LinuxQuestions.org

LinuxQuestions.org (/questions/)
-   General (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/)
-   -   The All New Linux vs Windows MegaSuperThread (https://www.linuxquestions.org/questions/general-10/the-all-new-linux-vs-windows-megasuperthread-606415/)

JBailey742 04-22-2006 02:06 PM

The All New Linux vs Windows MegaSuperThread
 
I'm sorry if this does cause any serious arguments and what some call "flamewars".

And, I'm sorry if this is long and boring. No one has to read this or even reply.



I have been a long term Windows user, back when there was a 386 machine, 5 1/4 floppies, and just DOS.
I have used Windows 3.1 and/or 3.11 workgroups, Windows 95, 98, 2000 (a little), ME, and even XP Home Edition.

At some point, I had tried out Mandrake 8.1 or 8.2 and found quite a bit awfully confusing. I didn't know how to do much of anything on there, and figured "If you can't even play CD's, something that simple, forget it."

As time went on, and trying more modern Linux OS's, and asking for help, I am able to understand this more, and know what I was missing as far as not hearing the CD.
I am able to do more, and be more comfortable with this system.
I also find that Linux based OS, seems nicer, as far as layout goes, the sort of programs, and the fact that some types of software has various programs, like more than one paint program, or email, internet, etc.

At first, I was upset with Linux, because I couldn't understand why you have to go through so much b.s. to get anything working.
"Why can't you just click on this icon, and have it install! Why go through terminal or shutdown mode, type in these commands, edit this file, then get it working!!"
Having a more modern Linux OS, more things working, and having help, I have much more patience with Linux now, and I'm currently using it, loving it more than Windows.

With Windows, it seems so bare and expensive compared to Linux.
With Linux, there's spellcheck in messnger, email, even writing in forums, word processors. Granted, Windows can have the same, but with more money, and it doesn't even have the same appeal like Linux.

The real problem, so to speak, is that Windows is so much more well known. Basically all products are designed for Windows. This is one of the reasons most just stick with Windows.
It's all over the place, basically all hardware/software is "Windows", so people use it.
I asked a question in a computer store if they can fix something. I said, Linux based, they said sorry, windows only.

If people care to use Windows, that's fine. I myself, use it some, but I try to be on Linux and learn as much as I can on here.

My greatest fear is, is that being almost everything is "Windows", that just having Linux alone, would be a mistake.
I don't mean to make it sound like using Linux is all bad, or anything.
If my hardware goes out, or there's a program that is "Windows only" and I can't get that new hardware/software going on linux, I'm screwed.

Sorry if this was long and/or pointless. As an ending note, I'm proud of those who had made the linux based OS's easier, and simply better.
Thanks all.

XavierP 04-23-2006 07:00 AM

I have moved this thread to General (where all the other opinion pieces go). I have also renamed it and stickied it. Any further posts like this will be merged into the new "Linux vs Windows Opinions Megathread"

vharishankar 04-23-2006 07:21 AM

Totally offtopic: I can see this topic title from the main forum index, but when I get into the General forum, this topic doesn't seem to appear.

Edit: Sorry, didn't notice this has been made a sticky. :)

sundialsvcs 04-23-2006 11:33 AM

I hope that, as variants of this sort of thread continue :rolleyes: people will start trying to think of ways of bringing some real, useful content into them.

"Bad-mouthing your competitor" is not only not going to make your competitor go away; it's in downright bad form. What we really need to talk about is how Windows can learn from Linux and how Linux can learn from Windows and how all of this mish-mash of software is supposed to evolve to continue to meet ... customer's needs as well as our own.

The computing world at-large "discovered" Linux a long time ago. They poured a lot of work into it because Windows wasn't meeting their needs (and/or running on their platforms). Now things like Apple OS/X-86 are, in a way, a simple fruition of those things. Unix, and Linux, are coming into the main stream. Here it comes ... But are we ready? If not, why not, and what do we do about it. What are the competitors doing; are they right or wrong. Should we vilify them or imitate them, and if so with what. These are useful threads to "sticky" here.

JBailey742 04-25-2006 10:55 PM

Wow, I'm amazed this is/was a sticky. Sort of back on topic though; I know this so called bad mouthing isn't going to drive them away. I dont think I was really being out of line. I'm just stating my opinion. Some things are nice on Windows, others not, same with Linux.
One mentioned though, how each OS can learn from each other. I'm sure they both are getting ideas with each other, in some form. I see Windows has IE 7 beta now, with tabs, like Linux.
The bummer side is, we can't improve windows ourselves, not saying it's windows fault we can't. we just cant.
I'm sorry if I bad mouthed Windows. I kept it within reason though, basically saying why I pretty much switched to linux.

OldSeaDog 04-26-2006 01:23 PM

I am new on this site, although I have used and been a member of many similar sites over the past 35 years I have been around computing - I hate to admit it but I go back to 110 baud telex terminals, paper tape and like that. During my years I have seen many similar themes. In this case the differences are at the very least dramatic, and while I appreciate sundialsvcs point - it is easy to fall into the trap of negativity that benefits no one - it is unreasonable to expect everyone to maintain a high tone and positive spin, particularly given the views that they have expressed in the past about us and the whole concept Linux represents, which directly challenges the core of their business.

I come from just outside Ottawa, Canada and we have a local computing magazine here called the Monitor. They have a Linux columnist called Paul Godin, and Paul can include a sense of humour among his many gifts. He started his April column as follows:

"Yep, I'm done... No more Linux. I';m tired of not paying for my fair share of anti-virus tools, licensing fees, slow response, costly office suites, programming tools, Web page editors and all that other stuff. Yes sir, no more free ride for me. I really want to support Microsoft, now, I really want to pump up their bank account, punish myself financially and break my back to pay for every upgrade and add-on they tell me I should be paying for. I just want to wallow in DLL hell...

Okay, okay... Just having a little fun with you! After all, it is April, isn't it?"

Now that we have had a little fun, let's head for the high ground, as sundialsvcs suggests.

OldSeaDog
I want to die in peace and tranquility like my grandfather did, not screaming in terror like the passengers in his car.

slantoflight 04-26-2006 02:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBailey742
Wow, I'm amazed this is/was a sticky.

Same here. I would've thought there was no comparison. I mean everyone knows Windows is better, right?

Vagrant 04-27-2006 11:22 PM

I think this notion of "Windows can learn from Linux and Linux can learn from Windows" is all "We are the World" rubbish. Windows can learn how to not be a shady monopolizing megacorporation from Linux. Many of the so-called "problems" with Linux are due to ethically questionable business practices and other ills brought on by the proprietary elite.

hand of fate 04-28-2006 10:54 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by JBailey742
I see Windows has IE 7 beta now, with tabs, like Linux.

Linux itself has tabs? Not as far as I know!

Some programs for Linux use tabs, but then so do some programs for Windows. Tabs are in no way a "Linux thing". In fact, most of the programs that IE is copying the tabs from are multi-platform programs.

weibullguy 04-29-2006 09:56 AM

Mr. Gates and Co. are business men. Mr. Torvalds and Co. are not. Linux and/or the distros need a marketing agency to take the product to the people.

Individually, we can really only do it one person at a time. I've converted both my kids and one guy at work. The next person who has a "broken" Windows machine is getting Linux...unless I want the hardware, of course.

aysiu 04-29-2006 12:08 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Arow
Mr. Gates and Co. are business men. Mr. Torvalds and Co. are not. Linux and/or the distros need a marketing agency to take the product to the people.

Are you trying to tell me the executives at Novell and Red Hat are not businesspeople?

Vagrant 04-29-2006 03:10 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by aysiu
Are you trying to tell me the executives at Novell and Red Hat are not businesspeople?


Well, and IBM had a marketing campaign going, "The Boy Called Linux" or whatever it was.

peter_89 04-29-2006 04:14 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vagrant
Well, and IBM had a marketing campaign going, "The Boy Called Linux" or whatever it was.

Those were cool commercials, but you could tell they were aimed more towards the enterprise sector more than the general public. I can remember, when my mom saw those she thought Linux was a new kind of laptop.

Bruce Hill 04-30-2006 07:52 AM

IMO Microsoft is a company designed by a criminal to dominate the computer industry. It has been well documented by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, D.C. - the seat of American government) that Microsoft is criminal. Bill Gates 'got his start' by stealing computer time from Harvard, selling a company a hacked version of it's own software and cheating both them and his partner (Paul what's his name) in the process. Bill Gates has established a MO of lying, cheating, and stealing. When a real threat arrives against his poorly-coded Windows OS, or anything else Microsoft has, he first tries to buy out the competition. If that doesn't work, he uses whatever means necessary to destroy that company; the main one being suing them in court. Because he owns so many lawyers and judges, and has so much money, he usually succeeds in either forcing the company to sell to him, or putting them out of business because they can't pay the court and legal fees to defend themselves. This is not an unfounded rant, but facts which are verifiable.

In most countries of the world, Bill Gates would be locked in jail and the key thrown away. Why not America? Trace his money trail and see how many politicians he owns.

When it comes down to it, there are software packages designed for all operating systems. We have choices, and I dare say there's nothing that can't be used in the OS you choose. I happen to prefer Adobe InDesign for desktop publishing, and Adobe Photoshop for image editing. There is nothing comparable to InDesign in open source. There is GIMP which isn't a substitute for Photoshop, but will work for most things. So for these two apps, and a few more, I installed QEMU in Slackware. Then I installed a Windows OS which I purchased prior to using Slackware in QEMU. Then I installed those apps only designed for Windows in Windows inside QEMU. So now I can use the superior software that is only designed for Bill Gates inferior OS in the much superior Slackware Linux OS -- without having to reboot.

If open source applications comparable in quality were available, I'd never let anything from Microsoft touch a hard drive of mine again. But at this time, there are professional services for which I use those apps, and no suitable replacement for my needs.

I'd like nothing better than to see Microsoft's monopoly dissolved as AT&T's was -- and Bill Gates jailed for his criminal activities. But as long as Bill owns the politicians, it's not going to happen.

Vagrant 04-30-2006 12:39 PM

Well, I'm no fan of Microsoft but I think some of those points aren't really accurate Chinaman. One thing, when we attack the proprietary companies, we must ensure our arguments are on point, lest we come off as fringe fanatics.

Bruce Hill 04-30-2006 12:57 PM

Do your research and you will find out they are correct.

slackist 04-30-2006 03:11 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Chinaman
IMO Microsoft is a company designed by a criminal to dominate the computer industry. It has been well documented by the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (Washington, D.C. - the seat of American government) that Microsoft is criminal. Bill Gates 'got his start' by stealing computer time from Harvard, selling a company a hacked version of it's own software and cheating both them and his partner (Paul what's his name) in the process. Bill Gates has established a MO of lying, cheating, and stealing. When a real threat arrives against his poorly-coded Windows OS, or anything else Microsoft has, he first tries to buy out the competition. If that doesn't work, he uses whatever means necessary to destroy that company; the main one being suing them in court. Because he owns so many lawyers and judges, and has so much money, he usually succeeds in either forcing the company to sell to him, or putting them out of business because they can't pay the court and legal fees to defend themselves. This is not an unfounded rant, but facts which are verifiable.

In most countries of the world, Bill Gates would be locked in jail and the key thrown away. Why not America? Trace his money trail and see how many politicians he owns.

When it comes down to it, there are software packages designed for all operating systems. We have choices, and I dare say there's nothing that can't be used in the OS you choose. I happen to prefer Adobe InDesign for desktop publishing, and Adobe Photoshop for image editing. There is nothing comparable to InDesign in open source. There is GIMP which isn't a substitute for Photoshop, but will work for most things. So for these two apps, and a few more, I installed QEMU in Slackware. Then I installed a Windows OS which I purchased prior to using Slackware in QEMU. Then I installed those apps only designed for Windows in Windows inside QEMU. So now I can use the superior software that is only designed for Bill Gates inferior OS in the much superior Slackware Linux OS -- without having to reboot.

If open source applications comparable in quality were available, I'd never let anything from Microsoft touch a hard drive of mine again. But at this time, there are professional services for which I use those apps, and no suitable replacement for my needs.

I'd like nothing better than to see Microsoft's monopoly dissolved as AT&T's was -- and Bill Gates jailed for his criminal activities. But as long as Bill owns the politicians, it's not going to happen.


What he said ^^ .

Amuro-Ray2020 05-01-2006 01:16 AM

It's not that one is better than the other, it's just that they both take into consideration the needs of different kinds of users. Some users that are inexperienced require Windows to get anything done, or need it for ease of use. Other users require Linux because they need to do certain specialized tasks, or require more advanced configuration/usage of available resources. In fact, it practically comes down to the basic 'opposing forces' idea, yin and yang, good and evil (Not that Microsoft's operating systems are inherently evil, or that Linux is beyond doubt good. But I'll be the first to admit that there are times when my system (In Windows or Linux) gives me errors that make me want to believe it is possessed by some satanic ritualist and needs to be exorcised. We've all been there, I'm sure.)

Bill Gates has always been someone who wants money for his software, and that's fine. He has every right to profit from his operating system. Though, whether we admit it or not, his operating system has spurred the growth of Linux. While I do believe we are moving toward a future that will see Linux as the predominate operating system (mainly due to China's useage) it is also apparent that Windows isn't going anywhere anytime soon. So rather than be forced to choose, go with the flow and dual boot. ;)

Building on what Vagrant just said, it's better to debate the other side's good points respectfully, rather than to insult them outright with their bad points and misgivings. Microsoft has done bad things, but their effect on the economy is noticeable. They have created jobs, so don't forget the good things they've done.

SpecHackers 05-01-2006 10:56 AM

I am big fan of microsoft, and i know the M$ is better than linux. I can prove you in results, security factor is important and microsoft is tough customer in it.

well i am vinoth from SpecHackers team, and i am network administrator and security expert working for a company,

aysiu 05-01-2006 12:07 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Amuro-Ray2020
Some users that are inexperienced require Windows to get anything done

I haven't found this to be the case at all. People who are inexperienced with computers find Windows just as confusing as (if not more confusing than) Linux distributions.

It's people who are used to Windows who find that they "require" Windows in order to get anything done.

Amuro-Ray2020 05-01-2006 03:33 PM

That's true as well, but usually any user these days has more experience with Windows than Linux. You'd have to hit them pretty young in order to get them into Linux before Windows. It's just that Windows is everywhere; schools, businesses, even on most computers available for purchase.

pdeman2 05-01-2006 04:10 PM

From my experience, it seems most of the people who know Windows pretty well are willing to try Linux, but then there's the many people who don't really know much about Windows either. I would say that not much less than half of the people I know can only browse the web, write documents, and turn on and off the computer. Heck, some of the people I know can't even turn a computer on!

I think that if developers want Linux to get more exposure, they need to consider the people who could care less about computers, and just want to write a document or something. I know that all these things can be done in Linux just as easy, if not easier than in Windows, but Linux also comes with many other things that probably the average user doesn't need or want. I think that the general public could benefit from distributions where they can just click a couple of buttons, and then they are ready to browse the web or whatever. Perhaps there could be distributions specifically designed to do only the tasks that the average person wants to do. A lot of people hear about Linux, and they are just scared of it because there are just too many nooks and crannies in it. I know, a proprietary desktop distribution would be pretty crappy, but it just might be what the public wants. Right now, Microsoft is the one selling the crappy proprietary distribution.

sundialsvcs 05-01-2006 04:15 PM

"Windows is everywhere," yes, but Linux is in a whole lot more places than you realize. There's an excellent chance that most of the electronic devices now in your pocket are running Linux, or very soon will be.

Like most techno-monopolies, the "assured future" of Windows depends upon the one thing that never, ever happens: constancy in hardware. As long as "a word processor" was "an expensive machine that you bought and put into your law-office and used for no other purpose," Wang had it made. The personal-computer blew them out of existence. Now, as long as "the personal computer" is "an Intel-x86 based machine that fits on your desk or sits in your lap and runs Windows," Microsoft "has it made." But that's changing fast, and it won't change back.

Suddenly, there are lots and lots of types of hardware that "your application" might need to run on, all of them different except for one thing: they all run Unix/Linux. That's big. That's really big. That's the Rosetta stone. (Or maybe the Philosopher's Stone...)

And this is what makes the OS/X-86 project from Apple so enormously important: Unix has arrived on the Intel-x86, Microsoft's own turf, and it's not being led by a bunch of scruffy hackers with no social skills (bear with me...), it's being led by the company that owns music right now. An absolutely household name; a sexy, cool name. This is something that everyone, including Wall Street, can understand perfectly.

Doesn't matter that, with Linux, "Unix arrived on the x86 a long time ago..." Wall Street can nod at a college kid in the icy north who did miracles in his dorm-room, but Wall Street can't understand that. Can't see money in it. But they sure can see money in an ambitious new project that arrived on-time while Microsoft so completely fumbled Longhorn/Vista. Apple's accomplishment encourages investors to see that "it's the software, stupid!" And Linux, of course, can come right along for the ride.

Linux started the talk. Apple dazzlingly proved them right. And Microsoft's in a world of hurt. All without any court doing a single thing. When the market sees a better mousetrap, you can't stop the tide.

Vagrant 05-01-2006 04:40 PM

I don't really see your "Apple Connection." Apple has ripped off the BSD Community. Ok. I get it. But so what?

sundialsvcs 05-01-2006 07:36 PM

Apple hasn't "ripped off" anyone. C'mon...

Look at it like Wall Street does: you're not a geek (you have servants for that). You want to know when someone has something new and different; you know you don't have to understand all the techhie details. "Apple" is, by now, a name that you know... everyone knows it now. And what they did, seemingly without effort, was to port their entire system to a new processor. "It's still a Mac."

... Meanwhile, Microsoft gutted all the nifty new features out of the (already late) Longhorn, released it belatedly as Vista, and promised Longhorn "real soon now." You begin to wonder if they can deliver. And, no matter, you smell money. When company-X does everything right and company-Y blows it, there is probably money to be made. Especially if company-Y was the reigning monarch. And that's what happened. Apple did something radical, on-time, when Microsoft proved itself unable to do what ought to be a very mundane thing, "yet again."

And here's what's different: thanks to the iPod, "Apple is a name that Wall Street knows and loves." Steve Jobs can walk on water, because he delivers Earnings. And, in a stroke, he's legitimized everything that Linux has been saying for years. No college kid in Finland, accompanied by no-matter-how-many brilliant unwashed geeks, could have accomplished that impression.
  • AAPL has the numbers. Capitalization. Earnings per share. Pixie dust. The trader observes that "my teenage son wears an iPod everywhere he goes."
  • Microsoft totally missed its profit-projections in the same period and is babbling excuses. "Gee, I don't think my Blackberry runs Windows, come to think of it..."

The notion that "Windows is supreme" is finally shaken because the notion that "a personal computer equals thus-and-so and need be nothing else" is dispelled. Linux and Unix have their opportunity at last.

Vagrant 05-01-2006 07:51 PM

I say again:

I don't really see your "Apple Connection." Apple has ripped off the BSD Community. Ok. I get it. But so what?

Certainly, Apple has graciously taken BSD source code and donated very little back to the community. Wow, "Rendezvous." It makes no contributions, even to the Samba project, for which without it Apple would be irrelevant. This goes for more projects than simply BSD and Samba however.

Nevertheless, you haven't really made a point. What has Apple done that "no kid in Finland could have accomplished" that has any relevance to this discussion. Apple has stolen more from the Open Source community than any kid in Botswana could ever dream to, what's your point?

You keep going on and on about some mystical Wall Street and these magical fairies that Apple produces but none of it is relevant.

How does this Apple business have anything to do with Linux? If you think Apple is somehow not a proprietary software company because it rips off an Open Source project and donates nothing back then I think you are mistaken. Microsoft for years used the BSD TCP/IP stack code, so what? Is Microsoft, then, championing the cause of Linux? I,frankly, don't see the connection.

I just can't fathom how DRM, proprietary music formats, vendor lock-in, proprietary hardware, proprietary software, and ripping off the Open Source community further the "cause" of Linux. Perhaps you can enlighten me.

pdeman2 05-01-2006 08:20 PM

I don't think Apple has ripped off BSD at all. BSD is open source, they have the right to use it. It's not like they've ever denied that they use BSD. Also, if Apple never returned anything to the community, then how come they support Darwin so much?

jdog006 05-01-2006 08:34 PM

Windows will fail. I don't know when Linux will overtake Windows. But it WILL happen.

Closed Source software works to the exclusion of everything else. That segregration is the very reason that Windows stands no chance.

Open source software works to the inclusion of everything and everyone, even the people and systems that they were excluded from in the first place. That inclusionary attitude coupled with cutting edge computing advancements guarantees the success of Linux.

Example: Try to read a Linux partition while running Windows. Windows only recognizes Windows.

Try to read a Windows partition while running Linux. Voila, it works like a charm. Linux is versatile enough to recognize and use any filesystem.

That is just one example of the inclusionary attitude that gives Linux the upper hand.

aysiu 05-01-2006 10:45 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by jdog006
Example: Try to read a Linux partition while running Windows. Windows only recognizes Windows.

Not if you have this:
http://fs-driver.org/

suse91pro 05-02-2006 10:44 AM

I started with windows 98se for about 1.5 year the worst i have ever try i have use windowsXP home sp1 for about 2.5 year now with sp2 it is much better when 98 special atfer i added sp2 but not as good as 1 mounth i have with Ubuntu 5.10 i now use Suse 10.0 Evalnut i run it with KDE because in like interfase it look very much like xp home.

suse91pro 05-02-2006 10:49 AM

I started with windows 98se for about 1.5 year the worst i have ever try i have use windowsXP home sp1 for about 2.5 year now with sp2 it is much better when 98 special atfer i added sp2 but not as good as 1 mounth i have with Ubuntu 5.10 i now use Suse 10.0 Eval but i run it with KDE because i like interfase it look very much like
xp home but run much better but i have get get everything to work jet so i stil use Windows XP Home Edition SP2 as my Primary system and Suse 10.0 Eval as my Secondary system.

BinJajer 05-02-2006 10:50 AM

My opinion is simple: the only people that deserve using Windos are the M$ employees. They get paid for doing so. We don't, and I certainly don't wanna pay for such a baptism of bugs and crashes. Believe me, when I launch Win apps in cedega (The cvs version...) they work... much more stable, sometimes faster.

OldSeaDog 05-03-2006 07:13 AM

My What Have We Wrought!
 
This discussion sure is getting complicated, and interesting... :study: A little history lesson might be in order.

I don't know how many of you remember back when the PC revolution took place in the early 80's, but M$ became synonymous with that revolution. Gates and Co. were the Linux and IBM were the M$ - the "Evil Empire" to many hackers and PC revolutionaries. (25 years later, M$ is larger than even IBM back in the day would have foreseen for themselves.) PCs by and large were stand-alone machines running MS-DOS or an equivalent and files travelled by sneakernet. Networking was unheard of in most offices. In time, networks started to pup up - I put my first one in in 1985. Desktops were PC-XTs, our server was a 10MHz AT with 4MB RAM and duplexed 40 MB hard drives. Windows was a joke - Windows 286 anyone?

In time, networks became pervasive in business and M$ wasn't about to let that golden goose escape. NT was foisted on us, and we smiled and took it, right between the eyes! Viruses were around, but nowhere near as bad as today, and as a result, we looked more for prophylactic solutions - we piled virus checkers on top. And, as even more versions of malware surfaced, we piled more malware killers on top, until we now have a very precarious misture of OS and guardians that is at least possibly if not probably at much of the root cause of their current malaise. The hazards of leaving all the ports open by default and then scurrying around plugging them after the fact should be pretty obvious by now.

Notwithstanding the comment from our Indian colleague about Windoze's track record on OS security, we pretty much all know that Windows is porous. M$ discarded all the doors and windows and left just the openings when they put their design together. (No pun was intended, by the way.)

What we need is a way to show people in a very specific and visual way why Windoze is so risky and what they can do about it. We are all smart people, but most of us wouldn't know where to start trying to put together such a case, but some of us do. Do we have any takers on trying to do this? It would be an amazing proof of the power of open source if we were to put together a solid case that is easily understood using its principles. This is something all of us, newbies and veterans alike, technically gifted as programmers or otherwise, can participate in. I will certainly help in any way I can.

Any thoughts?

Maritime 05-04-2006 12:11 AM

I use Linux and like it a lot. But I think that it is completely immature that some users continue to bash Windows and Microsoft.

First of all, I don't know how you use your system, but Windows is NOT usually prone to errors/bugs. I've been using Windows XP for years and never once have I gotten a single fatal error. It froze perhaps once every so often (for no more then about 15 seconds), sure, but does that mean it is an unstable, horrible OS? No, absolutely not. Is Microsoft Internet Explorer its greatest achievement? No, and the company admits that. But it's not like no mistakes were ever made in Linux, and I'm sure no one likes to use every program that Linux offers. For example, I much prefer Firefox over Konqueror. Just like with Linux, you have a choice of web browsers for Windows. Use the one you like best, and if one gives you problems, use another. But please, do not try to glorify Linux by saying Windows "breaks all the time." Because that is just false, unless you abuse it (in which case, of course it would break, just like any other operating system). Does Linux have advantages over Windows? Sure it does, but emphasize them rather then nonexistant Windows faults.

This isn't directed toward anyone in particular, of course. I'm just venting.

pdeman2 05-04-2006 07:43 AM

I think you've been extremely lucky with Windows then. I don't use Windows at all anymore, but when I did, I had a problem just about every time I booted it up.

baldy3105 05-04-2006 10:49 AM

[QUOTE=Maritime]Windows is NOT usually prone to errors/bugs[QUOTE]

"Last Monday, Coverity, in collaboration with Stanford University, announced the results of their analysis of software quality and security of 32 of the most critical and widely used open source projects in the world. The study, which was funded by the Department of Homeland Security, used Coverity's automated defect detection tools to uncover critical software bugs. In general, the analysis showed that open source applications have lower defect rates than proprietary software applications. The average defect rate of the open source applications was 0.434 bugs per 1000 lines of code. This compares with an average defect rate of 20 to 30 bugs per 1000 lines of code for commercial software, according to Carnegie Mellon University's CyLab Sustainable Computing Consortium."
http://www.linuxtoday.com/developer/2006031800826OSCYDV

Sorry but the facts speak for themselves.

samuelmp 05-04-2006 12:32 PM

hi guys have alook at why one bloger is in the news claming linux is destroying the world

have alook

http://shelleytherepublican.com/2006...computers.html

and hear

http://www.theregister.co.uk/2006/05/03/shelley_linux/

weibullguy 05-04-2006 12:39 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldSeaDog
I don't know how many of you remember back when the PC revolution took place in the early 80's, but M$ became synonymous with that revolution.

Touche! In those days it was wide open and M$ ran with it. We can't fault them for that. It's the same with the second revolution in the early to mid 90's. Three things came together to put the PC in "every" home. The internet craze, reasonably inexpensive hardware, and....M$ Windows. It's not their fault that the opportunity to make money presented itself and they jumped on it.

Quote:

Originally Posted by OldSeaDog
We are all smart people, but most of us wouldn't know where to start trying to put together such a case, but some of us do. Do we have any takers on trying to do this? It would be an amazing proof of the power of open source if we were to put together a solid case that is easily understood using its principles. This is something all of us, newbies and veterans alike, technically gifted as programmers or otherwise, can participate in. I will certainly help in any way I can.

Any thoughts?

I agree wholeheartedly. What OSS needs is a marketing campaign to push further into the desktop, home, business, etc. user market. Backend and power user stuff like servers, databases, compilers, etc. will tend to sell themselves with minimal advertising because the end-user (IT professional) is more discriminating. The key word here is "professional."

I mean, have you ever seen an advertisement for a National Semiconductor LM630 operational amplifier? Probably not, because the engineers looking for a solution requiring an op amp know where to find the information they need. They make a comparison of the LM630 and the uA741 based on technical specifications. If I put that LM630 or uA741 in a cell phone...now I need a marketing campaign because I want to sell it to everyone.

IMHO, Linux is at a point to seriously invade the home market. There's four things that bring me to this conclusion. First, my mother-in-law. She's a first time computer user as of four years ago. She bought an off the shelf box with Windows and I hooked everything up for her. If something stops working or whatever, I gotta go fix it. It wouldn't be any different if she was running Linux and she probably wouldn't know the difference.

Second, I watched my not quite 12-year old son install Debian and the only question he asked was whether the mirror at msu.edu was Michigan State (closest to us). Everything worked for him right away. He doesn't spend a bunch of time fiddling with except to download something with synaptic, try it out, and keep it or uninstall it. Very Windows-like from his viewpoint, except he doesn't have to buy a CD to install the software.

Third, that same son is off the opinion that Linux is more stable than Windows (and GNOME is more stable than K). Point is, the average computer user is able to recognize a performance difference without any knowledge of or concern about the technical underpinnings.

Finally, my niece's Win 2k PC is so infected with viruses, spyware, this-bot, that-bot, whose-bot, etc. that a complete reinstall of the OS is probably the quickest and cleanest solution regardless of whether it's Windows or something else. When I do a needs/use analysis, there's no reason she needs Windows to surf the net, instant message, write a paper for school, and listen to music. Hardware's not that important and her parents can put off a new PC purchase for a few years if I drop Linux on the box.

So, OldSeaDog, I'm not an IT professional and may have nothing to offer, but if you have some thoughts, I'd be willing to help.

Maritime 05-04-2006 04:15 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by baldy3105
Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritime
Windows is NOT usually prone to errors/bugs

"Last Monday, Coverity, in collaboration with Stanford University, announced the results of their analysis of software quality and security of 32 of the most critical and widely used open source projects in the world. The study, which was funded by the Department of Homeland Security, used Coverity's automated defect detection tools to uncover critical software bugs. In general, the analysis showed that open source applications have lower defect rates than proprietary software applications. The average defect rate of the open source applications was 0.434 bugs per 1000 lines of code. This compares with an average defect rate of 20 to 30 bugs per 1000 lines of code for commercial software, according to Carnegie Mellon University's CyLab Sustainable Computing Consortium."
linuxtoday.com/developer/2006031800826OSCYDV

Sorry but the facts speak for themselves.

[Some of the URL is ommited from the quote because I cannot post them in full yet.]

Statistics may be quite decieving. Nevertheless, you're probably right. Stanford University isn't exactly very disputable. Also note that it says propretary software, not just that from Microsoft, but I'm sure Microsoft makes up a good portion of propretary software anyways.

But I still believe that if you use Windows with intelligence, you will not have very many problems at all. Thirty to fourty errors per every one-thousand lines of code didn't make a difference to me, and I'm sure it would be the same way with every knowledgable person that uses Windows. If you have problems with it, there must be a reason.

When people complain about problems in Linux, many people answer that it is most likely because something isn't configured correctly (which, indeed, is probably very true), thus rationalizing the problem. But when was the last time a Linux user tried to configure Windows in order to get it to work properly?

Vagrant 05-04-2006 08:58 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritime
I use Linux and like it a lot. But I think that it is completely immature that some users continue to bash Windows and Microsoft.

First of all, I don't know how you use your system, but Windows is NOT usually prone to errors/bugs. I've been using Windows XP for years and never once have I gotten a single fatal error. It froze perhaps once every so often (for no more then about 15 seconds), sure, but does that mean it is an unstable, horrible OS? No, absolutely not. Is Microsoft Internet Explorer its greatest achievement? No, and the company admits that. But it's not like no mistakes were ever made in Linux, and I'm sure no one likes to use every program that Linux offers. For example, I much prefer Firefox over Konqueror. Just like with Linux, you have a choice of web browsers for Windows. Use the one you like best, and if one gives you problems, use another. But please, do not try to glorify Linux by saying Windows "breaks all the time." Because that is just false, unless you abuse it (in which case, of course it would break, just like any other operating system). Does Linux have advantages over Windows? Sure it does, but emphasize them rather then nonexistant Windows faults.

This isn't directed toward anyone in particular, of course. I'm just venting.

blah blah. You've painted far too rosey a picture of Windows. If your estimation is that machines running Windows generally go "for years" without crashing then you have overgeneralized from too small a sample.

Nevertheless, the comparison to Linux is irrelevant. Windows is proprietary software written by a company which has conducted itself in, at best, a questionable manner. Whether or not you get a kernel panic in a year while not getting a crash in Internet Explorer is just irrelevant.

Furthermore, your "nonexistant Windows faults" is completely laughable. Go find your self a nice Windows forum and see if your hypothesis that Windows has no problems, or generally goes years without problems, is founded.

Vagrant 05-04-2006 09:01 PM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Maritime
But when was the last time a Linux user tried to configure Windows in order to get it to work properly?

Have you ever bothered to look through any of Microsoft's Knowledge Base articles? Many of their supposed solutions require changing magic numbers in the registry, without giving anything in the way of explanation, which may actually educate the user. This just seems quite uninformed.

FrostBot 05-04-2006 11:46 PM

Windows Vs Linux
 
This is some of the funniest shit I've ever read....

http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/mcse2.htm

And here are a few more from the same guy, just as hilarious...

http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/windows_no.htm
http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/...yshootout.html

Maritime 05-05-2006 01:49 AM

Quote:

Originally Posted by Vagrent
Furthermore, your "nonexistant Windows faults" is completely laughable.

You're missing the point. I never said that nothing was ever wrong with Windows. All I said was that it seems that some were just making up problems in Windows to make Linux look better. I think that is very immature and just makes the Linux community look bad.

Whether or not Microsoft has conducted itself with questionable business practices is another issue entirely. In fact, they may have. I don't disagree with you on that subject.

All I want is for Linux users to stop bashing Windows by saying it's "error prone," because it usually simply isn't the case. If you disagree with Microsoft's business practices, then all the more power to you. Just focus on bashing their business practices instead of the software.

jlliagre 05-05-2006 01:49 AM

That smart guy is confessing how Windows user spend most of their time ;)

Quoted from http://www.divisiontwo.com/articles/MacMini2.html

When I consider that a good deal of my time is spent running applications like Disk Defragmenter, Scandisk, Norton AV, Windows Update and Ad-Aware--none of which are available for the Mac platform--it doesn't make sense for me to "switch" to a Mac at this time.

ioerror 05-05-2006 06:05 AM

Thanks for the links, rofl... :D

BTW, jlliagre, you appended a colon to the end of the mac link :)

weibullguy 05-05-2006 07:19 AM

Nice!!!

My two favorites...
Quote:

I especially like the four games it comes with - Hearts, FreeCell (so addictive!), Minesweeper, and Solitaire. It's easy to see why XP is considered the ultimate platform for gamers.
and...
Quote:

With Windows XP Home, I have the peace of mind that comes with knowing my habits and activities are being monitored by Microsoft, and my computer's hardware configuration and list of installed software is being stored in a database in Redmond.
This guy's right...I think I'm gonna call the state police and turn myself in for speeding to work this morning.

pixellany 05-05-2006 07:33 AM

This is a tough one.....Let's see if we can figure it out:
1. He makes his living as an MCSE.
2. Microsoft helps people who are MCSEs
Therefor, he might have a motivation to have a slight bias towards Windows???
I KNOW that MS would never incentivize anyone to write such articles.......

dalek 05-05-2006 08:23 AM

Quote:

* Windows versus Linux - Applications and Utilities

I save a lot of time thanks to Windows XP, which brings me to another area where Linux is lacking. As I am sitting here writing this column, my computer is busily defragging my hard drive, running my virus scanner, and I'm being shown a list of all the latest MS security patches that are being remotely installed on my machine today. Why doesn't Linux come with any defragmenting tools or virus scanners or Active Backdoor Update like you get with Windows? These are all must-have features for me. Linux is seriously lacking in Internet utilities as well. No way would I run a Linux operating system if it means I can't connect to America Online. Also, where is Microsoft Office for Linux, Windows Media Player for Linux and Outlook Express for Linux? Nowhere to be found. If I can't type a letter, make a spreadsheet, or email anyone with Linux, why on earth would I ever put it on my desktop?
I'll take this one on: Linux doesn't fragment like windoze so it isn't much of a problem for Linux to begin with. We don't need a virus scanner either. We update our OS when we need to and it is more secure out of the box than windoze will ever be. Linux users are waaaaaaay to advanced for the childish AOL crap. Open office comes to mind to replace M$ Office. MPlayer plays the video thing. We have Kmail, Thunderbird and Mozilla to replace Outlook, your choice which is something you don't have much of in windoze. Why would a idiot like this need a computer to begin with???

All that said, ignorance is bliss I guess. :scratch: :scratch:

Later

:D :D :D :D

meng 05-05-2006 09:02 AM

Makes me wonder whether everyone is getting the joke. I must admit, it took me a while for the penny to drop with me: this is a satirical website.

d00bid00b 05-05-2006 12:04 PM

Gotta love it!!! Thanks for posting this - it's really funny!!! :D


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 12:36 AM.