GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
1. Choice - I get to install what I want I my computer.
2. Flexibility - The configuration of Windows itself is superficial compared to Linux.
3. Stability - A lot of people have seen Windows crash, in some form or way for reasons unexplained. Where as Linux proves its much more stable unless of course you do something really wrong or your hardware screws up (eg. motherboard).
I can think more reasons but I couldn't be bothered typing them all up right now.
I like ALL OS's other than microsoft ones (with the exception of DOS5.0) Because Windows is the only OS I know that can cause itslef to encounter fatal errors.
It is also the most touchy OS and if overworked it will reliably fail, rather than just run slowly.
But for Linux? I like it cause it does all I want, and much more (except run some games, like comamche 4) and It can handle the fact that I have a gig of RAM. Unlike Windoze ME
I don't understand Why most of Linux users spread hatread towards Microsoft. I think it is becuase they love linux. but the way of loving linux is not abusing other os.
I agree windows is not stable as linux. but there are operating systems more stable than linux. ( may be unix clones).
Also many of the apps in linux are buggy.
Most of users exagerate the errors with the windows while they ignore some strage behaviour of linux on some machine.
Don't Shoot Me
O, it is excellent
To have a giant's strength; but it is tyrannous
To use it like a giant.
-- Shakespeare, "Measure for Measure", II, 2
yeah that is a good point, i do often feel that people can be very selective abuot pros and cons. BUT the main reason that there is a lot of buggy software for linux is the different way it is developed. off the shelf windows programs don't get publically released in OFFICIALLY unstable states.. whereas most linux apps are developed publically from the start and they are not meant to be bug free in the slightest... and it's that public bug fixing that makes the apps cheap to develop and all that. but yes once a program is decalred stable and given it's official 1.0 release then they are back on a level playing field.
Originally posted by sakeeb I don't understand Why most of Linux users spread hatread towards Microsoft. I think it is becuase they love linux. but the way of loving linux is not abusing other os.
Probably because they best understand what microsofts buiness practices do to the industry.
Bill Gates is a brat, who want to dominate the market, nothing more, nothing less. You would think that a superior product would be the way to achive this, but as you say yourself the product 'MS Windows' is sub standard. So he (and now MS execs) has and continues to achieve his (and MS') goals through marketing, subversion, obscurity, ambiguity and LOTS more.
I must say that I dislike MS because of the success it has achieved through immoral policies.
Microsoft is not full of fools, i agree with you there, anyone who says so is being ignorant I think.
As for stealing code there are cases where this has happend. in September 2001 Microsoft was fines 3 million francs by a french court for stealing software from another provider and selling it as their own. I'm sure that others could point out a great many other examples.
xbill, I think, is just a parody. I don't think that anyone would take great offence to it.
i agree there are cases of code stealing. and i agree that xbil is a parady. but i would like to point out that presenting microsoft and bill gates badly will not support the effort to make linux popular.
there are so many people who believes that a operation system is windows and learing computer is learning to operate windows.
Originally posted by sakeeb i would like to point out that presenting micro$oft and bill gates badly will not support the effort to make linux popular.
Yep, This is true, people just like to vent their frustration and now and then...
Quote:
there are so many people who believes that a operation system is windows and learing computer is learning to operate windows.
I am not in the "I love Linux" camp just yet, its still new to me and some of it is downright scary compared to the cosy comfy world of windoze where I have happily lived since my VMS boxes were switched off many moons ago
However I've finally binned win2k (considering its MS, its not that bad an os) off my workstation in favour of linux only (been dual booting for a while), as a laptop user I find it considerably easier to move between multiple NT domains using linux/samba than NT itself.
In addition the multiple desktops/KDE are a godsend for a window junkie like myself.
Finally I love being a newbie again, theres all this exotic sounding stuff to play with, Apache, Samba, wine etc etc. making stuff work is a challenge again, no longer just click on setup.exe and reboot, you get to compile stuff and shout, swear and hack about for 3 days just to get your vid card working again
Originally posted by fatgod 'MS Windows' is sub standard.
A good example of this is Windows ME (I wonder what ME was/is supposed to stand for ). First create a good (dare I say) Windows OS (Windows 2000) and then create a piece of crap (Windows ME) after, sounds like a money making scam to me.
An excellent example. I wonder if it's documented anywhere that you should not use ME on boxes with 1gig of ram. Windows ME is basically MS-DOS 10 or more likely 7.4
do we really need yet another drawn out slagging off session abuot M$? i personally don't think so, it gets pretty tired after the first dozen or so identical threads, and that was a LONG time ago... the title of the thread is "why i love linux" NOT "why i hate windows". try concentrating on the pros of linux and/or *nix as a whole, not just slag of an OS that will naturally not have any support here in there first place, excluding trolls.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.