Ubuntu 8.04 Linux Review

All formatting was lost in this, and I'm too lazy to go back and fix it all so I left it as it is.

Review of Ubuntu 8.04 (Hardy Heron)

Chapter 1 - Install Process:
     The boot CD was fairly well designed.  You are greeting with a very basic boot screen that allows you to decide what to do, whether its run the Live CD, a direct install, a memory test, or ignore the CD entirely.  You can also make small modifications to the Live CD in case if anything goes wrong.  Only needing 512MB of RAM to run, the Live CD makes a very nice impression for new Linux users.  The wait for it to start up is a fair amount, and is mostly based on your RAM (seeing as how nearly every CD drive these days works at 48x or faster).  What was so special about the Live CD was you can test nearly the entire OS before you install it.  All programs are available and there are very little restrictions.  Its a great way to rescue data from broken OSes, including Windows.
     Compared to other distributions of Linux, the installer was very user friendly.  It only takes a few steps and is fairly informative.  The partitioner is just about the most advanced you can get.  You get choices of multiple file systems and best of all, you can decide what each partition does.  You can split the OS so user accounts are in one partition, installed programs in another, boot info in another, and so on.  You aren't restricted to one drive either, Linux can be separated upon multiple disks and different types of media.
     During the actual install, you are still free to try out the OS.  Play a game or two while you wait.  The one disadvantage I see to the installer is you will most likely get hardware troubles if you aren't connected to the internet.  Towards the end, the installer downloads many things (unfortunately it doesn't tell you what any of them are) so you will have less to work on when you boot it up.  I will discuss hardware installation in Chapter 5.

Chapter 2 - The GUI:
     Ubuntu has a different style of operation but it has plenty of similarities to Windows XP so you won't get too discouraged.  The beauty of a Linux OS is everything is free and open source, meaning, you can do whatever you want with it.  The desktop has far more customizations to it than Windows and Mac combined, and thats without downloading anything, but that will be discussed in Chapter 3.
     Linux OSes have multiple workspaces/desktops.  With Mac and Windows, you are restricted to one.  The benefit of multiple workspaces is organization.  You can put different windows on different workspaces so instead of having to move one window out of the way or minimize something, you can just switch to another workspace.  You can download programs so each workspace can have a different image, or you can assign programs to appear on a different workspace depending on the conditions.
     Linux OSes are also Unix based.  This is difficult for new users to understand and find convenient, but it is extremely efficient in terms of performance and system resources.  In Windows, the system has a folder for user accounts, another for installed programs, and another for the kernel.  In Linux, there are several folders each with a different purpose.  For example, one folder would have all libraries, when another would have all executables.  The purpose of this is so the system can organize itself faster, it spends less time searching for something, and it saves disk space by eliminating duplicate files.  As a user, you can benefit from this because anything not in your Home folder is considered owned by root, making the files secured from hackers, and to run a program, all you have to do is type the name of it and thats it (if you were to run it from Terminal).  But, this can be a problem if you ever plan to make changes, very inconvenient at times when you can't just be a super user.
     One other disadvantage to a Unix based system is drive mounting.  In Windows, whatever is connected to the computer is typically completely in your control.  Except for PATA devices, just about any drive or media can be safely removed.  In Linux, drives cannot be modified until they are unmounted.  Drives cannot be used until they are mounted.  Although it takes pretty much no effort or time to mount something, it does waste some time and it is still an inconvenience.  Also, mounting/unmounting isn't obvious for new users and I'm assuming it can cause data loss in case of a crash.
     Everything else about the GUI is pretty straight-forward.  Administrative tasks require a password and are separated from normal preferences, you get multiple ways to install programs (Synaptic Package Manager is advanced and less graphical but fairly easy to use).  The look of the OS is very clean and smooth but everything is somewhat large.  Typically people today don't mind having a larger resolution but I find it annoying to have large graphical features with very small text.  I will discuss more graphical features in Chapter 3.

Chapter 3 - Customization and Functionality:
     Customization is what Linux is really all about - the OS is yours to personalize.  Unlike Windows and Mac, you can modify just about everything you want and whatever you can't customize, you can find a download for.
     If you have a decent video card, Linux has the best visuals any OS has to offer with Compiz.  With 3D wobbling windows, desktop cubes,  particle system menu effects, and window transparency, this makes Mac effects look average.  You can make multiple panels that can be colored or textured however you want.  The panels can contain a system tray, window list, applications, system monitors, time, weather, and so on.  With the Terminal, you can customize the desktop, or really anything, to perform differently.  For example, you can make an animated background.
     The Terminal is definitely something to talk about.  While it is fairly advanced and just about the best debugging and tweaking program you could get, the OS is far too reliant on it.  If Ubuntu came with some document that had a list of each terminal command and what it did, I would have less of a reason to complain about Terminal.  People could just fix issues on their own.  Many terminal codes have a manual to them, but it doesn't always help very much, and obviously you have to know the command ahead of time.  Luckily, theres a large community available for your benefit.
     For functionality, Ubuntu works fine.  It is by far the most stable OS I've used.  A program could be crashed and frozen using 100% of the CPU but you still get complete control over the OS without much of a slowdown.  Better yet, you can actually pause processes.  If a process is misbehaving and won't shut down, you get an option to kill it.  You get a better priority setting as well, referred to as "nice".

Chapter 4 - System Resources and Performance:
     Being stable and secure is one thing, but one would think that could greatly affect system resources.  Well, apparently it doesn't.  The average Ubuntu desktop (without Compiz) can easily run on 256MB of RAM, a 4GB HDD, and perform fast and flawlessly on a 1.8GHz P4.  Considering what it has to offer, you can't beat that.  Compiz however does require a good computer, and it is not very friendly with many 3D programs and especially not WINE (discussed in Chapter 6).
     Speaking of having a small HDD, even with having a nice video player, FireFox, Pidgin, all of OpenOffice.org, Gimp (an advanced image editor), and driver support for any future devices you may install, a fresh new install of Ubuntu doesn't even get close to using up 3GB.  Windows XP on a fresh install with no special programs nearly reaches 2GB.

Chapter 5 - Hardware:
     This is possibly the most iffy part of any Linux distro.  If you're lucky and had an active internet connection while installing Ubuntu, you should have been able to had a quick easy install with everything set up for you.  Typically anything made in 2005 and newer will always work.  Anything made from 2002 or newer might need some work but not too much of a hassle.  Anything older probably won't work how you want it to and since Linux has very little support by any hardware manufacturers, you'll hare a real hard time.  Even the oldest hardware (including something from 1992) can work fine but it really depends on the situation.
     The greatest hardware issue for Linux is wireless drivers.  I'm not really sure why things such as video capture cards or LightScribe writers or SCSI devices have so much support while wireless doesn't.  There are plenty that work, but for whatever doesn't, you must download ndiswrapper, which uses a Windows wireless driver (must contain the .inf, .cat, and .sys) and makes it Linux compatible.  Many people give up on the OS because of this.
     To conclude this section, Linux is typically great with hardware but you should do your research before considering it.  Any brand that is not well known will most likely not work.  I have an Encore TV/FM tuner with a remote and nothing on that works.  At least Linux can recognize it when its not installed, something that even Windows can't do.  To be fair, and as a point that everyone should be aware of, the hardware manufacturer's website should tell you if the product is INcompatible.  Some will have official drivers, which you should always consider rather than the ones Linux developers make.

Chapter 6 - 3rd Party Applications:
     Out of the box, Ubuntu has a great collection of programs.  Due to Linux not being owned by anybody, typically everything is considered a 3rd party app.  The Synaptic Package Manager is where you typically install all your programs.  Since Linux is not typically supported by commercial producers, nearly every program you would buy for Windows or Mac is available for free in Linux and is usually just as good.
     For whatever isn't good enough, theres WINE.   WINE is a Windows compatibility layer (not an emulator) where you can install Windows programs on Linux.  It is constantly being developed and there is an immense number of incompatible or glitchy programs but it is expanding every day, having more of your favorite Windows programs available for you to use.
     The greatest disadvantages to a fresh install of Ubuntu are the practicalities of what they have installed.  If there were links to suggestive programs to install on the desktop, that would be fine.  But not everybody wants a massive program like Evolution or OpenOffice.org, and there are many programs that seem like they're just installed just so they get promoted such as Tomboy Notes.  Overall, everything installed is very nice and very useful, but I find it dumb how some built-in apps are so large when there are many required ones such as ndiswrapper or WINE that aren't included at all.
     My greatest and utmost complaint about 3rd party apps is if Synaptic package manager doesn't have what you're looking for, not only do you have to spend time searching for the app you want (although it probably will exist no matter what it is) but you have to know the programs' dependencies and most of all, how to install it.  No novice user would ever know how to, or even know to compile some programs.  That is just a great inconvenience to me.

Chapter 7 - Final Score:
[7] Set up - Best installer you could ever ask for but Ubuntu is way too reliant on the internet to support itself.
[7] Ease of Use - Would be perfect but very little direction for new users and Terminal can really make things difficult.
[10] Special Features - Ubuntu can be made to do just about anything you want it to and can be dumbed down to a console.
[9] Organization - The file system is very efficient but inconvenient.  GUI is laid out however you want it to be.
[10] Customization - You can customize more than you think is possible.
[7] SW Functionality - Compatible with thousands of programs (including Windows) but you need to know what you're doing.
[7] SW Stability - Most stable OS I've used, but problems can occur without having a clue of their cause or how to fix them.
[7] HW Functionality - Mounting can be a pain (especially for USB drives) and it is often just luck if something works correctly.
[10] HW Efficiency - If you get your hardware working, its typically flawless.
[7] OEM SW - Built-in software is as good as what you'd normally buy, but some apps need to be included, while some excluded.
[9] Overall Usefulness - Not recommended for gaming or video editing but better than every other OS at all other tasks.
[8.2] - Worth Using

0: Not an OS     1: Worst OS ever     2: Not worth using     3: Could be worse     4: Simply terrible     5: Poor
6: Conditionally bad     7: Average/Mediocre     8: Worth using*     9: Very good*     10: Best OS in existence*

*Highly recommended for average user