KEY POINTS:
Linux versus Windows is the stuff of near endless controversy. Linux lovers trash Windows for being slow, unreliable, insecure and overpriced, whilst Windows bigots accuse Linux of being hard to use and clunky.
Who's right? Is there a middle ground between both lots of feuding fanboys? Fearlessly treading where others fear to follow, I decided to see just how the Linux penguin stacked up against Clippy, Windows' much maligned mascot.
So what's the big deal about both Windows Vista and Linux? Linux is a multitasking, multi-user operating system that has a reputation for rock solid reliability, its price (free or free-ish) is pretty hard to beat.
Where Windows is a closed platform whose code is closely guarded by Microsoft, Linux is open source which means that it is available for free, and anyone can tinker with it. Windows also supports multitasking and whilst it isn't free, it does support a massive amount of hardware and applications, plus it also happens to be dead easy to drive.
Taking all this into account, I began to investigate my test methodologies, starting with my Linux options. This is more complicated than you'd think as there are a gazillion different flavours of Linux, with each version (or distro in Linux parlance) having its own pros and cons. Cutting a long story short, I eventually settled on Open Suse Linux which is backed by Novell and near-idiot proof to install. My test platform was an ageing 1.6Ghz Centrino Acer notebook with 1Gb RAM and a pokey integrated Intel graphics and tiny 60Gb hard drive.
Round 1: Installation/Performance
Setting the Acer to boot from an installation image of Suse I'd burnt to CD, I held my breath and made ready to reach for the fire extinguisher. In the end it turned out that installing Linux turned was a complete non-event.
After answering several simple questions and making a cuppa, The Acer eventually restarted to display the Linux desktop. Everything on my previously slothful Acer not only worked, it worked much faster. System windows literally sprung open, and starting an app didn't result in endless hard drive activity or hour glass pointers. In short Suse looked good and, compared to Windows Vista on my same notebook, ran like greased lightening.
Installing Vista proved equally non-eventful. Popping the Windows Vista CD into my PC and restarting had me answering some basic questions about my PC, time zone etc. Once I'd done this, Vista chugged away, installing in just under 15 minutes. After installing additional drivers for my notebooks hardware, Vista prompted me for an activation code and I was good to go.
Verdict
The installation process for both Windows and Linux was so easy that even I managed to get it right on both counts. The two operating systems found all my PC's hardware and installed the correct drivers (which, given the plain vanilla Acer laptop I was using, wasn't too surprising).
Performance-wise Suse had the edge transforming my ancient Acer to perform significantly faster than it ever had under Vista, making Suse the winner in the installation and performance category.
Vista: Installation 1 Performance 0
Suse: Installation 1 Performance 1
Running score: 1/2
Round 2: Adding Hardware
Whilst Suse made it far easier to deal install hardware than with previous Linux versions, this only worked up to a point. Whilst common, garden-variety peripherals were dead easy to get going, installing older and more exotic hardware more often than not turned into a nightmarishly complicated process.
Even if I was able to find a Linux device driver for said exotic peripheral, I usually then found myself needing to manually edit configuration files. For less tech-savvy folk (like my Mum, who once managed to delete the Windows XP recycle bin), engaging in a spot of manual hacking to get older peripherals going is going to make Linux a nonstarter.
Vista, on the other hand, proved more bomb-proof when detecting and installing hardware. Eight times out of 10, Vista simply auto-detected the hardware and prompted me for a driver (or found one automatically). Installing an older flatbed scanner required me to download a Vista driver and fire up the Device Manager to manually install it.
Verdict
On the whole, Windows is still far better to deal with when it comes to installing hardware than Linux. A broader base of supported hardware, near idiot proof plug-and-play installation and access to a centralised device manager makes Vista the clear winner when it comes to adding hardware.
Vista: Adding Hardware 1
Suse: Adding Hardware 0
Running score: 2/2
Installing Additional Applications
Adding software to Suse was superficially simple, and could be done using the Package Manager app. Not only does the utility provide a simple point and click method for installing Linux apps, but it'll also let you search online for new applications. Unfortunately, not all applications are available via the Package Manager utility, and installing many of these can see users compiling the application before it is able to be installed.
Adding applications to Windows Vista proved similarly simple in most cases. Downloaded applications tended to self-install once opened, while application CDs tended to auto-run and self-install. In some instances archived applications needed to be decompressed before they could be installed, once again leading to difficulties for beginners.
Verdict
In most instances, installing applications on Windows Vista and Suse Linux was a point-and-click affair. While manually compiling source code to run on Suse or unzipping files to install them on Vista can be a messy process for less computer savvy users, installing apps was mostly a reasonably straightforward process on both operating systems, making this category a tie.
Vista: Installing Apps 1
Suse: Installing Apps 1
Running score : 3/3
Multimedia
The default desktop PC install of Suse has a multitude of bundled multimedia applications that proved to be more than ample for all but the most demanding multimedia power users' needs. By default, apps are installed for ripping audio from CDs, playing video clips and managing music collections.
Dealing with growing numbers of digital photos is done through the F-Spot photo management app, but compared to Vista it was frustratingly slow, chugging whilst importing large photo collections (with Vista's Picture Gallery, importing big photo libraries can be done in the background). This said, GIMP (which is a free industrial strength photo editing application) was a one-click install via Package Manager.
Vista's multimedia capabilities are augmented by Windows Media Player which, when compared with earlier versions, is a versatile application for playing music or the odd video clips, and can easily manage large music libraries.
Another nice inclusion is the Windows Media Centre, which transforms PCs into full-blown multimedia AV entertainment systems. Vista also played nice with large digital photo collections. Not only could I add tags to photos, but I could also search for photos using Vista's search function. Vista's only real multimedia weak spot is its rather anaemic paint programme, which lacks nearly all of the functions found in Suse's more powerful GIMP image editor.
Verdict
With GIMP also available for Windows, Vista's superior digital photo management and media centre capabilities meant it won in the multimedia category by a mere whisker's breadth.
Vista: Multimedia 1
Suse: Multimeda 1
Running score: 4/3
Conclusions
After spending a month with Vista and Linux I've not only developed a new respect for both operating systems, but have also come to the conclusion that neither will suit everyone and that both have more upsides and downsides than I could ever hope to cover in this write-up.
There's a lot to like about Linux. A near-seamless install combines with a massive pile of pre-installed software to give nearly everything you're likely to need to get up and running out of the box.
Performance-wise, Linux proved to be not only zippy, but also offered fantastic bang per buck value given its free sticker price. Unfortunately, Suse is miles away from being intuitive enough for beginners. This said, if you've got an ageing PC that needs a new lease of life and tinkering with a new Operating System appeals, it's pretty hard to go past one of the available Linux varieties.
Vista, on the other hand, shows just how far Windows has come since the early 90's. PC lockups and the Blue Screen of Death are rapidly becoming quaint memories, and the addition of Windows Media Centre, photo gallery and a slick new search engine makes Vista a great choice. It may cost a bomb compared to Linux, and run slower on older hardware, but it still remains the best choice for non-techie PC purchasers just wanting a hassle-free PC experience.
Final score
Vista 4
Suse 3
