: the same procedure. More centralized and understandable than on other systems.

    I remember my last encounter with windows, where I had to downgrade DirectX, because it blocked an application – I don't remember being more annoyed sitting on a computer. My otherwise ever trusty iBook annoys the hell out of me, because the DivX-Player for OS X is simply the most horrible piece of software I have ever used. In comes the VLC-Player, with which I don't have any trouble at all (Open Source). I don`t expect the DivX-Player to be better in the future, but I do know that VLC is getting better with every release.

    And so is Linux/Ubuntu. While it might be true that Linux is not for everyone, I find some points in this review quite irritating, because Ubuntu even explains to the user why something must be downloaded and installed and can not be included by default – a thing I rarely find on Windows or even the Mac (and when I do it is almost always Open Source Software that explains itself in clear terms).

    But I think it would be interesting to see reviews of future versions of Ubuntu or other distributions and see what and how it has changed.
  • I've been using Ubuntu on an Averatec laptop for 11 months. Yes, there are issues with some multimedia, and I can't use that notebook with a projector, but I get all kinds of work done, and I have only locked-up once.

    I have written my Windows to Linux experience when I used Xandros Linux to save my desktop computer that Windows could not recover no matter what I tried. Xandros gave me access to my NTFS partition when Windows wouldn't even boot on the same computer.
    http://members.whattheythink.com/allsearch/arti...

    In the end, open source software is rather marvelous, and I find it far more sturdy but with fewer exotic features. Many of my Windows programs work smoother and faster in the WINE package in Linux. In fact, some of the Windows versions of Linux programs work better in WINE than their Linux versions do in Xandros Linux.

    As far as recommending it, Walt is right. If I was to start today, but had some cash to spend, It would be on a Mac.

    But if a computer was to be used to just surf for business and not entertainment purposes, and to get basic documents done, there is no reason not to recommend Linux for desktops. Notebooks are flaky things, for sure, which is one of the reasons why Dell's efforts are critical to Linux adoption. It's not like they don't tweak Windows to get optimum performance out of the box. But Dell's participation, and others, like HP and Lenovo, will get the attention of peripheral and software makers who will finally start addressing connectivity issues seriously.

    Personally, I have been testing Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon test releases, and I expect that I will make a 90% switch to Linux at the time the final release is made for my work. I will retain a Windows "entertainment" computer.

    In the end, I would recommend Linux to my mother, who just surfs, IMs and prints things out. I would not recommend it to my wife, who does lots of digital photography and like using the office software for which she is most familiar.

    Most important, I recommend it to me, as I'm tired of lockups, slow-downs, and other various bad behavior that Windows provides as a product feature. :)
  • Unfortunately, I have to agree with Walt's conclusions. I'm an Ubuntu/Dell user who blogs about Ubuntu daily at www.allaboutubuntu.com". My family loves Ubuntu. My wife and three sons all use the Ubuntu PC at home every day. But we still have a second system for videos, iPod/iTunes and other consumer-oriented applications.

    I would definitely buy additional Dell PCs with Ubuntu pre-installed. But I wouldn't recommend the systems -- not yet, anyway -- to neighbors who are basic Windows users. Instead, I'd tell them to go get an iMac or MacBook. You just can't beat Apple for everyday consumers at this point.
  • I've been using some variant of Unix as my desktop operating system for roughly 23 years now. During that time I've also used CP/M, VMS, MSDOS, MacOS, and a succession of Windows variants. There hasn't been a moment in those years when Unix wasn't superior to all of its competitors in stability, expressive power, performance, versatility, ease of learning, and ease of use. When Windows 3.0 came on the scene, it was inferior to the version of MIT's X window system I was using on a Sun.

    In 1994, after trying Linux at home for a while, I happily retired the Dec workstation on my desktop at work in favor of a Linux box. My wife and kids, in spite of preferring Windows for entertainment, still use the Linux email accounts I set up for them. We haven't had a virus in our household since the boot-sector virus I inadvertently brought home on a floppy disk ten years ago.

    Is Linux different from Windows and MacOS? Sure. Is it harder to install from scratch? No, in spite of the fact that Dell routinely bungles the job (I've had several Linux machines from Dell). Is it harder to learn? No. Switching from Windows to Linux is certainly no harder, and arguably easier, than switching from Windows to Mac. It's probably easier to learn Linux as a first OS, though it might be hard to find research subjects between the ages of five and 80 who have never been subjected to Windows.

    Is it ready for the average user's desktop? Certainly! But will the average user make the switch without strong motivation? Probably not; bad habits are hard to break.
  • I'm a retired engineer and I spent my entire career in various parts of the computer industry. I first used Unix in the early 1980s and used it occasionally later but never enough to become truly proficient.

    A few months ago I decided to try several versions of Linux to see how user friendly they were. Ubuntu hung during the install on two of the three PCs where I tried to do a clean install, I never figured out why. On the third computer it went better until I tried to surf the web and got to sites that require Java or Flash. I couldn't figure out how to download either Linux plugin to Firefox.

    I was rather dismayed that so many of the Linux evangelists that I found didn't realize how user-unfriendly it is. Their solutions to problems usually consisted of a series of command lines. That's not user friendly and I can't ask non-techies to do it.

    The only flavor of Linux that I found that comes close to being user friendly is Xandros Home Edition-Premium. That version is rather harshly panned by many Linux purists, however, because Xandros has the audacity to charge for it.

    The business model for companies like Red Hat is to give the software away free and hope they can make it up by charging for support. I don't think that will work in the consumer market.

    There are thousands of free Unix applications available but few have adequate documentation.
  • As Open Source Software in general and Ubuntu and other linux flavors in particular attempt to go 'mainstream' with the non-technical user, there are definitely issues they are going to run up against, several of which were outlined above. A lot of times, the rougher edges have not been smoothed out, but the good news is that with open source, anyone can 'scratch the itch' and put out a fix. With a vibrant community behind Ubuntu and several other flavors, we can expect fixes and enhancements to be released rapidly, and have them be far more stable. The Mozilla projects, amongst others, have shown that great consumer-facing products can be built to overtake the functionality of existing products from companies like Microsoft. At our Open Source community site, OurVox, we are seeing a lot of users wanting to find Open Source alternatives to proprietary source applications (e.g. LAME instead of Winamp, or Spark instead of Yahoo/MSN Messenger). The problem with Open Source is that anyone can put out a product, and the quality and usability (depending on user skill) of a lot of these applications is unknown. You want to use the wisdom of the crowd, and of your trusted network to find and evaluate the best products for your needs. Though Ubuntu might not be there today, it is going to be very interesting to see how it stacks up the next time Microsoft releases the next version of their Operating System. And, let us not forget that Mac OS X is built on top of BSD, so great products, including OSes are being built on top of Open Source apps.
  • Decent enough review, but there are two issues that stick out to me.

    "When I tried to play common audio and video files, such as MP3 songs, I was told I had to first download special files called codecs that are built into Windows and Mac computers. I was warned that some of these codecs might be “bad” or “ugly.”"

    The same could be said for a Windows machine and playing anything outside of wm* and mpeg file. Try playing a quicktime or divx file on a fresh Windows install and you'll have the same problem. Personally I think it's nice of Ubuntu to get the codecs and warn the user of possible legal issues, rather than ask the user to hunt down and install the codecs manually.

    "Oh, and there’s no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.""

    Any operating system will have this issue. Decrypting DVD's without paying for a license is possibly illegal, so neither will play an encrypted DVD without installing additional software.

    Automatix is a utility that will fix most of these issues for you, apparently Michael Dell has used it himself.

    http://www.getautomatix.com/
  • Linux still has the potentials, but the problem is many of its developers are not getting it. I can share some of the experience I had three months ago trying Ubuntu, Fedora and others dist.

    For example, configuring setting for the touchpad or mouse was like hell when I used Gnome as my desktop environment. I can see that Gnome developers don't want users to deal with trivial setting and assume that the system will get it right at once. However, the system didn't and I had no easy access just to configure a simple touchpad/mouse.

    Another thing was in many Linux dist NetworkManager was turned off by default... for what? And it actually took three command lines so that it will be turned on I log in. Also, it wasn't easy to setup NetworkManager if users need to configure WEP/WPA settings and such.

    Another "amazing" thing was that Fedora Core 6 failed to install 2200BG properly. It took a very big effort just to get it right, such as updating the Linux Kernel. I don't get it... 2200BG had been out for at least two years by that point and 2200BG is definitely a popular wireless chip even today. The good thing was that Fedora 7 got it right at once afterwards.

    Also, I see that both Gnome and especially KDE have inherited many of the dumb designs from Microsoft Windows, such as putting the configurations in many different places that people won't think of. I know that the developers are doing this for the sake of Windows converters, but that is definitely not a smart way. Please, learn the mistakes that Microsoft Windows had done and correct it!
  • Clement Galluccio
    Based on my experience of following the discussions surrounding Ubuntu and Linux on the desktop, there is clear absence of forthright communication in regard to the appeal of Linux. In my opinion the reason that Linux has such an ardent following is not that it is free or offers compelling user benefits beyond those of Microsoft's Windows or Apple's OS X, but that it is not developed exclusively by a US company. Linux on the desktop will never attain the ubiquity of Windows in the U.S. nor the offer the seamless ease of use provided by the OS X ecosystem, but does provide the hope that one day it may break the United States hegemony of global desktop computing. Which is fine if that's your goal, just don't try to convince me it's a superior OS to either Windows or OS X in their present state or even the foreseeable future.
  • Do I understand what Rob Nix means by the following:

    Rob quotes this from Mossberg: “Oh, and there’s no built-in software for playing commercial DVDs.”"

    And responds thusly: "Any operating system will have this issue. Decrypting DVD’s without paying for a license is possibly illegal, so neither will play an encrypted DVD without installing additional software."

    On a Mac you pop in the DVD, Apple's DVD Player opens, and the movie plays. I don't imagine it is much more difficult on a PC, is it?
  • "On a Mac you pop in the DVD, Apple’s DVD Player opens, and the movie plays. I don’t imagine it is much more difficult on a PC, is it?"

    Apple pays a licensing fee for CSS to the DVD Copy Control Association so you can legally decrypt DVD's. Microsoft does not, so on both Windows and Linux systems you can only watch unencrypted DVD's without the need for any additional software.
  • First of all, let me say, I have no idea why anyone recommends Ubuntu. It's Gnome based, which is very unfamiliar to either a Mac or Windows user, and not very user friendly at that. Second, Ubuntu is an OS that requires you to do a lot of command line stuff. Just to get you nVidia graphics card to use 3D acceleration, you must install the proper package, go to a terminal and type 'sudo nivia-glx-config enable' to get it running. How many new users can figure that out?

    Honestly, someone coming from another OS will feel more comfortable in the KDE environment. Also, there are much friendlier distros out there like PCLinuxOS. It has a nice Control Center that lets you configure most of your computer via the GUI. It has a small, but well thought out package selection. It's probably the easiest Linux distro out there to get setup.

    Lastly, in reference to Rob Nix, most Linux distros have access to libdvdcss2, which is what one needs to get Linux to watch unencrypted DVD's. Some distros hide it from you in a repository not setup by default, others let 3rd parties provide it, but it's still free and out there for the taking.
  • Like Ruel Smith, I also think Ubuntu is not the best choice for beginners.

    I would personly recommend Mandriva Linux for mostly one tool : The Mandriva Control Center and the drakwizards.

    I use it without writing any line of code in any configuration file.

    regards.
  • "Second, Ubuntu is an OS that requires you to do a lot of command line stuff. Just to get you nVidia graphics card to use 3D acceleration, you must install the proper package, go to a terminal and type ’sudo nivia-glx-config enable’ to get it running. How many new users can figure that out?"

    Ubuntu has a nice gui with checkboxes for this now. No need for command line to do this.

    "Lastly, in reference to Rob Nix, most Linux distros have access to libdvdcss2, which is what one needs to get Linux to watch unencrypted DVD’s. Some distros hide it from you in a repository not setup by default, others let 3rd parties provide it, but it’s still free and out there for the taking."

    True, but because of the DMCA, it's still legally questionable to provide this library in the U.S.
  • Having watched this whole review he brings up some good points, the problem is two-fold though with it.

    First of all hes using a laptop. Linux as an operating system is still in terms of support Server > Desktop > Laptop.

    Laptops have well known support issues that all people with any sense of the OS (any distributions) bemoan, both inside and outside the Linux userbase.

    Second of all hes making complaints about things that are simplistic to fix and often do so automatically. I think Windows and Mac users are used to downloading additional software for system updates and updates for other software.

    Linux in most cases will do this automatically, if you try to play Quicktime video it will direct you to the codecs (which contrary to what their name suggests tend to work well) and they are SMALL updates, under five minutes to download if you have a decent connection at all.

    DVDs may not automatically grab the updates but you can sure as heck use Synaptic Package manager and look for "DVD" in the search box.

    Guarantee you that you'll find multiple suggestions (which explain themselves when you highlight them). Linux can not by law include in a distribution any software that has a paid license thats not something you can hold against it as a free OS (free as in beer).

    Its funny that he complains about downloading "codecs" really, because Windows makes it far harder to get Ogg codecs for instance than Linux does to get MP3 codecs.

    In fact, Windows and Mac both make it harder to get additional software than any Linux distro with Synaptic does. Basically if you can read the box and realize you don't have a particular operating system you can run Ubuntu on desktop hardware without too many issues.
  • I think Walter is spot on, on this topic. Having 20 years experience in this industry and working with many different OSs, I still can't recommend Ubuntu (or other Linux OSs)to other members of my family and friends for the very same reasons Walter mentioned. I love that part "open-source developers often have an imperfect feel for how average people use software".
  • I'm a free/open source software advocate and must agree wholeheartedly with much of what Walt Mossberg has written. I'm a technie and am afraid that Linux just ain't ready for the rest of us on the desktop, and even less so on laptops (where you see the worst-case behavior when it comes to user experience).

    Over the years, I have inhabited corporate and academic spaces only to find that there is a general aversion to using Unix in a desktop setting. While Linux has made tremendous strides forward as a desktop environment, I think the overall progress has been hobbled, paradoxically, by trying to make the experience Windows-like, because in most cases, people "in the know" will compare the Windows UI to the Linux UI. There is no comparison in reality, the Linux UI has even farther to go before it reaches the level of even better UI experiences as found on Mac, which has been more innovative in the UI space than Microsoft, even if you're not a Mac fan.

    In the interim, I truly think the best choice for most folks who might be interested in Linux is to run it on a Mac or Windows using virtualization software. This is what I do, because my work and research is aimed at all viable computing platforms. There is great value, Walt, even for non-techie users who might be maintaining small business/personal web sites to ensure their sites are usable on all platforms. Ubuntu, while not perfect, is probably the best play for personal use (even if "rough around the edges").

    I'll also add that there is a difference between being "rough around the edges" and reliability. We use Linux in a production server environment. Most of our critical servers have been running for years without requiring a reboot. The availability of free/open source software is a competition that is worth waging, and should help to keep the rest of this industry honest. Better yet, it has allowed us to put our money where it matters most (e.g. better hardware).

    Keep hope alive!
  • Hello Walt,

    thanks for your review.

    I have different experiences with "newcomers" and Linux. Both my brother and my son started with Ubuntu some while ago, and they never complained about doing so. Both have used Windows before. We have a 67-year-old aunt, who never used a computer, and on her system we installed Debian. She is happily using it since then. And even our daughter (2 years and 8 months old) is using programs like "Childsplay" or "GCompris" (which are also availabe in some flavor called "Edubuntu" AFAIK) on my Debian Etch machine here without any problem.

    Since I didn't know of a better way of "giving back" to the community, I started "TheDebianUser.org" a year ago, mostly "targeted" to users. If you look for beginners' advice, there are tags like "Level: Beginner", or "Level: All". Recently, I wrote some stuff for Ubuntu users as well - since this is, mostly, Debian.

    Concerning hardware: maybe you should have had a look at one of ZaReason's machines as well. They are in the Linux business longer than Dell, and according to third-party comments, they "live and breathe" free software.

    Anyway: thanks for your review again, and keep up the good work. Your column is appreciated here in Germany as well.

    Kind regards,
    Wolfgang Lonien
    http://wolfgang.lonien.de/
    http://blog.thedebianuser.org/
blog comments powered by Disqus

Search The Mossberg Archives

Latest Personal Technology Videos

More Videos »


BlackBerry News and Reviews on All Things Digital

Click below to browse or search past editions of Walt and Katie's columns.

Personal Technology »

Walt's main column, written since 1991, in which he reviews hardware, software and web sites, and comments on technology issues.

Mossberg’s Mailbox »

Walt's weekly column in which he answers readers' questions.

The Mossberg Solution »

Edited by Walt and written by Katie Boehret, this is a guide to gadgets, web services and other consumer technologies.

Ethics Statement

Here is a statement of my ethics and coverage policies. It is more than most of you want to know, but, in the age of suspicion of the media, I am laying it all out.

Read more »