Sorry to but in, but...I thought this thread was about Windows and *nix users being friends, not about arguing over which OS is better? IIRC there's already a thread for that in Big General (Linux vs. Windows MegaSuperThread or whatever it's called; the sticky).

In fact, aren't threads like this one supposed to be merged into that megathread?

I kinda agree, it's time to put this thread to pasture.

My final say is -- people just use whatever OS that makes you happy.

- Goodnight or morning wherever you are in the world

Aha...

Yes it was intended to diffuse some arguments but the thread was forming into the same old shape that these kinds of threads tend fall in to. I was just trying to prove that MS does make great software, so does Linux, and so does Apple. The reason I may seem (MS) biased is because the age old arguments used by other users were coming about and I wanted them to see how Windows is good for the PC world. If I was on an apple board and people were bashing Linux or it was a common practice, I would have taken on the side of Linux just the same.

Hi,

When was the last time you reverse engineered a piece of software? Ever try it? My hats off to the people who are driven to develop drivers for GNU/Linux. You have to remember most manufactures don't even want to release hardware information to the FLOSS community because of M$ agreements they are forced to adhere to. The ones that do release information are big enough to not care.

Where do you get "(as previously stated) Linux is great at redundant types of tasks, but I don't think they should be trying to compete with the desktop market because it doesn't handle multimedia type stuff very well"? Your now a GNU/Linux expert to boot?

You've had so many holes in your presentation so far therefore I'll take the above as a misstatement of misinformation. Your a kernel expert plus a driver expert along with being a GNU/Linux expert? You must have some real world experience with GNU/Linux to make all these statements. This whole thread can easily show how big of a misinformed troll that you actually are.

@MrCode

I guess that proves thay cannot.

@mattvdh

Linux can handle multimedia great. It's just that the codecs are a pain to install because they're proprietary and Linux distros tend not to want to include them because of that.

Blame the Big Media companies for patanting their codecs, not Linux. If you want to help solve this issue, use the Ogg media formats instead of MP3, MPEG, etc.

Linux can support hardware great, if it had a driver available. Most hardware manufacturers don't care about Linux and do a poor job of a Linux driver (and oftem don't even make one at all). Even if they do make one, they almost certainly make it closed-source, which makes it a pain to install for the same reasons as the media codecs. Even if they don't want to write a driver, they refuse to tell people that would have otherwise gladly written a FOSS driver how the hardware works.

It's the greedy hardware manufacturer's fault, not Linux's.

It is often the case that Linux doesn't see a driver for a new device until after the manufacturer feels that whatever competitive advantage the new product gave them in the Windows market has run its course. Sometimes that takes years.

Linux users that refuse to use Windows, and Windows users that refuse to use Linux will only fall behind in technology

I have Linux on my laptop, Windows on my Desktop, A Mac at work, and I use Solaris on my servers at work.

Do I have my preference? Of course I do; but I I don't want to fall behind (which is easy) on technology. Plus the true "tech geek" in me won't let me

Never let your need to be right be more than your need to be successful



-C

Look, no offense intended, you're as entitled as the next person to have your say, but:
But see, a good part of the reason that this thread has gotten as ridiculous as it has, is because you presented this argument on a Linux forum. Despite what truths or partial truths are in your arguments, you've chosen to present them on a Linux forum, so some static is bound to occur.
As for the above: if this thread is any indication, I suspect you would have gone to an Apple forum, presented an argument as to why Linux is better than Apple, and the thread might become as ridiculous as this one has.

This all is like putting on a big pot of beef stew, and then trying to convince a bunch of vegetarians that it's just as good for them as vegetable soup, because it has some vegetables in it

I'm vote +1 for merging this with the gigantic-ginormous-mondo-mega-Linux-vs-Windows thread.


Sasha

Custangro, what will happen to you if you "fall behind"? Will you grow hair on your palms? Will your teeth come in crooked? I suggest that you just use the tool that works for you. If it pleases you to use such a mixture of technology, then go for it. Most of us would be better served by sticking with one and depending on the developers to do the "keeping up with technology" part. In the main, the Linux developers do a good job of this. For example, during the past year, I've needed to use Windows to do my taxes, because TurboTax doesn't work with Linux, as well as EasyPal for the same reason. It's possible that my needs are much less than the mainstream, but I do see quite a number of people here on LQ who only use Linux.

Use the tool that works for you.

No I'm not a Linux expert or even a programmer (I'm a net. admin btw) but in my own experience with Linux it's proven to be an inferior desktop machine to Windows/Mac. I do have plenty of 'real world' experience with Linux to make a fair assessment, and that's why I have such an opinion about the drivers in Linux.
You said it yourself: "most manufactures don't even want to release hardware information to the FLOSS community "... This is a huge disadvantage and the user- experience suffers because of it.
I have yet to use a Linux distro that is a tightly-knit package that is a congruent/integral user-experience from power on to power-off. Don't get me wrong, I think Linux can be great for server type applications because you can take and older machine and put it to good use, but Linux as a desktop machine is not nearly as good as Xp/Vista/7/OSX.
When you use a Mac for example one of the big reasons why Apple products are so solid is because they engineer their machines from the ground-up. The software was designed to work extremely well with the hardware, and they generally pick high-quality hardware for their machines as well. With Windows/clones the reliability generally isn't as high because the software manufacturers (MS) are usually totally different from the hardware. So a machine that is running with cheap ram, processor, and obsolete peripherals will make for a poor user experience. But if you pick HW companies that are in bed with MS then it should rival the Apple experience. This is not the fault of Windows itself, but is a fault in their business model. Microsoft should probably just engineer PCs from the ground up like Apple does to be honest. And then there's Linux; you have to dig around just to find out if your hardware is compatible, and if it is, the drivers and software engineers have no idea what types of devices you may have working together in combination with each other. To top it off they are usually writing drivers/code on a voluntary basis, so there's no-one to hold them accountable if they write crappy code. A golden rule they teach you in school about hardware is: who knows the hardware best? the hardware manufacturers themselves do of course.

I use Linux exclusively for my desktop and I definitely wouldn't want Windows or Mac instead.

And I think a lot of members here will agree, too.

And whether it decreases the user experience or not, the driver thing is not Linux's fault.

Well said! That's exactly my sentiments actually. I think that if you're too focused on one OS you're missing out.

What if you don't care about the latest gadgets and stuff?

Why not just pick your favorite desktop and have the latest technology for your favorite desktop.