The problem with XP is a horrifying lack of modern hardware support. Try using an old XP install disk with a SATA hard drive, for instance :P
Anyhow, stop saying "Linux"! Gah...
Linux is not an OS, it is a kernel. Granted, Linux is a great blanket statement, but it must be understood as a blanket statement: "Linux" implies any desktop Linux distro out there, of which there are many good ones.
If you want a good OS for mainstream, try Suse. I understand Fedora 8 is pretty neat and tidy, too.
Mandriva has also been making huge strides, and has some innovative stuff going on. It's a bit bleeding edge, but has much a much more malleable release schedule than Ubuntu, ensuring that everything in the final release is indeed final. (Whereas Ubuntu, on the other hand, is not unknown to have release candidates and late beta versions of user-space software).
Ubuntu definitely needs a nicer identity. Right now it is a half-polished bleeding edge distro most of the time, a beautifully polished stable distro every 4th release. Hardy is going to be quite good, though. Polish and LTS means implementing some fancy new stuff that will serve it well for stability, like PulseAudio and PolicyKit. Hopefully NetworkManager 0.7, too, which is conveniently aligned with this release. Heck, we may even see Compiz being stable for once.
What Ubuntu needs is a better way of keeping user-space software up to date. Really one the major reason people want bleeding edge is because they want the new version of The GIMP, or new Wacom drivers. That stuff is not really system-critical, and should be provided as updates within the support cycle of each release instead of requiring a whole new upgrade to get them from the official repositories. Otherwise, users just grab the stuff from GetDeb or compile from source, which defeats the purpose of those official repositories altogether.
I think a good example of how badly Ubuntu needs to have its release / update cycle rethought is the fact that Gutsy comes with a release candidate for The GIMP, and has never seen the stable version officially. That is seriously stupid, since the stable version is out and we can safely assume it is a safer, more stable thing to go with than the release candidate! Putting out a release candidate in the final "stable" version there is completely backwards.
Perhaps one nice approach would be if things were a bit more consistently standardized with regards to where programs go and what they change, such that the developers of major programs could maintain their own stable repositories used by Ubuntu by default.
One good thing coming of the fragmentation, though: People are developing some really inventive solutions, and they are way more scalable than the application packages of MacOS or the installer programs in Windows. Only a matter of time before one of them works nicely...
Anyhow, stop saying "Linux"! Gah...
Linux is not an OS, it is a kernel. Granted, Linux is a great blanket statement, but it must be understood as a blanket statement: "Linux" implies any desktop Linux distro out there, of which there are many good ones.
If you want a good OS for mainstream, try Suse. I understand Fedora 8 is pretty neat and tidy, too.
Mandriva has also been making huge strides, and has some innovative stuff going on. It's a bit bleeding edge, but has much a much more malleable release schedule than Ubuntu, ensuring that everything in the final release is indeed final. (Whereas Ubuntu, on the other hand, is not unknown to have release candidates and late beta versions of user-space software).
Ubuntu definitely needs a nicer identity. Right now it is a half-polished bleeding edge distro most of the time, a beautifully polished stable distro every 4th release. Hardy is going to be quite good, though. Polish and LTS means implementing some fancy new stuff that will serve it well for stability, like PulseAudio and PolicyKit. Hopefully NetworkManager 0.7, too, which is conveniently aligned with this release. Heck, we may even see Compiz being stable for once.
What Ubuntu needs is a better way of keeping user-space software up to date. Really one the major reason people want bleeding edge is because they want the new version of The GIMP, or new Wacom drivers. That stuff is not really system-critical, and should be provided as updates within the support cycle of each release instead of requiring a whole new upgrade to get them from the official repositories. Otherwise, users just grab the stuff from GetDeb or compile from source, which defeats the purpose of those official repositories altogether.
I think a good example of how badly Ubuntu needs to have its release / update cycle rethought is the fact that Gutsy comes with a release candidate for The GIMP, and has never seen the stable version officially. That is seriously stupid, since the stable version is out and we can safely assume it is a safer, more stable thing to go with than the release candidate! Putting out a release candidate in the final "stable" version there is completely backwards.
Perhaps one nice approach would be if things were a bit more consistently standardized with regards to where programs go and what they change, such that the developers of major programs could maintain their own stable repositories used by Ubuntu by default.
One good thing coming of the fragmentation, though: People are developing some really inventive solutions, and they are way more scalable than the application packages of MacOS or the installer programs in Windows. Only a matter of time before one of them works nicely...