I can't take it any more, $500 for Vista and Office! I should get myself something nice not get my computer something nice! Anyway I plan on switching to Linux, however I do not want to abandon the simplicity of windows, I remember once reading an article that said InstallShield was available for some versions of Linux.
Anyway I'm looking for a version with the following:
1) Support for most games.
2) InstallShield (I'm sorry I just can't be bothered using commands, so don't even bring it up)
3) Free.
That's all, I hope such a version exists. Another thing, I don't care if I have to install InstallShield separately.
- Miran94
ID:182525
 May 12 2008, 4:52 am (Edited on May 12 2008, 4:59 am)
|
|
I considered it but after seeing the price tag I changed my mind. Now I am hoping to switch to Linux with the above conditions.
- Miran94 | |
Why are you switching to Vista in the first place? Vista is awful. The only reason they quit making XP is to force people, who otherwise wouldn't out of good sense, to upgrade.
| |
Foomer wrote:
Why are you switching to Vista in the first place? Vista is awful. The only reason they quit making XP is to force people, who otherwise wouldn't out of good sense, to upgrade. Kind of why, I read an article saying that we will be forced to switch to it on June 30th. Otherwise I would never consider it. But since we are forced better to get a copy now than later (you could see it made sense at the time). - Miran94 | |
Miran94 wrote:
Foomer wrote: So, what, if you don't upgrade by June 30th your version of windows will explode? I don't think so. If there's no vital reason to upgrade, I'd suggest you don't. | |
Something about canceling update actually and removing it from the stores, anyway the point is I want to move to Linux with the conditions stated.
| |
Miran94 wrote:
1) Support for most games. You can easily get this with WINE and other stuff. Just do a search for "author:digitalmouse cedega" on these forums. 2) InstallShield (I'm sorry I just can't be bothered using commands, so don't even bring it up) You don't really have to use commands unless you're wanting to. It's generally as simply as using a package manager or just double-clicking a file to execute a script. 3) Free. Most distros are free, but they come without support. | |
Audeuro wrote:
Miran94 wrote: I heard Ubuntu was excellent but I still want an InstallShield similar to windows or close to it. | |
I suggest giving Ubuntu a try with Wubi.
First of all, I assume you're on a Windows computer already - with Wubi, it's super easy to install Ubuntu without uninstalling Windows. You don't have to burn a CD, partition your hard drive, enter commands, or anything. It's a one-click install process, easier than any other Linux distro. As for your requests:
Check it out at http://www.ubuntu.com/ if you're interested. Wubi, the Ubuntu installer for MS Windows, is available at http://wubi-installer.org/ . Good luck. :-) | |
They're basically stopping selling XP on June 30th, but for certain OEMs sales will continue until 2010. Mainstream support continues until April 14th (so updates will be made until then) and Extended support ends in 2014. So basically, nothing is forcing you to upgrade for at least another year when support ends (after which your copy of XP will still work, but no updates will be developed).
XP SP3 isn't even out yet, so there's going to be a long time before XP is untenable as an operating system. | |
Miran94 wrote:
Foomer wrote: Theres a nice licensing loophole that allows owners of certain versions of Vista to Downgrade to XP Pro. It's going to be used for some time by companies to avoid having to go to vista, since the demand just isn't there. | |
Ubuntu comes with great community support, and it's very easy to install applications.
You simply open up a "Add / Remove programs" entry and then select which programs you want. Plus Ubuntu is free. | |
Hazman wrote:
XP SP3 isn't even out yet, so there's going to be a long time before XP is untenable as an operating system. Thats funny; I was visiting a net café I sometimes go to a few days ago and someone was installing XP SP3... As for switching to Vista, I honestly don't find it that bad. I've used Vista for the past 3-4 months. If my computer had bad specs I probably would, but for any computer with 2GB ram or more and a dual core processor it works fine. Some functions in Vista now, I sorely miss in XP; I really wouldn't go back to XP unless I was forced to. | |
Alathon wrote:
Thats funny; I was visiting a net café I sometimes go to a few days ago and someone was installing XP SP3... It was released recently (the beginning of the month, I think), although potentially you could have seen someone installing the Release Candidate version, which has been out for a while. but for any computer with 2GB ram or more and a dual core processor it works fine. Yes, but realize that these are high end specs. 1GB is already a rather lot of memory, and 2GB memory and new/powerful multiple-core processors are only needed by gamers, and an important point to make Some functions in Vista now, I sorely miss in XP; I really wouldn't go back to XP unless I was forced to I'm interested and it would be pretty beneficial to the topic, so care to expand here? It seems to me Microsoft focused on the wrong things again and went and added usual useless marketing features such as a 3D desktop, (wow, I really needed that) made the OS more of a resource hog than XP rather than the other way around, etc. Another important issue is that since Vista is pretty new, they still haven't fixed all of the bugs and all (of all...and all...) the security holes, so XP is probably safer and more stable right now. Personally I don't think I'll upgrade to Vista before Vista SP1 is released. | |
A quip that I've heard, and that has matched very accurately my experience with people I know who have used Vista, is this: "People who liked XP, hate Vista; people who didn't 'get' XP, like Vista".
A lot of folks who weren't XP power users find Vista a lot easier to navigate, better-looking, and so on. People who have been happily using XP for quite some time, hate that Microsoft moved everything around, made things work differently, added a bunch of "eye candy", forced them to a computer with higher specs without a big performance gain, and so on. Another one I've heard a lot of is "Windows XP was loathsome until Windows Vista came out. It then became perfect in every way." Naturally, I still find them both loathsome. | |
All of the kinks haven't been worked out of Vista. Nor all of the kinks for XP either, but XP has far less bugs then Vista. Vista is also an unecessary resource hog (as usual with most Microsoft crap) with little, if any gain at all, to their performance. Microsoft is basically trying to force people to buy a bunch of crap, to operate crap. I've been happy with XP Pro ever since it came out. I'm sticking with it until Microsoft either fixes Vista, or something better comes out.
| |
Foomer wrote:
So, what, if you don't upgrade by June 30th your version of windows will explode? I wouldn't be suprised if Microsoft rigged their operating systems to blow. | |
Kaioken wrote:
but for any computer with 2GB ram or more and a dual core processor it works fine. Not only by gamers, no. Anyone wanting to view high definition video on their computer, anyone wanting to do photo editing, video editing and similar. That is a significantly larger portion of people in Denmark than gamers, who by themselves also make up a very significant segment of youth here. As for memory being expensive, what? 2GB of DDR2 memory (as 2x1024MB) will cost me something akin to 300kr, which is about 62 USD. Likewise, the cheapest dual core (a 2.2GHz, which can definately hold its own despite the low L2 cache it comes with) will cost about $100. Most pants you'd get in a clothing store in Denmark exceed $100 unless they're on sale, and don't last the average person 3-4 years. Some functions in Vista now, I sorely miss in XP; I really wouldn't go back to XP unless I was forced to As for resource hogging, yes. I'd loathe to be running Vista on anything under 1.5gb RAM, because it simply doesn't run anything near smoothe even with everything turned off. They made the interface smoother and more aesthetically pleasing. Thats a positive, not a negative. They also added some media managing functions which are great, if you need them - Anyone using a TV tuner will love Vista's interface with media, as well as anyone who regularly has to browse through large amounts of sound/video. They also added a 'Games' link which, while minor is still neat. It automatically adds any games you install and allow you to access them from a special type of Games folder. I don't happen to use it because I don't have a lot of games installed, but if I did I definately would. Its far cleaner and easier to work with than 20 links on your desktop or a standard menu system. The widgets are nice, but they utilize their own API which is the suck. They should've gone with the standard widget API here. The added security is nice, although its also a nuissance sometimes. Most games I have simply won't run without being run as an administrator, and having to click 'Allow' a lot during the day is annoying at best. I've been able to run Vista with no firewall and anti-virus (as an experiment) for 3 months now, and have only gotten some minor spyware that Windows Defender managed to clean out on its own. Thats a huge positive, compared to XP. Boot-time seems faster for Vista than XP for me, and it locks up less than XP does. The task manager is nicer about responding than it is in XP sometimes, being less prone to go unresponsive. The sherlock-like 'search' function at the bottom of the start menu works really well - I couldn't go back to XP because of this alone. Another important issue is that since Vista is pretty new, they still haven't fixed all of the bugs and all (of all...and all...) the security holes, so XP is probably safer and more stable right now. Personally I don't think I'll upgrade to Vista before Vista SP1 is released. No, XP is not safer by *any* margin. Vista is currently the operating system with the least highly critical system holes. As a note of interest, OSX is the one with the most. As for bugs, yes. SP1 fixed a lot of things, however. And they aren't 'critical' bugs by any means. Current bugs: 1) Sleep mode crashes with a lot of graphics cards, so generally you just have to turn that off. It causes a blue-screen and memory dump when you wake out of sleep mode. This is fixed for most situations in SP1 2) Transfer speed is very slow, as low as 4MB / second sometimes. This is fixed in SP1. Often its only slow between external drives and internal drives. 3) Firewire is occasionally wonky in vista for no good reason. This is fixed in SP1 As for power users not liking Vista, I call bull on that. I run QuickSilver on my OSX machine and Total Commander in XP. I've been just fine XP for a long time, and I was fine with 98SE before that. I'm a power-user, but I don't see the big evil that is Vista. And I don't mind getting the same OS with more security, a more pleasing interface and better functionality. | |
Lummox JR