Author Topic: Switching to Ubuntu (Read 9883 times)

Lapis Lazuli · « **on:** June 17, 2006, 03:22:45 pm »

So a couple days ago I got tired of Windows. I pulled out my outdated Ubuntu CD's and tried a live run (live means you can test the OS from the CD and not have to lose your current configuration).

Rather impressed by Ubuntu's simplicity, I ordered a set of CD's and downloaded the Ubuntu ISO. After some Windows-based trouble I finally got the CD burnt and I tossed Windows aside forever.

Installation took less than 15 minutes, I backed up all my important files to my USB thumbdrive and I was able to settle right down into Ubuntu.

In many ways it is similar to windows, minus the crashes and severe performance lag. I can honestly run six or seven applets, including 3D games and the like, and use little over 160 MiB of RAM. There is never any performance drop, no matter how many programs or services I have running at a time.

I also have four virtual desktops, meaning that I have four workspaces to keep my workspace clear. If one screen is cluttered with windows I can switch to another (on the same monitor!) and work with a clear view.

Installing applications is easy thanks to a user-maintained repository. Applications and games can be downloaded automatically and installed with no effort made by the user. Updates are automatic and can be performed with a single click.

Ubuntu is extremely awesome, and now that I'm completely free of Windows, I'm happier each day that I made the switch.

If you want more info, go here: http://www.ubuntu.com

*edited in by FliesLikeABrick*
For anyone who wants to try ubuntu, here are some nice quick links for you:

Ubuntu graphical installer for x86 (pentium 1/2/3/4, celerons, AMD)
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-desktop-i386.iso

Ubuntu text-based installer for x86 (pentium 1/2/3/4, celerons, AMD)
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-alternate-i386.iso

Ubuntu graphical installer for AMD64
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-desktop-amd64.iso

Ubuntu graphical installer for AMD64
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-alternate-amd64.iso

Slashnoob · « **Reply #1 on:** June 17, 2006, 04:21:40 pm »

sounds tastey, sure made me wanna switch right ahead.
uhm, i'm not too keen in the subject of other operation systems so can you tell me if any normal file type that works in Windows will work in Ubuntu aswell?
such as movies (.mpg .mpeg .rm .avi etc..), pics (.jpg .bmp .gif etc) programs (exe), and other misc stuff such as rar or zip files?
is there a major type of programs\games\whatever that is known for not working in other OS or Ubuntu in specifit?

and for the last question - why did you choose Ubuntu and not Xubuntu?

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #2 on:** June 17, 2006, 04:27:29 pm »

Slashnoob, all of those filetypes you mentioned work on linux except .exe (except for the programs that work in wine). Linux programs have to be compiled specifically for linux (every operating system has its own program types).

Ubuntu uses GNOME
Xubuntu uses XFCE
Kubuntu uses KDE

My guess is that he just felt like trying ubuntu first, he can always install xubuntu and/or kubuntu over what he has now. you can have all 3 installed on your computer at once, plus even more window managers.

(btw I'm on ubuntu right now, I always am)

blackdevil0742 · « **Reply #3 on:** June 17, 2006, 04:31:18 pm »

Quote from: FliesLikeABrick on June 17, 2006, 04:27:29 pm

Slashnoob, all of those filetypes you mentioned work on linux except .exe (except for the programs that work in wine). Linux programs have to be compiled specifically for linux (every operating system has its own program types).

That's why I'll stick with my "legal" Win XP Pro I have.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #4 on:** June 17, 2006, 04:33:36 pm »

... I'm just saying that .exe don't work on linux. There are tons and tons of programs for linux that are better, faster, and more reliable than everything you use on windows.

Plus you and your "legal" copy of windows are going to be dead in the water once you have the inability to use windows updates that give you things you want/need (new versions of windows media player, directx, etc) plus you're going to be forced to use windows vista to use certain programs you're addicted to.

Thats why I'll stick with my actually legal linux computers I have.

I didn't mean that only linux has to have programs compiled specially for it. Windows has to have programs compiled to run on windows, Macs have to have mac programs compiled on macs so they can run on macs, and linux systems have to have programs compiled to run on linux. It is the nature of having different operating systems, not something specific to linux

blackdevil0742 · « **Reply #5 on:** June 17, 2006, 04:46:53 pm »

True. But I've tied some linux OS and I like them but the I can't live without the .exe part.

As for my winxp I'm getting the latest updates without a problem. The only thing I can't have is SP2 from the net which I don't want because it messes up the computer with is't firewall and protection and If I would like to get sp2 I could allways order a free copy on a cd

.

jettlarue · « **Reply #6 on:** June 17, 2006, 04:53:00 pm »

i have a dual boot with ubuntu/win xp for about a year now. i only use xp for soldat because i feel like playing it withought all the extra bugs fom wine. ive tried suse, ubuntu, mandriva, and goblinx before. and ubuntu is the best of them all. just download the live cd and if you like it you can click on install from the shortcuts. and its only ONE cd. better than suse with 5 or fedora with 5. plus gnome is great window manager. plus to upgrade and reinstall ubuntu is a breeze compared to shitty windows which cant detect anything...and the myth that you need to be real smart with computers to use any form of linux isnt true, there are some linux distros that require you to be more advanced. but ubuntu is simple but allows you to do all the complex things that other os's have. if it werent for soldat i wouldnt have bought a pre installed windows system

bja888 · « **Reply #7 on:** June 17, 2006, 05:35:26 pm »

If you like it simple you have some good timing Lapis Lazuli. Windows isn't kidding when they said the min for Vista is 1 GB of ram. There is so much happening in the background it isn't even funny. Mostly generating thumbnails and folder structures. I don't mind too much though. I need to get used to it before I turn it off. (at least the thumbnails)

No since repeating my reasons for not switching over but Vista has some useful new features. Some taken from linux and others that will most likely be put into new versions of linux distros. My favorite it being able to view the desktop via alt + tab

Vltava · « **Reply #8 on:** June 17, 2006, 09:06:12 pm »

We have been awaiting your arrival.

Lapis Lazuli · « **Reply #9 on:** June 17, 2006, 11:23:34 pm »

bja888 - There is nothing in Windows Vista that is worth switching from Linux for.

Especially, you know, viruses, trojans, spyware, and uhh, so much damn commercial software.

OSS is the future, and I have seen the light. I'm forcing myself to sit down and learn Linux day by day and every day I'm wishing I'd done it sooner.

bja888 · « **Reply #10 on:** June 18, 2006, 04:31:13 am »

Quote from: Lapis Lazuli on June 17, 2006, 11:23:34 pm

Especially, you know, viruses, trojans, spyware, and uhh, so much damn commercial software.

No firewall, no Anti-Virus, no anti-spyware software. And I am running just fine. Windows problem is not viruses. (Its users) Its that the run-time environment sucks.

The Bone Collector · « **Reply #11 on:** June 18, 2006, 05:34:16 am »

I don't like linux, mostly because of the programming shite you have to do just to install a simple program (using the console...blah blah blah). although, I like its look, and the way it using so little RAM to run. But windows is better for what I do. I'm a gamer, and there are not many (if any) commercial games for linux. If Linux wasn't so complicated, and had more commercial software companys distributing their programs in its format, then I'd use linux.

frogboy · « **Reply #12 on:** June 18, 2006, 05:40:26 am »

The programming shite, as in "./configure; make; sudo make install"? Or "apt-get install program"? "chmod 755 install-file; ./install-file"?

Lapis Lazuli · « **Reply #13 on:** June 18, 2006, 06:02:22 am »

You don't have to do any of that with Ubuntu, most, if not all, is handled graphically these days.

bja888 - I used to think the same way. There's no fault in Windows, it's all this other crap.. no, the faults are there, and you'll start to see them, given time. Trust me on that one.

All Windows has going for it is driver support, but that's only due to the Microsoft monopoly.

bja888 · « **Reply #14 on:** June 18, 2006, 06:51:32 am »

Quote from: Lapis Lazuli on June 18, 2006, 06:02:22 am

bja888 - I used to think the same way. There's no fault in Windows, it's all this other crap.. no, the faults are there, and you'll start to see them, given time. Trust me on that one.

"run-time environment" Not the programs. How windows runs the programs is the fault.

Quote from: Lapis Lazuli on June 18, 2006, 06:02:22 am

All Windows has going for it is driver support, but that's only due to the Microsoft monopoly.

Linux has better drivers than XP

frogboy · « **Reply #15 on:** June 18, 2006, 07:11:48 am »

Quote from: Lapis Lazuli on June 18, 2006, 06:02:22 am

You don't have to do any of that with Ubuntu, most, if not all, is handled graphically these days.

Yeah, I know. But installing a program from command line isn't exactly "programming ****e". I prefer command-line anyway, it's a lot quicker.

Quote from: bja888 on June 18, 2006, 06:51:32 am

Linux has better drivers than XP

Definitely not. Video drivers, for example, are a complete pain in the arse to install. At least, ATI's are. Sound drivers can be annoying sometimes too, because of the different driver frameworks.

ElephantHunter · « **Reply #16 on:** June 18, 2006, 07:13:53 am »

Oh, I see we have a convert. Welcome to the brotherhood, faithful believer of OSS.

Haha, anyhow... I have only Ubuntu on my PC at home. Right now I'm on my father's machine (today is father's day.) He's one of those guys who just has to be on the bleeding edge of gaming.

Ubuntu does almost everything I need. The only problem is testing websites I have developed in Firefox with the Internet Explorer browser (obviously necessary when none of my clients have heard of Firefox.) Soon I'll download QEMU and install my student copy of XP on it, just so I can have Internet Explorer.

MofoNofo · « **Reply #17 on:** June 18, 2006, 08:15:52 am »

I've just ordered my PC copy of Ubuntu =D.
I've used Feroda Core 3 (i think) on my old pc.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #18 on:** June 18, 2006, 11:11:01 am »

I agree with bja888, it is a well-known fact that linux has better hardware and driver support than windows.

As for the virus/trojan/spyware/whatever thing:

That is absolutely a fault of Windows. you cannot blame the user for getting infected with a malicious program that abuses faults in windows. It isn't the user's fault that windows has so many insecurities that you get infected if you stay a month or two behind the updates they release. The consumer can get infected with something just by plugging their computer into a network, or into the internet without a firewall.

Malware is absolutely microsoft's/windows' fault. It is not the user's fault at all. The user shouldn't have to tiptoe around the functionality of their computer worrying about getting raped by some virus, they should be able to click around and do whatever they want without worrying about getting taken advantage of by some kid who wrote a worm

bja888 · « **Reply #19 on:** June 18, 2006, 02:13:05 pm »

Quote from: FliesLikeABrick on June 18, 2006, 11:11:01 am

As for the virus/trojan/spyware/whatever thing:

That is absolutely a fault of Windows. you cannot blame the user for getting infected with a malicious program that abuses faults in windows. It isn't the user's fault that windows has so many insecurities that you get infected if you stay a month or two behind the updates they release. The consumer can get infected with something just by plugging their computer into a network, or into the internet without a firewall.

Malware is absolutely microsoft's/windows' fault. It is not the user's fault at all. The user shouldn't have to tiptoe around the functionality of their computer worrying about getting raped by some virus, they should be able to click around and do whatever they want without worrying about getting taken advantage of by some kid who wrote a worm

For the purpose of good conversition I wish to resolve this argument....

Now a days, everyone is so paranoid about getting anti-virus software and firewalls. Yet, I dont even think about it and I am doing just fine. Yes I know a little more then your average user but as EnEsCe will be quick to point out, I only know so much. I like to focus on the development of digital art rather than the technical aspect.
On the flip side, I was in class one day my sophomore year when a virus hit the schools network. It was a simple shutdown command that I aborted but I dont think anyone brought that worm on the network.

Computers where designed to do only and exactly what they are told. It would be morals that stop them from writing a virus (or a destructive program). Therefor, in theory both windows and lunix should be prone to viruses.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #20 on:** June 18, 2006, 02:20:23 pm »

Linux is not prone to viruses because it follows a proper layered OS model, such that a normal user doesn't have privileges to do anything that compromises the system.

I'm saying that Windows is at fault because it should not be vulnerable to viruses in the first place. You should not have to run performance-degrading programs in the background to protect you from viruses, spyware and other bad things. You should just be able to use the computer and not worry.

Yes I know you don't need to think/worry about it, and I'm the same way when I use windows. I don't have any antivirus software or anything installed.

The fact remains that it is not the user's fault, they do not have to do anything to get a virus. You said that it is the user's fault, and I'm flat out saying "no, you're wrong."

I go to a college with a generally-intelligent student body. I work at the computing helpdesk and I spend hours every week helping many people remove viruses from their computers, but only the windows users. Mac users and linux users on campus never have any problems at all, because they're made properly.

I don't see how you can blame it on the users. Yes, smarter/more cautious users don't have problems, but you're completely missing my point

xtishereb · « **Reply #21 on:** June 18, 2006, 04:22:28 pm »

I use Ubuntu on my somewhat old laptop. It has its fair share of bugs, similar to when I ran Windows XP on the laptop, but otherwise it's fine. The major probelms I have with it are derrived from the hardware, not the software (execpt in the case of Flash, since Adobe/Marcomedia hasn't released Flash 8 for Linux yet, plus no working Soldat, since the laptop barely runs it without emulation).
When I switched over, the Windows harddrive I had was often inexplicably freezing for long periods of time. It was great being able to do so many things.
It's also really easy for me to customize it without downloading additional programs (like WindowBlinds), many of the programs I use (like Firefox) are also available on it, and the package features (.deb) are great.

Anyway, have fun. It's a great OS.

frogboy · « **Reply #22 on:** June 19, 2006, 01:37:16 am »

Quote from: FliesLikeABrick on June 18, 2006, 02:20:23 pm

Linux is not prone to viruses because it follows a proper layered OS model, such that a normal user doesn't have privileges to do anything that compromises the system.

I'm saying that Windows is at fault because it should not be vulnerable to viruses in the first place. You should not have to run performance-degrading programs in the background to protect you from viruses, spyware and other bad things. You should just be able to use the computer and not worry.

It's both users and the model of Windows. A lot of the time, a person has to run something before they are infected, but after that, the poor design of Windows means the problem is more severe.

Lapis Lazuli · « **Reply #23 on:** June 19, 2006, 04:22:30 am »

Actually, the average Windows XP machine is infected with a virus, trojan or worm, six seconds after connecting to the internet.

Yeah, I'd say its an issue with the OS, not the user.

JBL · « **Reply #24 on:** June 19, 2006, 04:42:31 am »

STOP TALKING ALL UR COMOUTER TALK! Talk NORMALLY! I can't understand!!!!!

Dascoo · « **Reply #25 on:** June 19, 2006, 06:02:24 am »

k

Can i play DOD with linux, or Call of duty 2? I have a free Ubuntu cd......

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #26 on:** June 19, 2006, 06:19:24 am »

running windows games on linux is still a gray area. There is a piece of software that will let you run windows games in linux, but it is not entirely free and it may be a bit confusing for someone who is new to linux to set up.

There is nothing keeping you from having windows and linux both installed on the same computer though

bja888 · « **Reply #27 on:** June 19, 2006, 06:59:51 am »

Quote from: xtishereb on June 18, 2006, 04:22:28 pm

(execpt in the case of Flash, since Adobe/Marcomedia hasn't released Flash 8 for Linux yet, plus no working Soldat, since the laptop barely runs it without emulation).

Dont expect it any time soon. They will make flash 9 for linux a few months after it comes out for win and mac. Flash 9 is in beta 3 but a few more months till its finished.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #28 on:** June 19, 2006, 07:09:47 am »

you're talking about flash... what?

bja888 · « **Reply #29 on:** June 19, 2006, 07:21:31 am »

Quote from: FliesLikeABrick on June 19, 2006, 07:09:47 am

you're talking about flash... what?

Kinda off topic. There is not flash 8 for linux and there is no 64x support of player 7.

Lapis Lazuli · « **Reply #30 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:16:11 am »

I'd still stick with linux.

Linux
Unbelievably fast + effecient, and user friendly,

vs.

Windows
Horrifically slow, bloated, riddled with holes and traps,

I'll stick with the OS that isn't a minefield, thank you.

bja888 · « **Reply #31 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:27:52 am »

Its like a knife. Once you cut your self with a good knife it is taken away and you are give a plastic one.

You can still cut things with a plastic one but now it takes more effort

Lapis Lazuli · « **Reply #32 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:31:08 am »

Right except they took the good knife away because its rusty and inflicts disease.

bja888 · « **Reply #33 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:32:40 am »

Quote from: Lapis Lazuli on June 19, 2006, 08:31:08 am

Right except they took the good knife away because its rusty and inflicts disease.

Not when you first got it.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #34 on:** June 19, 2006, 08:33:44 am »

yeah, but it only takes two weeks to rust and become disease-infested

Atticus · « **Reply #35 on:** June 19, 2006, 12:51:51 pm »

Okay, so you guys have peer pressured me into being interested in Ubuntu. I was wondering what some of the drawbacks are and how could I go back to my windows if I wanted to. Also, I only have this laptop to use, so I was wondering how to have windows and ubuntu on one computer.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #36 on:** June 19, 2006, 01:00:57 pm »

you can easily go back to windows if you don't like linux, though you will have to reinstall everything. The only normal way to avoid this is to have them both installed at once.

If I had more free time, I would tell you how to set up a dual boot (having windows and linux on the same computer) but unfortunately I don't. I'd be glad to help you with it once you have it installed, but in the mean time take a look at these tutorials:

This tutorial steps you through exactly how to set up a dual boot, assuming you are on a computer that currently has windows XP (or some other windows with an NTFS file system)

http://users.bigpond.net.au/hermanzone/p3.htm

This is the file you need to download and burn for that:

http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-alternate-i386.iso

The page looks very long, but it is mostly pictures and there is nothing hard about it, especially since that page has very detailed step-by-step directions, far better than what I can write

Atticus · « **Reply #37 on:** June 19, 2006, 01:07:41 pm »

I wan't to do this really bad, but I don't want to mess anything up and I am not very good with computers. I just think that it might be a big risk. I want to be able to play soldat. I also don't know what programs that I enjoy right now will not work with linux.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #38 on:** June 19, 2006, 01:10:49 pm »

if you dual boot, you get the best of linux and windows, and you don't risk losing any functionality of your laptop.

Also, your signature breaks the rules (file size too big)

Lapis Lazuli · « **Reply #39 on:** June 19, 2006, 02:11:22 pm »

Actually, Ubuntu, last I checked, can resize partitions so you're able to free up some space to install Ubuntu. It then automatically configured my PC for dual boot options and I didn't have to do a thing. When my PC powered on, it gave me a menu featuring a selection between Ubuntu and Windows ME.

Of course your mileage may vary, so to speak.

Atticus · « **Reply #40 on:** June 19, 2006, 10:19:59 pm »

Sig Fixed.

Dascoo · « **Reply #41 on:** June 20, 2006, 06:14:51 am »

If they made more games for Linux that are for Windows, I would definately isntall linux....but right now, I'm not gonna risk blowing up my computer >_>

UGK · « **Reply #42 on:** June 20, 2006, 06:43:39 am »

I will. My comp is already 75% fucked up.

A · « **Reply #43 on:** June 22, 2006, 06:52:32 pm »

lapis, you have me sold. I made the switchover and must say that I'm extremely impressed. I've been running off the live cd, and think I'll use an external hard drive and make it my primary operating system.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #44 on:** June 22, 2006, 07:05:32 pm »

Quote from: A on June 22, 2006, 06:52:32 pm

lapis, you have me sold. I made the switchover and must say that I'm extremely impressed. I've been running off the live cd, and think I'll use an external hard drive and make it my primary operating system.

absolutely awesome

bja888 · « **Reply #45 on:** June 22, 2006, 08:55:52 pm »

I'm suppried so may people have never used linux before.

I found out you can get AA (link) for linux yeasterday. Someone tell me how it runs. (I dont have time to try it my self)

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #46 on:** June 22, 2006, 09:17:02 pm »

I'll try it some time this weekend

jettlarue · « **Reply #47 on:** June 22, 2006, 11:53:24 pm »

this is great that a couple people are trying something that isnt micro$oft related. even though im posting with windows right now, but i do dual boot. isnt it that quake was ported to linux too?

ElephantHunter · « **Reply #48 on:** June 23, 2006, 12:16:35 am »

I've tested lots of games that run on Linux natively.

- All versions of Quake

- All versions of Doom
- UT2k5 (haven't tested any of the others)

Search http://www.happypenguin.org/ for more games.

frogboy · « **Reply #49 on:** June 23, 2006, 07:11:38 am »

Almost all of id software's games are ported to Linux natively - all of the Doom series, all of the Quake series, Enemy Territory, I'd guess Wolf3d...

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #50 on:** June 23, 2006, 07:27:11 am »

was it on a local network in your house, or on a direct, unfirewalled connection to the internet?

For anyone who wants to try ubuntu, here are some nice quick links for you:

Ubuntu graphical installer for x86 (pentium 1/2/3/4, celerons, AMD)
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-desktop-i386.iso

Ubuntu text-based installer for x86 (pentium 1/2/3/4, celerons, AMD)
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-alternate-i386.iso

Ubuntu graphical installer for AMD64
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-desktop-amd64.iso

Ubuntu graphical installer for AMD64
http://ubuntu.mirrors.u13.net/ubuntu-6.06-alternate-amd64.iso

JayBee · « **Reply #51 on:** June 23, 2006, 08:34:05 am »

If AA runs on Linux, I might switch to Ubuntu. I usually focus on one game and I played AA in the past. I might start playing it again.

I was asking myself what I wouldn't be able to do when I would run Linux, and the only thing that came to my mind was games. I hardly play games nowadays, one game would be more than enough to invest my time in.

Oh and stuff like .doc and .pdf , can I open that in Ubuntu? I'd rather switch over completely.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #52 on:** June 23, 2006, 08:41:41 am »

yes, openoffice can open .doc and save to .doc with no problem, and actually does it much better than MS word (smaller file sizes (like up to 20KB smaller) with the exact same content/functionality)

Many programs in linux can read/write/export/save from/to PDF files

Denacke · « **Reply #53 on:** June 24, 2006, 10:24:15 am »

I decided to check what all the fuss was about, downloaded the CD right for my system (amd 64 one) and booted it up. Only to get stuck when booting the kernel.

I've been checking around some forums and it seems to be a problem that has happened to a lot of people. Some managed to fix it by disabling usb in bios, some by fiddling with acpi and apic settings, but for me none worked.

I'll just stick with my fedora (which installed just fine) 'till they fix the install problems.

bja888 · « **Reply #54 on:** June 24, 2006, 10:57:19 am »

Not booting bacause of usb. Thats silly!

Smegma · « **Reply #55 on:** June 24, 2006, 12:25:20 pm »

What programs run the games that can be used in windows (I've heard you drop WINE a bit).

Also, do these programs run all games/programs that can be run on windows or just select ones?

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #56 on:** June 24, 2006, 12:29:03 pm »

cedega can run some (maybe most?) of the bigger games: wow, CS CS:S etc.

wine is mainly for other programs right now, though it is starting to get better and better game support

Smegma · « **Reply #57 on:** June 24, 2006, 02:59:35 pm »

I'll wait for some easier solution or wine to get better support. I dont want to pay 5 dollars a month for cedega

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #58 on:** June 24, 2006, 03:11:45 pm »

fair enough.... though nothing is keeping you from having linux installed at the same time as windows. My laptop has both, just so I can use windows for games

Smegma · « **Reply #59 on:** June 24, 2006, 05:09:55 pm »

I was thinking about that (I even read all the instructions and was getting ready), but I wouldn't like to shut down and restart just to play a game, unless you can somehow switch OS without restarting.

FliesLikeABrick · « **Reply #60 on:** June 24, 2006, 05:40:01 pm »

well I guess it really just comes down to how badly you want to try it out.

News:

Author Topic: Switching to Ubuntu (Read 9883 times)