I’ve been thinking of making the move. Does Linux take advantage of multi-processor cores?
In fact, Linux comprises the vast majority of high-end machines, utilizing multi-core machines.
I would just add that one of the cool things about Linux is the availability of "live" CDs. That is, you go to a Linux site (eg. ubuntu, pclinuxos, mepis, just search for "linux distros" etc.) and download an ISO image of a CD. (note, this'll be big, about 700 MB) Most CD burning programs make it easy to "burn" the ISO image onto a CD. If your machine's BIOS is set up correctly, you can then boot the machine from the CD and try Linux. No muss, no fuss, no commitment of installing it. Yes, it will boot and run significantly slower from the CD than from hard disk. But it is a good way to try it out. They are also handy to have around to "rescue" machines (or at least data from them) that will no-longer boot due to some damage to the OS installed on the hard disk.
Is Linux "the" answer for everyone? Of course not. I'm an admitted Linux fan. However, I also have Windows 7 available to dual boot for the couple of things I cannot do in Linux. (eg. iTunes and TomTom GPS updates) Linux works fine for what I use it for: email, web, photo management of pics from my digital camera, video management (digital video camera), occasional documents and spreadsheets. (open office - also available on windows and OS/X)
I got started using Linux 'cause it's cheap (free) and so am I. ;-) Also, yes, it does run just fine on lower-end machines. Note, now win 7 is pretty good at this too. They both boot and run about equally fast on the same dual-boot machine here. Yes, Linux is nearly immune to virus and other attacks. However, many of the applications you use on it may not be. (eg. FireFox, OpenOffice, etc.) Since I back up my data regularly, I can always just wipe and re-install if need be. So I don't run an anti-virus program on Linux. If you use windows on a regular basis, giving up some $, disk space, and CPU cycles to an anti-virus program is a must.
Anyway, Linux really isn't just for geeks anymore. It is a viable option depending on what your needs are. Maybe not even as your primary OS, but as something you set up just to fool around with and explore/experiment. (ok, that may be a bit geeky)
it also makes use of processor frequency scaling, and gives you a nice little toolbar applet to see it. if your pc processor supports it, when it’s not busy, it will run slower (like 99% of the time when your pc is not doing diddly). if gets busy, it will set the cpu speed faster.
i recently bought a dell optiplex 380 with windows on it: never ran it once, just turned it on and went into “setup” mode, changed boot to dvd, put in my bootable centos install dvd and rebooted, which put me right into centos install.
the centos desktop is very practical and efficient. the system monitor is like windows “task manager” and shows nice low cpu usage even when playing videos. one no longer has to know many unix commands (like top for that one) as there are graphical desktop apps for most everything, even configuration.
i also installed centos on my little dell mini laptop (i like it because the battery lasts many hours). didn’t take long to get my verizon um175 usb wireless modem going.
i can nicely (and securely) transfer files between them with a cruzer usb 32G memory stick; just plug it in and centos sees it and opens up a folder.
but unix is not for someone who wants an easy solution with “zero” effort; it’s not so difficult for me because i have a lengthy IT background.