28. linux not only works for pope or ulama , flies harvesting hippies or sharp sighted four-eyes ... he works great on ex-presidents too ...

29. but linux does not offer supports by foot on the ground ... you have to do it yourself ...

30. linux does not need any hideously mined statistical reports on how and for what social educational causes he is being used for ...

31. Linux... (to be continued)


.

Let's think twice, Linux and Windows both is long history OS. They have their good and their bad, I mention 'LINUX NOT' meaning native Linux is difference, please do not misunderstand.

Probably I need to explain again why 'LINUX NOT':

1. Linux not use exe file to execute.
Linux won't run exe file, wine run exe file and it only work in some application(Same with OSX, you will say OSX run exe file too since it have cxoffice?) Have you see somebody double click some exe file and ask you why it can't run?

2. Linux not use exe file or msi file to install application, they use rpm, deb, source code, any much more.
Am I wrong here? will you use exe file to install linux package? I think you use wine, cxoffice, cedega...


3. Linux not standard, many things in 1 distro may not find in another distro.
I wrong again? You can see YAST in debian? YUM in SUSE?

4. Linux not using activex, get ready for some website incompatible.
Not true? You mean you want to run activex in firefox? Who say activex is not important? Can you use firefox to perform online scanning at Mcafee website? Can you use opera to manage trend micro antivirus server?

5. Linux not always double click, majority of setting need to edit configuration file or command line.
I wrong?

6. Linux not always use GUI, don't be frighten if you see black screen in Linux PC.
Hehe, everybody know this. If I'm wrong you probably have something wrong.

7. Linux not use .lnk file as short cut.
You familiar Linux, you know short cut can exactly same with the source file name, and you know in Linux not necessary every file need to have extension. But windows user don't even can imagine it. The will ask you how come so many file with same name. Wasting the disc space.

8. Linux not easy, don't expect without deep learning you able to make your PC full fill your requirement.
You think Linux is easy? I think you don't really understand what is 'easy'. I love Linux, but I don't dare to say it is easy. Please tell me how long and how many step you need to install Macromedia Flash 8 Profesional in you Linux PC. And please tell me how many person can live in Linux without google for online support?


9. Linux not always high performance, Centos and Suse have huge difference in their performance.
I majority of people did try opensuse, how long you boot up? Come on! They developed for difference purposes. And who say windows have bad performance? You Windows corrupt or blue screen only because you don't know how to 'TAKE CARE' you windows. Don't simply blame the OS because you are not expert on it(Same with you should not blame others people when you don't know what is happening).

Finally, 'Linux Not' meaning Linux not same with Windows, I am not mean LINUX CAN'T COMPETE WINDOWS ok?

Regards,
Ks

1. Not .exe files no, but they both use executable binaries. To run from the shell or DOS they are both similar from a user point of view.

2. No, thank god, that's true.

3. Source. OK, its harder from a user point of view but they all use it. Since synaptic was ported to RPM's the package management is fairly standard through the most popular distro's, and a thousand times better than MS's offerings.

4. Using activX to manage the security system... HA HA HA HA HA HA HA... that hurts

5. Yes. What distro are you using? I have put linux on 5 PC's for friends, they use it every day, get a blank look when they see me using the command line but have never had any trouble administering their systems. In 6 months I have only had to look at anything on 2 boxes.

6. Blue

7. Most windows users have no idea how many bodges it took MS to make links, all they see is the link. Same for windows and linux there.

8. See point 5. I'm itching for a chance to try the grandma test with Ubuntu or CentOS, it seems to me they are ready, don't have intimidating 'You are an idiot' popups for every second action and have help files that can actually be (gasp) used.

9. True, I see quite a bit of difference between distro's too, I see a lot bigger difference between the average household linux an windows PC's after 6 months of use though.

Cheers,
Stan

hmm ... windows does no dos , mac does no windows , dos does no cpm , linux does no solaris , bsd does no linux , etc etc etc and whatever we are able(and correctly) to think of ...

believe me ... linux(or any other common systems) is not that hard and stupid ...


.

[EDIT ::] btw , feel free to invert , mix and match however you want , they are all correct ...


.

Numbers 1 and 2... who cares? This is a non-issue. Windows doesn't run .app files (from OS X) or .bin files, shar files, and a dozen other formats from other systems. Don't belittle people coming from Windows by thinking they can't understand this. If they ask then you tell them. But seriously, just because they use Windows doesn't mean they're stupid.

7) So? Linking in *nix exists... as you admit. So there isn't an extension? So? I don't see why this is an issue considering most Windows systems hide extensions by default.

In fact: 1, 2, and 7 can all be explained with the simple "Linux doesn't use extensions like Windows" statement.

ActiveX... never ever found a valid use for it. I don't see why being unable to run a Window virus scan is a problem on Linux. If you must... then use the virus scanning tools that are available for Linux and not a Windows specific thing.

For 5, on most systems, yes you're wrong. KDE itself answers that quite well. I'm not a fan of KDE but it does a fine job of removing the end-user's need to see a configuration file.

Same with 6, most people never see text mode. My step-mother was in shock when I took her computer down to single user mode... she thought it was broken because she'd never seen it without the GUI. That's in over two years of use... she didn't even know it wasn't graphical by default.

And so on... I don't have the time to respond to all the misunderstandings you're trying to communicate as truth.

All of the comment is correct, provided users know it... Who care? Newbie... Thats why some distro try to make their Linux distro look like windows xp.

you are correct too ... ^_^

ok , how about this one ... sometimes it is the easiest to be hard and it is the hardest to be easy ...


.

im a first time poster to a linux forum on this topic, mostly on other forums im asking"dumb newb" questions, and sometimes i get the help i need, and sometimes i dont. when i dont, its for 2 reasons.

1. I am a newb, so i should just due my time and RTFM, and come back when i can ask a real question or.....

2.I lack the technical terminalogy in the first place to relate enough of the apropriate information to reseave a meaningfull answer and most of my exchanges are about trying to figure out what im asking about

now, through my trials and tribulations with linux, i keep coming back to windows. i know!!!!!( why dont you just stick with it, blah blah blah....). well ill tell you. its because it works. it works .it works!!!!!!!!!!!
and that is my point in all of this.
ive been reading a lot of material on linux trying to get it to do what i want. my experience with linux has been with redhat,ubuntu,slackware, and knoppix(the most functional"out of the box "so to speak)
i have had problems with driver and applications and networking , and instalation. and i see a lot of my problems all around have the linux community to blame. now im not trying to flame here but.....

as i see it from a "dumb newb" and "MicroSHAFT WinBlows user" point of view, the problems with linux stem from the fact that linux is written, modified and used by people that REALY understand linux. by people that program it, and code it, and engineer it, and want to make it better FOR THEM. and it is FOR THEM. for the linux experts, the gurus, the geeks, and the nerds.

linux adoption in my opinion needs a couple of elements for wide adoption from people like me

first-it needs a COMPLETE GUI EVIROMENT, everything that you have to manual edit, script, compile,edit,ect... must be made to work the same way through a dumb gui interface(look at WINBLOWS). when you run windows, unless you are trying to seriously modify the os, everything is a gui, drivers,network,programs,desktop,users accounts,and system settings, its all gui. most of windows can be completly controlled and tailord to a user with almost no keyboard at all.
but not in linux(in my experience wich many of you will probly flame for as being very limited, and if you do, your missing the point!).in linux anything and everything has some sort of editing or programing,ect....... command lines and changing this text in this file and on and on. just plain complicated. i atribute this to linux developers thinking like linux developers and not like dumb newbs and Winblows users

Second- it needs standards in distros, and im not talking about within redhat or ubuntu, im talking driver and aplication packaging and installation needs to be a unified standard across the board for every distro. i read forums and have myself experienced the problem of a driver or application that will open and install on one distro and not another.why? there both linux right? no i know this is not always the case, .rpm for example is usable in many distro without a problem though not all. but why is there no standard, escpecialy for hardware vendors tht DO support linux.
in my windows world( and yes i know, everything support windows, and if your just gonna flame about this you are again missing the point) there is a standard, because every driver i install just simply installs, applications simply instal and run. not counting bad hardware and compatability probems(wich in my experience have been few) everything just works

Third-compatability with th dreded M$! now right off someone reading this is saying WINE! SEDAGA YOU!!!!. yes some level of compatability exist between MS apps and driver, and linux. but go read forums befor flaming me. countles problems with individual MS apps and driver on forums,and no common answers.if you want to have linux widley adopted at any rate of speed by the masses,you must have easy and automatic gui base support forM$ driver and apps. lets face it, the world as a majority uses windows. the solutions for MS on linux that exist are just like linux, written by linux users and developers, for linux user and developers(oh and when i say "linux user" im talking about the majority base as it stands, wich is very different from the average"dumb user" or windows user). the solution for MS on linux needs to be seamless and automatic, with easy to use interface that isnt confusing and makes some sort of sence to a dumb user

these are my basic need from linux as a dumb windows user. i know it wont happen over night, and yes I KNOW!!! that even if the problems as a whole were addressed and saolved in every distro, there would still be a bit of a learning curve when moving form MS to the penguin(and i love the logo, its cute). i am not a linux hater, i am not anti linux, and i will keep trying to learn how to solve my problems and eventualy myself(and people like me) and the gods of linux(linux developers and programers)as well as the linux community will meet half way and start walking togther twards full functionality,compatability, easy of use,and of cours, open source software for all

Hi, and welcome to LQ!

The problem with your whole argument is that the people
who made Linux never intended it to be a windows-replacement
but a freely available alternative to commercial Unix; and
Linux does that marvelously well, and in terms of ease of
use blows most of the commercial counterparts out of the
water.

While I do appreciate that there may be disgruntled windows
users out there who'd like to be using Linux, I still have to
say: you're most welcome, just be aware that this isn't Windows,
so please don't expect it to be like it.

To answer your gripe with the diversity of the varied
distros: I think that it's a blessing! Because it's one
of the reasons that makes writing a virus that will affect
all versions of Linux next to impossible. And as for the
compatibility with commercial windows applications: I, for
one, couldn't care any less. Again, if you want to move,
move. Go to the mountain, don't expect it to come.

As for the call for GUI. It all works well until it fails.
Windows like Linux; and when it does there's no way to
help yourself. A windows user will commonly re-install
the OS. I as a Linux-user will happily boot to the command-
line and fix whatever I broke (note: I don't use [and despise]
the distributions that try to be like windows and make
decisions for me).


Cheers,
Tink

i dont understand those "features" ---- suspend/sleep/hibernate among them ... why do we need all that ...

and the presumed good ui designs for graphical windowing systems like auto-mounting/auto-running of disks , intelligent screens-savers , auto messaging pop-ups of all sorts with sounds and armpit ticklings , icons viewing only in file browsers , "quick" navigating and searching task-bar on the side , hiding of file extensions , hiding of system directories from the users and the needs of answering multiple stupid questions when performing the presumingly dangerous "users actions" on files ...

i think every windows users should get-rid of those stupid "good-ui defaults" by disabling all of them by default ... the only thing i would allow is the hiding of system directories ...

by doing that on your windows systems in the first place , you may not find linux that hard and stupid in the end ... there are reasons ...


.

And who do you think writes Windows code? Joe Six-Pack?

I started using Linux completely about a year ago, and haven't looked back.
As for your comments on driver support: Linux (as in any distribution) detects ALL the hardware I have in my PC, while Windows XP used to need to be fed CDs for an hour until it had all the necessary driver to work properly.
Driver support is technicaly not the resposability of the people designing the operating system, its the hardware manufacturers job! The fact is that many hardware manufacturers do not make drivers for operating systems other than MS either because they couldn't be bothered or because they are getting "extras" from MS for doing so.

Still, Linux has a much larger native driver database than Windows will ever have!

Regarding software:
The only thing that I have noticed that lacks support for GNU/Linux are games.
Other than that, everything you used on Windows has a free (as in freedom) replacement that you can use on Linux.

As for the GUI (ha!):
Firstly, the major desktop environments used in Linux distributions are very easy to navigate. Even my parents and brother (totally non-tech savvy people) sat down and in a few minutes were already finding their way just fine.
Maybe thats because I also did some of the harder work for them, but them again, when you have a problem with your Windows computer you simply take it in for fixing at the shop and also don't see any of the "nitty-gritty" going on....
And to top it off, the GUIs availible for GNU/Linux don't look like they were designed by Fisher Price!

Then as mentioned before in a previous post the only way you fix a problem on Windows (a really serious one) is by reformatting your drive and reinstalling (this is even recommended by MS!).


What I think you need to do angevelon is to buy yourself a copy of a commercial GNU/Linux distribution, and that way you will have full tech support and won't have to bother about technical issues at all.

You payed for your copy of Windows (I presume...) so why not buy a supported copy of Linux?

May I add this? I have a Canon camera that I never did get to work on windoze. I installed/uninstalled the software off the CD several times and even downloaded a newer version off the website, still no joy. I was doing this on my brothers windoze XP because I was going to let him use the camera some. After giving up, I thought the camera was broke. It was brand new.

I came back home and plugged it into my Linux box and opened Gtkam. Downloaded all my pics. I spent about 2 or 3 hours on windoze for nothing. I spent less than five minutes on my Linux box. My USP plug is on the back. It's dark back there and I am getting older.

I ran into similiar problems with my brothers printer. I like to have never got that stupid thing to work. I rebooted until I thought I was going to go nuts, which ain't far for me.

I have also used my Linux box to rescue data before too. Since windoze is usually installed on a single partition, when you have to reinstall you loose everything. If all you get is a blue screen or can't get to failsafe, your lost. Me, take the drive out, plug it into my box and copy away, NTFS included. Put the drive back and install the OS, then use Samba to get the data back over.

Just because more people use windoze doesn't make it better. Another thing I like about Linux is things like these:

My personal record is this:

I have seen a lot of windoze servers that can't do that. Even Bell South can't last longer than about 30 to 60 days.

All in all, Linux has a lot of advantages over windoze. You just have to use it and get used to it a bit to see it.

I'm all for the GNU and open source principal, the worlds best software development framework IMHO. Plus it means my PC runs for free
Doesn't mean that paying money to use linux is wrong though, just as easuter points out, support makes sense. It makes sense to all the companies etc. who use linux exclusively and know from cost analysis that it makes more sense to pay higher for the initial setting up than to pay again and again just to keep the system running.
Looking through the web its amazing the amount of users who will try linux for free, complain about it being complicated, then go and pay 400 euro for an MS system that hasn't been fully tested and has crap hardware support or half that for an older version that needs powerfull hardware just to run the antivirus/firewall/anti-malware/anti-spyware software.
Why not pay half the price of XP and see how a professionally set up Linux box runs?
Has anyone reading this paid for their distro? Was it worth it?, How good was the support?

Cheers,
Stan

PS. Someone already put a link up to this
http://iansuri.wordpress.com/2006/02/02/os-airlines-2/

I recently experienced a Linux superiority over Windows in hardware support for the first time.
Until now, I always spent more time fixing problems under Linux than in Windows.
But recently, I went to a friend's place with my laptop. He had a Motorola Surfboard modem with a free USB connection.
Under Windows, I had to install an extra driver to get the modem to work over USB.
Under Linux Ubuntu Edgy Eft, it worked immediately on startup.

Here some Yoda quotes modifications for fun :

Linux-Yoda: “Market share matters not. Look at me. Judge me by my market share, do you? Hmm? Hmm. And well you should not. For my ally is the community, and a powerful ally it is. Life creates it, makes it grow. Its energy surrounds us and binds us. Luminous beings are we, not this crude matter. You must feel the community around you; here, between you, me, the source code, the GPL, everywhere, yes. Even between the applications and the kernel.”

For fanatical M$ bashers:
Linux-Yoda: “Do not fear, nor hate Microsoft. Fear is the path to the dark side. Fear leads to anger. Anger leads to hate. Hate leads to suffering.”

This one doesn't even need modifications :
“Linux-newbie: What's in there?
Linux-Yoda: Only what you take with you.”

May the source be with you.

you guys really eat from the internet ... ^_^ they are not even a quater of the truth(if there are any) ... let alone the thing they call principal ...
_______________________________________


31. linux does not like you asking him when will he start doing the real thing to save this world or sing to this world a fine tune ...

32. linux does not need anything or anybody to be around ... with or without all those ...

33. linux is anytime , anywhere ...

34. Linux... (to be continued)



.