LinuxQuestions.org
Review your favorite Linux distribution.
Go Back   LinuxQuestions.org > Forums > Non-*NIX Forums > General
User Name
Password
General This forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!

Notices

Reply
 
LinkBack Search this Thread
Old 05-11-2011, 04:31 PM   #991
sundialsvcs
Guru
 
Registered: Feb 2004
Location: SE Tennessee, USA
Distribution: Gentoo, LFS
Posts: 5,051

Rep: Reputation: 954Reputation: 954Reputation: 954Reputation: 954Reputation: 954Reputation: 954Reputation: 954Reputation: 954

Here's my two cents...

(1) A digital computer is (just...) a machine. It lives in a world of "ones and zeroes, nothing more or less." It does everything that it does, based purely on "yes or no, and nothing in-between" decisions. It does not care in the slightest what operating-system it's running.

(2) For some inexplicable reason known only to Redmond (and, I daresay, to Peter Norton), the Windows operating system was shipped to millions of end-users with its (quite formidable!) security framework turned off. Yes, Virginia, even though it possesses a role-based security model that would put Linux to shame, millions of people bought "Home Edition" versions of Windows in which ... not only was "everyone an administrator," but it was intentionally difficult for "everyone" to be otherwise!

Translation: "Not only are we going to send you out there with your pants down ... we're going to make it extremely difficult for you to put your pants on!"

(3) Neither Linux nor Macintosh OS/X "walk on water." The only difference is ... their security models, such as they are, are turned on.

(4) Malware writers are lazy. They know that there are millions of accessible computers out there that are bare-butt unprotected, so they target them. As a result, OS/X and Linux systems look pretty ... but only because the cat-burglars have decided, "if the door is locked, don't bother ... just go on to the next house."

(5) Security is a process, not a product (and certainly not an operating-system). I see this every day when I check-in to a hotel and happen to notice dozens of Windows and OS/X shares exposed by people who are taking systems "on the road" that are configured to run on (supposedly...) "protected" office networks.
 
Old 05-14-2011, 01:41 AM   #992
tiredofbilkyyaforallican
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2010
Location: 3rd rock from the sun
Distribution: LMDE/Peppermint/Mint 9,&10/along with a few others
Posts: 152

Rep: Reputation: 22
Quote:
Originally Posted by brianL View Post
They're probably Steve Ballmer.
Nah even Steve isn't quite as stupid as these two seem to be! Maybe they are Andrea Borman LOL
 
Old 06-19-2011, 11:46 PM   #993
hedron
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2009
Location: NYC
Distribution: Slackware, Bluewhite
Posts: 211

Rep: Reputation: 21
My biggest issue with Win7 is the obnoxious memory hog it is. I have 4GBs of RAM and that's still not enough!? I constantly get out of memory errors. If it weren't for that one issue I wouldn't really have much of a problem with it. Linux seems quite happy on my laptop, which has a mere 1GB of RAM. Although, I did get it to slow to a halt tonight. So, maybe Win7 isn't that bloated after all.

The main two issues I have with linux are the following:

1) Applications that just don't work in Linux. For example, websites that use Silverlight just don't work in Linux. True, there is moonlight, but that just does not work for the websites I use. Then there's doc and docx. Sure, Open Office works well, but it's an awkward conversion. doc files just don't look the same in both OO and MS Office. They print out differently and I hesitate to send some company my resume in a doc format, which is usually required, when it is saved by OO for fear it might come out all garbled on their end.

2) Everything in Linux must be configured. Everything. This is a double edged sword. If it wasn't highly configurable, Linux wouldn't have its edge. On the other hand, I just want to use my computer. I don't want to futz around configuring every last thing. This is the main reason I left for Win7. Win7 installs and everything just works. Really. I'm not just saying that and I don't work for MS. I don't even own their stock.

If it weren't for these issues, Linux would not be confined to my server.

I'm curious to know how other linux users deal with these two issues.
 
Old 06-20-2011, 04:21 AM   #994
Noway2
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2007
Distribution: Ubuntu 10.10, Slackware 64-current
Posts: 2,120

Rep: Reputation: 776Reputation: 776Reputation: 776Reputation: 776Reputation: 776Reputation: 776Reputation: 776
Quote:
Then there's doc and docx. Sure, Open Office works well, but it's an awkward conversion. doc files just don't look the same in both OO and MS Office. They print out differently and I hesitate to send some company my resume in a doc format, which is usually required, when it is saved by OO for fear it might come out all garbled on their end.
I try to stay away from M$ formats as much as I can, especially their latest and greatest formats. As you said sometimes .doc format is required. In those cases, I hold by breath and fire up the dual booted system with XP and office on it. When it comes down to it, I would rather have the opportunity at the job than stick to my preferred OS. Personally, when it comes to resumes most sites will accept a PDF. Therefore, wrote mine in LaTeX and printed it in .PDf which comes out nicer than .doc anyway. One, possibly little known, secret about Windows and printing is that much of what you see in Office and especially the print preview is heavily tied to your printer drivers, which is something to watch for when you get unexpected results.

Quote:
Everything in Linux must be configured.
This depends somewhat upon choice of distribution and your application. On a sever, almost always yes. That is the nature of server applications. If "one size fit all" we would all be running the same version of Windows with the same browser on the same hardware.

For desktop / laptops, I haven't had this problem so much. There are some distributions, such as Slackware, Arch, and Gentoo that are designed to be highly customized and configured, which is why many choose them. If this is too much for your everyday desires, pick another one. Ubuntu and its variants do a lot of the configuration for you behind the scenes and unless you have weird hardware usually work right out of the box.
 
Old 06-20-2011, 11:04 AM   #995
RedNeck-LQ
Member
 
Registered: Jan 2011
Posts: 83

Rep: Reputation: 11
Quote:
Originally Posted by hedron View Post
The main two issues I have with linux are the following:

1) Applications that just don't work in Linux. For example, websites that use Silverlight just don't work in Linux. True, there is moonlight, but that just does not work for the websites I use. Then there's doc and docx. Sure, Open Office works well, but it's an awkward conversion. doc files just don't look the same in both OO and MS Office. They print out differently and I hesitate to send some company my resume in a doc format, which is usually required, when it is saved by OO for fear it might come out all garbled on their end.

2) Everything in Linux must be configured. Everything. This is a double edged sword. If it wasn't highly configurable, Linux wouldn't have its edge. On the other hand, I just want to use my computer. I don't want to futz around configuring every last thing. This is the main reason I left for Win7. Win7 installs and everything just works. Really. I'm not just saying that and I don't work for MS. I don't even own their stock.

I'm curious to know how other linux users deal with these two issues.
Most people would dual boot window$ and linux to handle the indifference in hardware and software incompatibilities.

I personally use linux exclusively and I sometimes face hurdles, but I don't care -- for me, linux is king. HAHAHA
 
Old 06-21-2011, 12:03 AM   #996
Sumguy
Member
 
Registered: Jul 2010
Location: Rural Kentucky, USA.
Distribution: Debian 7 & CrunchBang
Posts: 229
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 56
As a [now] Linux-only user:

I haven't had much call for anything that a Linux application can not do. If I were in a position where I had to submit a resume and there was no option for alternatives, I wouldn't want the job- as I'd imagine I would be expected to be flexible in an employment situation, and I would expect that my employer be reasonably flexible too. (Guess that's why I'm self-employed)

As far as configuration: Hasn't been an issue for me with Ubuntu. Having the option though is nice.

When I switched to Linux just about a year ago, I was dual-booting with Vista- and pretty much right from the start I'd only return to Windows to use my Magicjack. Since my Magicjack expired in April, I've had no need for Windows.

It's nice not having my 'puter crash- EVER.

It's nice not having my resources hogged.

It's nice not supporting MS's abhorrent business practices; tolerating their snooping and not clicking "yes" to a EULA that makes you and your computer a virtual sharecropper. It's just nice not using Windows. I've had no trouble or need for Windows since I converted...and even if something did arise that would make Windows look appealing, I'd rather just tough it out with Linux- the OS of my choice, than put up with all the MS BS.
 
Old 06-21-2011, 07:02 AM   #997
dalek
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 2,058
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 65
I'm a Linux only user too. Heck, I use Gentoo which is one of the most configurable distros out there. I don't recall having to config much of anything except for network or something like that. I have to do that on windoze to so what else is new.

I can honestly say, I have never bought a M$ product for any of my rigs. I did pick up XP for my ex once but it was hers not mine.

I might also add, I spend more time fussing, sometimes cussing, at windoze. I rarely have any problems with my Linux box. It's my friends I feel sorry for. My brother has said that when I build him a new rig, he's switching to Linux too. Now he does cuss at his rig. lol

 
Old 06-21-2011, 08:02 AM   #998
unixfool
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Northern VA
Distribution: Slackware, Ubuntu, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OS X
Posts: 781
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 157Reputation: 157
I game. A LOT. On Windows operating systems. FPS-type games, as well as some major label flight sims. That is something that Linux currently can't compete with. That aspect isn't even worth debating.

I love Linux but I'm not about to stop gaming for the sake of being obligated to a philosophy. So yeah, I buy MS operating systems and games that run on that system. If I need to access/convert/create MS-like docs, I whip out my work laptop, which has XP and MS Office (I haven't purchased MS Office ever). We also have two other machines in the house that run XP, so I've options. 90% of my machines run Linux or BSD, though (they serve).

I also thought I saw someone mention that Win7 is memory-intensive. In comparison to what? Vista?? I guess I don't have that problem since I max out my RAM anyways (it helps my games load quicker and there's less issue with swap). Whoever said that might want to assess what they're running in the background. Just sayin'...
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:27 AM   #999
DragonM15
Member
 
Registered: Sep 2003
Location: USA
Distribution: Slackware (Multiple Versions)
Posts: 455

Rep: Reputation: 31
Games are really the only reason (in my opinion) that Windows is still around period. I will agree that sometimes documents in openoffice will turn out different if you open them in M$ Office, however that is what you get when M$ makes the standard and change it every few years. I would also like to point out that OpenOffice had full support for docx files long before M$ released an update to any of their previous office suites to even open docx files. I will also agree that Win7 is a memory hog, not to the extent of Vista, but that is because of how Vista was designed (to cache EVERYTHING). Needless to say, I ran Vista for less than a week due to its garbage performance. But I guess thats what I get for wanting a system that makes the most out of what it has. My server has 1GB of RAM. It never gets above 32MB of used memory. My desktop has 8GB, but it never gets over 1GB used (linux). My Win7 box starts by using 1.5GB with a fresh install. The best part is the Windows Task Manager that even after clicking 'Show processes for all users', still doesnt add up to the amount of memory used Oh well, I will get off my soap box. All in all I do use windows, but purely for gaming (and netflix). It plays games well, but that is purely because those games were built for it. At the same point, games that were designed for linux work very well also.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 10:48 AM   #1000
unixfool
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Northern VA
Distribution: Slackware, Ubuntu, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OS X
Posts: 781
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 157Reputation: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonM15 View Post
Games are really the only reason (in my opinion) that Windows is still around period.
I definitely don't agree with that, and I also realize that that's your opinion. An objective observation: If you take all the gaming systems out of the equation, you'll probably find that most corporate offices use MS operating systems, as well as many server farms. Gotta factor in the moms and pops that are used to Windows OSs and don't want change, as well as kids/teens. As much as I want to advocate for Linux, I'm not entirely stupid or a fanatic (no intended insult) about where MS stands when compared to Linux. I'm posting this from my work laptop right now, which is running Windows XP. 90% of our workstations are running Windows-based OSs. The last 3-4 jobs I had were similar. I believe that may not be the case everywhere, but I'm pretty sure that the percentage is high that a given company will probably be utilizing Windows, if not exclusively, then pretty close to it. We have a lot of Linux-based systems but our Windows-based system count dwarfs our Linux system count. And I work for an extremely large company.

As much as Linux fans love to hate MS, MS apparently serves a purpose(s) (I don't particularly care about the purpose(s) itself at this point), otherwise, people wouldn't be using MS software.

I use both OSs because in some cases I need MS software. The same goes for Linux. Both have their faults. I sometimes don't want to spend time configuring this or that in Linux. Sometimes I just want the **** to work. I don't want to have to run Wine or its equivalents (nor VMWare). When I feel that I want Linux, I've Linux systems to use, readily available. When I want stability or need to do something that may require a robust operating system, I go Linux.

I love Linux and will never have a problem using it. My wife does, though. She doesn't want to have to learn a whole new way of using a computer system. My kids are the same. I respect that and don't push it on them. I'm secure in my knowledge that while I love Linux, other people don't. There's nothing wrong with that. And if it is, ignorance is bliss, I guess.

I'm just sayin'...

Last edited by unixfool; 06-23-2011 at 01:49 PM.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 01:29 PM   #1001
dalek
Senior Member
 
Registered: Jul 2003
Location: Mississippi USA
Distribution: Gentoo
Posts: 2,058
Blog Entries: 2

Rep: Reputation: 65
I can agree with a lot of that but want to point out one thing. Most people don't know there is a alternative to M$ other than Apple. I talk to people, some are computer folks, and they are like 'what is Linux'? I have talked to some regular M$ users and they think Linux is some kind of program. I don't think they even know what a OS is other than M$.

Some of it is ignorance.

 
Old 06-23-2011, 02:02 PM   #1002
honeybadger
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2007
Location: India
Distribution: Slackware (mainly) and then a lot of others...
Posts: 847

Rep: Reputation: Disabled
My 2¢.
Computers are for computing.
If you want to play games why not buy a xbox or something that would give you _real_ gaming experience?
 
Old 06-23-2011, 02:06 PM   #1003
PrinceCruise
Member
 
Registered: Aug 2009
Location: /Universe/Earth/India/Pune
Distribution: Slackware14.1 x64(Workstation), Antix MX-14 x32(Netbook), CentOS5/6 (Servers)
Posts: 650

Rep: Reputation: 78
Quote:
Originally Posted by DragonM15 View Post
Games are really the only reason (in my opinion) that Windows is still around period.
Any justification sir?
3 one of the big data-center environments of USA I've worked in last 3 years, had way more Windows servers (read stable servers) than my beloved Linux and *nix boxes. I know what's the reason behind that BUT gaming is certainly not the case.
 
Old 06-23-2011, 02:07 PM   #1004
unixfool
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Northern VA
Distribution: Slackware, Ubuntu, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OS X
Posts: 781
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 157Reputation: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by dalek View Post
I can agree with a lot of that but want to point out one thing. Most people don't know there is a alternative to M$ other than Apple. I talk to people, some are computer folks, and they are like 'what is Linux'? I have talked to some regular M$ users and they think Linux is some kind of program. I don't think they even know what a OS is other than M$.

Some of it is ignorance.

I think most people don't care, as long as they have a working system. These are the people that take their systems to Best Buy or any major computer store that is local to them and have them perform basic maintenance and/or troubleshooting. They treat their systems like black box appliances. It's usually the power users that flock to Linux...that, and the open-minded people. I've not seen any Linux user that doesn't like to tinker somewhat with a system.

I used to have an Eagle Talon, which was considered a sports car awhile back. I joined a mailing list that had maybe 300 subscribers that loved to tinker on their Talons (and Eclipses and Lasers...same car, different branding) to make them sportier/faster. They would hack the holy hell out of their cars' components, engine management system included. These guys never understood that they were niche and that they didn't represent the whole population or even a major percentage. They assumed that everyone person on the continent cared about Talons and such cars and complained when Mitsubishi wouldn't cater to their needs to add this or that component. Mitsubishi's thoughts were that most of their consumers weren't racers or hotrodders...they just wanted something sporty. This is a similar thing with computers. We, the computer users that use Linux, do not represent the whole. We'd like to, yeah, but we don't. Until we do or until we have a majority stake, we won't see much progress, IMO. There has to be demand.

This is probably a marketing issue, also. When's the last time you saw a bonifide Linux commercial?
 
Old 06-23-2011, 02:16 PM   #1005
unixfool
Member
 
Registered: May 2005
Location: Northern VA
Distribution: Slackware, Ubuntu, FreeBSD, OpenBSD, OS X
Posts: 781
Blog Entries: 8

Rep: Reputation: 157Reputation: 157
Quote:
Originally Posted by SilverBack View Post
My 20„4.
Computers are for computing.
If you want to play games why not buy a xbox or something that would give you _real_ gaming experience?
That's just a very wrong assumption. Xbox gameplay is quite different than gameplay on a PC. In comparison of the two, the PC is the REAL gaming tool. You can't customize an Xbox like you can a PC, for one. Ever add 8GB of RAM to an Xbox? How about upgrading a vid card in an Xbox? The control aspects are quite different, also. If there were a game that were more universal (say, a game that accepts both Xbox and PC systems), the PC owner would positively own an Xbox player. And now many flight sims have you seen for Xbox??? Flight sims are serious resource hogs and usually require beefy systems. Sorry man...you just can't compare the two. And the thing is, I've an Xbox, a Wii, and a PS3. Neither of those three compare to a PC when it comes to gaming...at all. The difference is massively huge.

I'd like to know how you define "_real_ gaming experience".

Last edited by unixfool; 06-23-2011 at 02:17 PM.
 
  


Reply

Tags
64bit, cloud, linux, microsoft, windows


Thread Tools Search this Thread
Search this Thread:

Advanced Search

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is Off
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are On
Refbacks are Off


Similar Threads
Thread Thread Starter Forum Replies Last Post
LXer: Tutorial: Four Easy Fun Useful Things You Can Do With Linux LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-30-2008 11:41 PM
LXer: KDE 4: The Shiny New Linux (and Windows) Desktop LXer Syndicated Linux News 0 09-17-2007 06:10 PM
media server or other fun things. doralsoral Linux - Software 1 11-05-2005 07:55 AM
most fun & excited things about Linux woranl Linux - General 2 07-27-2004 08:28 PM


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 03:17 AM.

Main Menu
My LQ
Write for LQ
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute content, let us know.
Main Menu
Syndicate
RSS1  Latest Threads
RSS1  LQ News
Twitter: @linuxquestions
identi.ca: @linuxquestions
Facebook: linuxquestions Google+: linuxquestions
Open Source Consulting | Domain Registration