Why are you thinking of getting linux?
Does your present OS do everything you want from it? If so, stick with it.
Don't go switching to linux because it is in and cool
Linux is ideal to run on a machine you cannot see. Somewhere in a rack in a serverroom. Perfect. It can handle many users at the same time, there are perfect http-servers, databases and development-tools for it.
As a desktop OS... It's not finished yet. Many have tried their ultimate best to make it look and feel like windows (Yes they did, says something, doesn't it?
) but it's still rough around the edges. Personally I find it unworkable, everything takes twice the amount of time, nothing is completely compatible and Adobe still hasn't ported Photoshop to it, they probably never will.( and gimp really isn't anywhere in the same league as photoshop ).
For games, I would leave it alone too.
I always have to laugh when people immediately start about emulating their old OS. Why are you even considering switching? If you paint a Volkswagen Beetle like a Porsche, it still won't be a Porsche. Why sell the Porsche for a Volkswagen?
Emulating costs processor power, even an emulator that is emulating a machine that isn't doing anything.
It's not all bad, but if you're only looking in to it because you are interested, I would say, don't burn your ships behind you just yet. Try it a year. Then decide.
If you're just thinking of switching because:
a) you heard it was better
b) you hear it's free
c) A linux zealot convinced you to
d) You're an open source salon socialist...
Don't do it.
a) It's better for some things, find out first if these are the things you need.
b) If your time costs something, linux is not free, it consumes extra time learning,
installing and maintaining
c) After you converted, the zealot will be gone and you will be cursing the stars
alone if you can't convince the thing to do what you want it to
d) Salon socialists discuss a better world from the safety of their wealth. A good
open source salon socialist should write beautiful articles about open source
on a registered version of Microsoft Office
Sorry about sounding negative here. You'll probably get a lot of very positive sounding advice. I have worked with the OS for almost 10 years now. I've come to hate it. It and the people who preach it. They all seem to have distorted views on what 'easy', 'usable' and 'userfriendly' means.
(easy does not mean: "Read a book the size of the bible first before doing anything", it's closer to, "Try what feels natural, the interface shows the way and warns if you do something irrevokable")
a2ps, an application that translates anything to postscript (so you can spool it to a postscript printer).
If you feed it an ascii file, it will turn it into a postscript file that shows the ascii-text. This without adding options to the commandline (because it is default behaviour)
However, if your ascii textfile is an HTML file, a2ps thinks it needs to be smart and tries to push it to a browser first to render the HTML. You would expect the default behaviour here too to be just to turn the text to postscript. It will still do that, but you'll have to add commandline options.
This kind of inconsistent behaviour is not uncommon.
( and if anyone cares to explain from the manual-page of 'find' what the difference between 'modify' and 'change' is... You wonder if -atime shouldn't be documented as 'alter'
regardless of what you decide