You can play some Windows games using Wine / Cedega, where you might have to engage in a bit of tweaking to get it running properly. I would recommend you check the WineHQ's AppDB to see the games you can install.

Here you go:

http://appdb.winehq.org/

i'd rather dual boot to a real windows environment than run games off wine imho

I started to learn linux becoz of my boss forced me to.
to make things worse, the first distro I using is ubuntu server which is whitout GUI at all.
actually I working as IBM AS400 operator at previous work. as400 too, dont have gui but at least have menu and you can press f1 for help, but ubuntu server just have "root:~#"
my first project was using ubuntu server as mail server. Its take me a week to learn about linux things like command line, zimbra for email n bla2.
I had litle experience with Microsoft Exchnage before. As long as your license is not expirate, you can just call microsoft center for help but in linux, I don know who to call..
the good thing is, google can answer me almost everything i need to.
Now, I still exploring linux world. Maybe after this I learn Red Hat variant like fedora or centos for extra knowledge.
btw, I graduated as electronic student but working in IT field...

owh, forgot to tell that I still using win-xp at my desktop....

This post has been edited by joker_jr: Jun 8 2009, 02:48 PM

You can install GUI for Ubuntu Server. Try ask on Ubuntu forum.

Tried out Ubuntu because my new laptop didn't include a Windows OS.

It's usable, but not as good as Windows. No games, no Microsoft Office, my favorite programs don't work, lousy video drivers. For some reason Firefox's UI is very, very slow in Ubuntu as well.

because I can do this

You live in the state of ignorance or something? I found Ubuntu to be more fun than Windows. I have more fun with the games they provide with Synaptic than the ones I download from various gaming sites and I found Open Office to be a good MS Office replacement.

And yeah, firefox is a bit slow, but I was pretty happy with it. A browser's a browser, regardless of platform. And they always improve every time, so I don't complain much.

There is a GNU/Linux distro which is dedicated to gaming. Read here:

http://live.linux-gamers.net/

This post has been edited by ayob99: Jun 11 2009, 01:56 AM

Attached thumbnail(s)

i know this.
but let's not kid ourselves here.
people that are into games will never find linux gaming a good experience.
as much as mac people don't go OHH AHH about their games.

well, they should at least try it out. I don't see any harm in that.

Linux desktop is usable, yes, but for overall package Windows is still the champ. The biggest gripe i have with Linux is the distributions and stupid repositories. Some distros are awesome but lacks the features of others, and some others have really good repositories, but so much dependencies that I need to download like 200 MB of packages just to use an application that is only 5 MB, or to download a driver for use with a new hardware. Yes, this problem exists in Windows as well, but not nearly as annoying as Linux.


Linux CAN be infected with virus. It's just the user base for linux is so much smaller than Windows. One other thing which goes with the Unix/Linux security is that you set a root password, and then you create an account which doesn't have root privileges. In Windows, you create an administrator password, and then windows still puts the first user into the administrator group.

In short, your best defense against virii and general malware is not the OS, but it is that thing that is between the keyboard and the chair.

I seriously fail to see the comparison with Windows regarding this. What I do know from my previous experience developing on Windows is that most of the libraries I need already are available in the Win32 API and .NET libraries. Now, if the applications you're downloading are built on top of Win32 anyway, I'm sure your binaries would be small. But if they're built on other widget libraries such as QT, wxWindows etc, you'd be downloading a ton of dependency executables as well. When you say some binaries suck up 200MB of dependency packages just for a 5MB package, it's probably because you're running something like Gnome, and then decide to install a KDE application, which would definitely involve the scenario you described, 'cos it's two completely different window environments altogether (each with their set of widgets, libraries etc etc).

Honestly, I don't like it either. Hence, I make an effort to keep to KDE applications as much as possible. I just don't use Gnome/GTK apps unless absolutely required. The nature of competition between the 2 platforms often means that a particular functionality available in 1 platform is usually available in another application for the competing platform (RhythmBox on Gnome vs Amarok on KDE, for e.g.).

But, the fact that having the choice of multiple applications, multiple desktop environments, multiple types of experiences is annoying? There's a Youtube post that describes this phenomenon the best: http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=jETv3NURwLc

Actually all those problems are blissfull when compared to times you need to install third party apps like an older Oracle version on newer Linux. The biggest headache in Linux are all the different versions which comes out so quickly, it's great if all the softwares you need are in the repo, but if it's not there then you're gonna get a big headache.



Having both KDE and Gnome is a waste of resource, in the end both do the same things.

then go ahead and uninstall one which you prefer not to have. the choice is yours, as opposed to being forced to use one interface that MS has decided for you.

true.
though i hate to be the one to explain to the DOTA/SDO ah beng/ah lian when they have problems with games on their linux machine after buying an Acer with Linux instead of Windows for their usual MSoffice assignments and games

Maybe, just this morning I was playing with Kubuntu 8.10 on Virtual Box and it says it's got "updates", and it was trying to download well over 200 MBs of libraries. I didn't have the patience for that and cancelled it, and then went back to PCLinuxOS. And that doesn't even have anything to do with GNOME.


The repositories are the annoying things, not the desktop environment.


Windows desktop is customizable too.

it is but the overheads are way higher than linux

well...im interested to try linux..
d problem is, which distro should i try?

ubuntu Gnome or KDE?
fedora?
opensuse?

anyone can give some opinions?

1. ubuntu gnome has a cleaner interface than the kde version. also, the kde version's wifi has a bug.
2. fedora is known for its cutting edge softwares. it can be unstable/buggy but you can get newer softwares compared to other distro such as ubuntu. Anyhow, the recently released version (fedora 11 Leonidas) is not bad.
3. opensuse is probably the best if you like kde

For trialists, I always recommend linux mint 7. it is based off ubuntu but it has better start menu (IMHO), as well as all the codecs, flash, etc pre-installed except ati and nvidia drivers. Remember to choose the Main Edition.

it means unlike ubuntu, fedora and opensuse, you can start playing all of your musics, videos and youtube right away. ati and nvidia drivers have to be installed over the internet

1. Linux Mint (based on Ubuntu but is more complete as a desktop replacement for Windows)
2. Ubuntu (based on Debain is very user friendly and Mac users will feel quite at home)
3. PCLINUXOS (KDE's answer to Mint)
4. OpenSUSE (IMHO quite well put together however coming from a big vendor some grey areas which might be illegal aren't included thus a big download/update if u want it to have the same functions of Mint)
5. Fedora (when u get abit more adventurous)