Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread

Originally Posted by dugan And you see fit to format it that way because?

Because it splits text into paragraphs according to text's logical structure. Newline is not at the end of each sentence, by the way.

Originally Posted by Sumguy ....

Well, that was a well written/interesting reply, thank you.

The reason why I started discussion, is because I think there should be more "objective" info about both systems (instead of "linux is the only way"). The windows machine I use currently is not perfect, but it is more suitable for my daily tasks than linux machine (which is also not perfect). It would be nice if there were more posts listing strengths/weakness of both systems so the user could choose based on reason.

I have nothing else to say.

Originally Posted by SigTerm Well, that was a well written/interesting reply, thank you. The reason why I started discussion, is because I think there should be more "objective" info about both systems (instead of "linux is the only way"). The windows machine I use currently is not perfect, but it is more suitable for my daily tasks than linux machine (which is also not perfect). It would be nice if there were more posts listing strengths/weakness of both systems so the user could choose based on reason. I have nothing else to say.

Thank you. We can agree that no OS is perfect- and none universally serve the needs of everyone. It is easy to become fanatical about something which we like very much, or something which works better for us, or whose philosophy we like better than the competition's, but ultimately, I agree with you 100% that the best thing is to present unbiased information so that others can derive benefit from our experiences. This is the very thing which makes the internet such a valuable tool. All too often people let their biases and preferences take over and blind them and prevent them from coming to an agreement on facts, whereas reasonable people should be able to mutually acknowledge readily apparent truths, even if their opinions on those truths differ. It is very refreshing to be able to do that.

Have a pleasant night.

(((And besides, I wouldn't make a very good Linux apologist, as I am only one step above "computer illiterate" myself, and have only been using Linux for 7 months....)))

@SigTerm

I know this is gonna seem almost hypocritical (or whatever you might call it ), but really, I'd like to apologize for my previous posts. Seriously.

I really don't think of myself as one of those "FOSS evangelists", and yes, I do still use Windows (hell, I'm posting from it now; that useragent icon is not a spoof). It's just that (more than likely without justification) I felt like I was being told that my choice of primary OS is somehow "wrong" or "unwise". I'll admit that there are some issues that I have with Linux: I can't currently set the backlight level on my laptop manually; I need to have acpi_backlight=vendor set in my GRUB boot parameters so that the BIOS controls the backlight level when on AC/battery, and that switches between the brightest level (which is fine) and the lowest level (not fine if I'm sitting near a window or any other bright light). Firefox also seems to use more CPU time (on this machine) in Linux than in Windows. Admittedly, this might partially have to do with the fact that I'm also running a compositing window manager (Compiz) on Linux, and this isn't exactly a top-of-the-line machine (CPU is an Intel P4 @ 2.66 GHz, GPU is an NVIDIA GeForce 7300 GT), so it's probably a poor choice of configuration, but IIRC even using plain xfwm (I use Xfce), I'm pretty sure it's still a bit higher.

Anyways, I'll seriously lay off the "snappy comebacks"...maybe I just won't post to this thread anymore.

Originally Posted by MTK358 I think it's more of an endless loop: People don't use Linux because software companies don't support it, and software companies don't support it because people don't use it.

Couldn't agree more. That's why we need to break the endless loop, and if we do, then the chain reaction Linux conversion has begun. It already happened on mobile phones; now is the time for it to happen on desktop, laptop, and netbook computers.

And I just thought of an excellent way to solve that problem: What if some distro created metapackages in its repositories that claim to install proprietary software but really trick the user into thinking he/she is using proprietary software when really they are using the open source equivalent? Just an idea.

What if some distro created metapackages in its repositories that claim to install proprietary software but really trick the user into thinking he/she is using proprietary software when really they are using the open source equivalent? Just an idea.

Umm, no...that would just paint an even more negative image of Linux ("Hey, I was promised Photoshop...WTF is this 'GIMP' thing?").

Originally Posted by MrCode Umm, no...that would just paint an even more negative image of Linux ("Hey, I was promised Photoshop...WTF is this 'GIMP' thing?").

lol...yeah...very true... and then they would have to make the user pay for it.. which is kinda bad cuz i don't think you can sell open source software..

Originally Posted by MrCode Umm, no...that would just paint an even more negative image of Linux ("Hey, I was promised Photoshop...WTF is this 'GIMP' thing?").

Yup. Stack that with the possibility that the user paid for the distro and doesn't get what he/she paid for...I'm sure the US courts don't need any more lawsuits clogging the system nor does FOSS need the bad publicity.

Kenny, when you think about doing something try also thinking about what the results of said action might be and, and seeing that action from other peoples' perspective as well.

Originally Posted by Kenny_Strawn And I just thought of an excellent way to solve that problem: What if some distro created metapackages in its repositories that claim to install proprietary software but really trick the user into thinking he/she is using proprietary software when really they are using the open source equivalent? Just an idea.

You keep complaining about Microsoft's unethical practices, but you yourself are suggesting unethical ways to spread Linux.

Clearly Kenny was making a joke there; nice work, dude!

why is it so hard to get a open suse livecd? i mean,they give you the dvd and dont let you choose...thx linuxquestions for having what i wnated :x

ontopic

@mudangel is that sarcasm???

Originally Posted by MTK358 You keep complaining about Microsoft's unethical practices, but you yourself are suggesting unethical ways to spread Linux.

How are they unethical?

Originally Posted by Kenny_Strawn How are they unethical?

Do you really that there is nothing wrong with selling someone Photoshop and giving them GIMP instead at the last moment?

As well, convincing someone that they are getting a free version of Photoshop and then installing the Gimp would simply show that open source projects are not as good as proprietary ones since you have to be tricked into getting them. On top of that, there would be huge trade mark issues over using Photoshop to distribute Gimp.

The best way to do it is to show people that you can do what you need by using open source tools. A way to do this would be to take a PC loaded with the usual Windows software and set up a Linux PC with comparable Linux software - so Office/OpenOffice, Photoshop/Gimp, IE/FF, Media Player/Kaffeine and so on and show that there is no loss of productivity. Then point out boot/startup speeds and that the Linux PC was set up for the cost of a blank DVD and installation time. You could also set things up so that you build both PCs from scratch and show which one takes less time.

Originally Posted by MTK358 Do you really that there is nothing wrong with selling someone Photoshop and giving them GIMP instead at the last moment?

Ah yes I know this tac, the ol' 'bait-and-switch'. Somehow its not unethical when you're advocating FOSS though... Uh...Yea..

Originally Posted by XavierP As well, convincing someone that they are getting a free version of Photoshop and then installing the Gimp would simply show that open source projects are not as good as proprietary ones since you have to be tricked into getting them. On top of that, there would be huge trade mark issues over using Photoshop to distribute Gimp. The best way to do it is to show people that you can do what you need by using open source tools. A way to do this would be to take a PC loaded with the usual Windows software and set up a Linux PC with comparable Linux software - so Office/OpenOffice, Photoshop/Gimp, IE/FF, Media Player/Kaffeine and so on and show that there is no loss of productivity. Then point out boot/startup speeds and that the Linux PC was set up for the cost of a blank DVD and installation time. You could also set things up so that you build both PCs from scratch and show which one takes less time.

WOW, you know that is actually a great idea. How come Kenny never thought of that?

Originally Posted by MTK358 Do you really that there is nothing wrong with selling someone Photoshop and giving them GIMP instead at the last moment?

Not selling. They'll think they're *getting Photoshop for free* when really they'll be getting GIMP at the last moment. And even then, the menu entries will say "Adobe Photoshop" with icons that look slightly different so as not to interfere with trademarks, but they will launch GIMP.

Same thing goes for:

Microsoft Office 2003/LibreOffice

iTunes/Banshee

Nero/Brasero

Internet Explorer/Firefox

MatLab/SageMath

Microsoft Visual Studio/Code::Blocks

GarageBand/Ardour

etc. etc. etc.