On 29 October 2013 09:34, Laurie Brown laurie@brownowl.com wrote:
Why would they go to W8, when you have emphatically and repeatedly stated that new hardware is out of the question? Also, although the same applies in terms of hardware, why not W7? I know a lot of XP users who are very happy with W7, and none who are even a little happy with W8.
Sorry if I wasn't clear.
They have options: upgrade to Linux on the old hardware, or bite the bullet and buy new PCs (or laptops). They are not going to buy new hardware for Linux.
The point about obtaining new hardware elsewhere in this thread (eg a new graphics card if an upgrade broke the Linux install) was about the ability to install it, not the cost of buying it.
Bottom line, that I'm sure many here have experience of: If Windows doesn't work, they'll either blame Microsoft (but put up with it), or just accept it without blaming anyone. If Linux doesn't work they'll blame me and/or Linux and ditch it in favour of Windows. If they try Linux and it causes them problems, all it will do is "validate" their eventual decision to spend money on a Windows PC, even if they don't like the Windows 8 it arrives with. (On the why not W7 question: the PC's we've looked at (at around the £250 mark) are Win8 Home so no option to use Win7.)
Therefore I need to provide as smooth an experience as possible, when their *only* issue with XP is that it is no longer to be updated after April and they have accepted my (valid) warnings that they should do something before then. That and the vulnerability to nasties is causing them concerns, but none of the people I am talking to have been hit particularly hard by a nasty so I'm not sure how high up their priority list that comes.
If/when they are established Linux users, all sorts of options open up. But we're not there yet. (My wife, who's had Kubuntu forced on her at home for a while now, is looking for a new laptop and has already said she wants it to be dual-boot, which is progress!)
It seems to me that you're going around in circles, constantly telling yourself that whatever has been suggested won't work, and moving the goal posts. Maybe you should set out in detail the criteria and parameters, and if, as it appears, it turns out that you want the moon on a stick, bring some compromise to bear...
OK, I'll try, and if I want the moon on a stick I'm open to that criticism...
(a) Needs to run on their existing hardware (and at a sensible speed, obviously) (b) Needs to be easy to use for an XP user. (Pretty much a given with all options except perhaps Ubuntu/Unity and maybe Gnome 3 which are a bit "too" different.) (c) Needs to not need any re-installs in the near future. In-place upgrades are fine as long as they meet criteria (a) and (b) above. (d) Preferable: Easy for me to maintain, which really means .deb based, but if I'd let (d) go before (a)-(c)
From this thread, I think (having not yet tried them) that Xubuntu LTS
and LXLE should meet these criteria. Almost certainly the "right" version of Debian will too, although I don't yet know which the "right" version is.
I don't *think* I've contradicted any of those points in this thread, but on the other hand I am an argumentative sod by nature and if that's come out in this thread I apologise - I've gained a lot of useful info from it.
Mark