Why not Linux

jma · 26-02-2012 7:27pm

Gonna try Bluefish. Cheers for the suggestion!

Johnboy1951 · 26-02-2012 9:22pm

Cork24 wrote: »

Linux isn't a install friendly os as like mac or win..

Their are many types of Linux OS out their

Dunno what this is supposed to mean ..... but .... a 'linux' OS distro is like Leggo ..... you can get many different colours, but they are all essentially the same, and how they are put together is the work of the distro devs.

Great to have the choice ..... sure beats the model T mantra ...... 'you can have any colour so long as its black!'

When it comes to networking a Linux system to a server it's a different story as when some goes wrong oh it will go wrong

I guess that is why such a large percentage prefer Linux for server use :rolleyes:

syklops · 27-02-2012 12:37am

pickarooney wrote: »

The expression is actually the opposite!

I borrowed the expression, and modified it. Something common in the Linux/Open Source world.

syklops · 27-02-2012 12:40am

Cork24 wrote: »

Linux isn't a install friendly os as like mac or win..

My friends who work on Anaconda would disagree with it not being install friendly.

Cork24 wrote: »

Their are many types of Linux OS out their

When it comes to networking a Linux system to a server it's a different story as when some goes wrong oh it will go wrong

Not sure I understand. Every linux box is basically a server in itself. Care to elaborate?

Stuxnet · 27-02-2012 1:15am

dont feed the trolls !
obvious this guy hasnt a clue what he's on about :rolleyes:

Cormic · 29-02-2012 5:23pm

Stuxnet wrote: »

dont feed the trolls !
obvious this guy hasnt a clue what he's on about :rolleyes:

I actually think he knows exactly what he is talking about. He is just trolling... and badly at that :rolleyes:

sink · 01-03-2012 12:34am

I use windows in work because my company uses windows domain, Microsoft Dynamics CRM/RMS. I use windows on my home desktop because I mainly use it for gaming and I use windows on my HTPC because I like to share files with my desktop and xbox 360 and homegroup makes that incredibly easy.

I have installed many different linux distros down through the years for a bit of experimentation, but I could never move to a linux environment given how grounded I am in windows. Plus the major criticism on windows here is to my mind completely unfounded. My HTPC and work PC running windows 7 stay on all the time, they apply updates and restart themselves at night when I'm not using them. I've had windows 7 installed on both of them for over 2 years and I've not noticed any significant slowdown. I can't remember the last time I got a BSOD or freeze. That said my Games PC which is overclocked and running a modified GPU bios occasionally crashes about once a month, but I don't think you can blame that on the OS.

PrzemoF · 01-03-2012 10:01am

Sink, it's Ok that you're perfectly happy with windows. May I ask you a few questions? Surfing on the net - do you avoid pages that are half-safe? Let's say you have 70 applications on you PC. How do you know that they are up to date? Let's say I don't like the way windows look/behave - can I change it (icons/menus/cursor)? I'm using virtual desktops to avoid minimising/maximising apps all the time - can you do that with windows?

Those are serious questions as I no longer use windows unless I'm forced to do so (like now...). I'm on windows xp now and the lack of some simple features is annoying.

Edit:
Where is "Stay on top" - an option to keep a window always on top?? That one is a _must have_

BostonB · 01-03-2012 1:28pm

Because I don't have any problems with Windows. And almost every interaction I have with a computers outside of my own and work is also a windows one. So I don't really have good reason for having a different OS other than entertainment. I have had Mac's in the past. Also Linux installed a few times, did a few projects on it in college, but the computer would end up unused and would always end up going back to Windows.

PrzemoF I can't think of any of those things as a problem on Windows, you can install apps for all of that, if the app doesn't do it natively which many do. Some of what you do like min/max windows is your personal preference in how you use the OS. I simply switch between apps, or have multiple monitors, or remote desktops. Have no need to min/max things.

That said I don't prefer windows, in fact theres lots of things I don't like about it, but I just don't have any problems with it. In my experience most people are the same. Windows is probably the weakest mainstream OS, no argument. But I don't think most people have much problems with it.

sink · 01-03-2012 2:51pm

PrzemoF wrote: »

Surfing on the net - do you avoid pages that are half-safe?

No.

PrzemoF wrote: »

Let's say you have 70 applications on you PC. How do you know that they are up to date?

Of the applications that I use regularly almost all of them have their own updater.

PrzemoF wrote: »

Let's say I don't like the way windows look/behave - can I change it (icons/menus/cursor)?

I like the way the windows look and behave as i'm accustomed to it.

PrzemoF wrote: »

I'm using virtual desktops to avoid minimising/maximising apps all the time - can you do that with windows?

I really don't see how that's much of an advantage over alt-tab and dual monitors, which is what I currently use.

PrzemoF wrote: »

Those are serious questions as I no longer use windows unless I'm forced to do so (like now...). I'm on windows xp now and the lack of some simple features is annoying.

Windows XP is 10 years old why don't you compare it to 10 year old linux distros. I've been using windows 7 for several years and I could not go back to XP

PrzemoF wrote: »

Edit:
Where is "Stay on top" - an option to keep a window always on top?? That one is a _must have_

It's not something that I've ever felt I required, I can snap windows to the side of the screen and with two widescreen monitors, I can have 4 windows open and displayed side by side.

PrzemoF · 05-03-2012 1:38pm

Ok, I feel like I'm starting a flame war, but ... so be it.

Individual updaters - I don't like them cause I'm presented with a window "new version available" when I want to actually do something in the application.

Look and feel - that's EOT - we have very different approach to this (I have a cyanogenmod phone, cause I didn't like unlocking on original samsung software)

alt-tab - I work with sets of applications i.e. I have to see a pdf, work in autocad and check soma data in a spreadsheet then I want to switch to email & firefox. Alt-tab is not any good in that situation.

10 years old system - OK, good point. I'm stuck with XP and that's out of my control.

"always on top" - again, one big window with a main application and a small on with a related information, but from a different app. "Stay on top" is easiest option if you don't want tu turn your head 100 times per hour jumping between 2 screens.

BTW I just heard a really funny conversation about searching the web and internet explorer. "If it hangs, just close it, open again and try a different keyword. I noticed that internet explorer hangs for certain words..."
That's authentic story!!!!

Sink, please take it easy. I'm not trying to prove that windows is bad, I'm just trying to prove that it's different and definitely less convinient for me than linux/gnome

BostonB · 05-03-2012 2:02pm

You can install a group updater or its a website, I've seen them in the past.
Alt-tab multiple apps is simply virtual desktops. Been around years.

BostonB · 05-03-2012 2:09pm

I have no problem with people preferring Linux/Unix, its the better OS. But I do find it odd that many will go all that length to learn Linux, but are not willing to find solutions for very basic things in Windows. I mean sure complain about IE, but why not use the same browser in Windows that you do in Linux. Its probably available on windows as well.

There's a logic disconnect there somewhere.

Bard · 06-03-2012 11:45am

PrzemoF wrote: »

Yes, and LibreOffice is 1:1 replacement for MS Office. I meant that even people using very standard applications are using that silly argument about "essential application"

It's 'essential applications' that stopped me switching to Linux (or Mac for that matter). I use Adobe Audition and Photoshop all the time as well as applications like CorelDRAW, MixMeister, iTunes and SAM Broadcaster (to name but a few).

I don't want to have to find an adequate alternative for these applications... I want to use these applications.

Bard · 06-03-2012 11:49am

PrzemoF wrote: »

Edit:
Where is "Stay on top" - an option to keep a window always on top?? That one is a _must have_

Simple answer to that one: http://download.cnet.com/DeskPins/3000-2072_4-52361.html Deskpins

PrzemoF · 06-03-2012 4:59pm

Bard wrote: »

Simple answer to that one: http://download.cnet.com/DeskPins/3000-2072_4-52361.html Deskpins

Thanks! I won't be able to use it - I need it for a corporate PC. Installing anything that's not already approved by IT is pretty much a miracle. The PC is so locked that I can't even open the calendar from the task bar.

I hoped that it's just an option somewhere inthe setup that I could switch on.
Thanks anyway!

ntlbell · 06-03-2012 5:29pm

BostonB wrote: »

I have no problem with people preferring Linux/Unix, its the better OS. But I do find it odd that many will go all that length to learn Linux, but are not willing to find solutions for very basic things in Windows. I mean sure complain about IE, but why not use the same browser in Windows that you do in Linux. Its probably available on windows as well.

There's a logic disconnect there somewhere.

It's very simple, in the mid 90's it was fashionable to bash Microsoft. I'm sure I did plenty of it myself a lot of it was the business practices of the company and some technically minded folk had some issues with the OS.

in 2012 I think it's mostly still the buisnsess practices of the company that are at the heart of the problem.

But stating MS's EULA is a pile of dog sh|t is not half as cool as saying what a fu*king blow out IE is.

Since probably around NT 4 SP 6 windows OS's have been fit for purpose.

They're a lot of things that that MS do really well and a lot of things flavours of *nix do very well.

As you grow into IT you're either pro active and take the time to learn a tool that you know can do the job a bit better Or you stick to what you know and use what you learned in college or had installed at home.

The rest going around wearing t-shirts ****ting on bill.

Stark · 06-03-2012 5:34pm

ntlbell wrote: »

Since probably around NT 4 SP 6 windows OS's have been fit for purpose.

I'd say since 2000 myself. NT 4 SP6 broke my heart when I had to support it for people. (As did the 9x series).

ntlbell · 06-03-2012 5:46pm

Stark wrote: »

I'd say since 2000 myself. NT 4 SP6 broke my heart when I had to support it for people. (As did the 9x series).

Well, of course there was still some issues.

Even today things like winrm on 2k8 etc can break your heart.

But in the grand scheme of things it mostly just works _mostly_

Using the right tool in the right environment for the right reason is the way to go. Moving to Linux for the sake of it is mostly a pointless exercise.

Friel · 07-03-2012 9:30pm

Khannie wrote: »

How come, if you don't mind me asking? I would hate to develop on windows again (I started out developing on windows).

Mostly because I use my desktop computer for web development and it has Windows on it. Use my laptop for everything else and it has Linux. Although I might start giving it a go on Linux, I'm guessing it's probably better anyway.

conor.hogan.2 · 14-04-2012 8:57pm

I chose OSX because it was the best option productivity wise but looking at Lion and Mountain Lion I am looking into Ubuntu full time.

(I never used it full time, I have had it in a VM and have used it on and off for a few years)

d'Oracle · 21-04-2012 4:43pm

murphaph wrote: »

I'm a Linux user (not hardcore, just an everyday user). We get handed preinstalled W7 pro laptops at our company and most promptly get wiped and have some variant of Linux installed. LibreOffice is good, amazingly good for something that costs the end user nothing, but according to my GF (who is an office power user at work who uses Libre Office at home) it's not quite as good as MS Office, for power users anyway.

After a few hours of mindlessly smashing my proverbial head against the proverbial wall trying to convert a column of dates I can say that LO calc is vastly inferior to excel in terms of type handling.

PrzemoF · 22-04-2012 7:24pm

Example?

irishdude11 · 23-04-2012 1:18pm

I used Linux for two years as my primary operating system but I can't see the point in using it since Windows 7 came out. Windows 7 just works with no problem.

It runs all games and applications, and it runs them with no hitches or crashes.

It's responsive, it doesn't slow down after leaving your pc on for 24 hours, it doesn't slow down after a year or two of use.

You are not limited to using open source applications like with linux. There a wide range of areas where the open source options are crap compared to professional applications. Photoshop wipes the floor with Gimp, Illustrator wipes the floor with any open source vector graphics editor. The open source audio editing applications are a joke compared to what's available on Windows. And don't forget that just about every decent open source software application like Gimp, etc, has a version for windows. So you have the option of using the open source stuff if you want.

Every peripheral piece of hardware will work perfectly with it. The amount of time I have wasted trying to get a few items of hardware working with linux...a complete waste of time looking back.

There is no advantage to using Linux these days. It's free but unless you custom build a pc you will be getting Windows bundled with your new laptop or pc.

irishdude11 · 23-04-2012 1:20pm

I can't see the point in using Linux since Windows 7 came out. Windows 7 just works with no problem.

It runs all games and applications, and it runs them with no hitches or crashes.

It's responsive, it doesn't slow down after leaving your pc on for 24 hours, it doesn't slow down after a year or two of use.

You are not limited to using open source applications like with linux. There a wide range of areas where the open source options are crap compared to professional applications. Photoshop wipes the floor with Gimp, Illustrator wipes the floor with any open source vector graphics editor. The open source audio editing applications are a joke compared to what's available on Windows. And don't forget that just about every single decent open source software application like Gimp, Open Office, etc, has a version for windows. So you have the option of using the open source stuff if you want. So open source software can't be counted as an advantage of Linux.

Every peripheral piece of hardware will work perfectly with it. The amount of time I have wasted trying to get a few items of hardware working with linux...a complete waste of time looking back.

There is no advantage to using Linux these days. It's free but unless you custom build a pc you will be getting Windows bundled with your new laptop or pc.

PrzemoF · 23-04-2012 4:44pm

I don't want to discuss with your beliefs (no price tag for windows means you got it for free, open source is crap almost everywhere), but there are some apps for linux like [1],[2],[3] that doesn't exist in windows world. Looks for screenshots - that wiil give you an idea what's in the tin.

[1] http://cinelerra.org/
[2] http://rakarrack.sourceforge.net/
[3] http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/

irishdude11 · 23-04-2012 5:03pm

PrzemoF wrote: »

I don't want to discuss with your beliefs (no price tag for windows means you got it for free, open source is crap almost everywhere), but there are some apps for linux like [1],[2],[3] that doesn't exist in windows world. Looks for screenshots - that wiil give you an idea what's in the tin.

[1] http://cinelerra.org/
[2] http://rakarrack.sourceforge.net/
[3] http://www.rosegardenmusic.com/

So what, windows has open source audio and video editors too. And if you want to a few quid you can get some commercial software that will blow the open source stuff out of the water.

ntlbell · 23-04-2012 5:12pm

irishdude11 wrote: »

So what, windows has open source audio and video editors too. And if you want to a few quid you can get some commercial software that will blow the open source stuff out of the water.

If windows suits your needs and you have no problems not owning your software there's no need for linux your right.

But, not everyone has a beast of a PC/laptop to run windows 7 and nor should one have to when you can run linux/BSD on very low hardware spec.

Maybe one doesn't want to wait 6 months for MS to fix known vulnerabilities?

own an OS that 99.9% of viruses/spyware/rootkits target?

have full control over your OS. Don't need xy and Z no problem, just remove it.

keep all software and the system up to date in the same place.

Don't want to wait 3/4 years for features to be added to your OS? no worries run current.

maybe you're tired of re-installing windows as it turns to ****e over a a few months?

This is just for personal desktop's there's a platora of reasons for the server and hence the majority of internet facing servers are not windows.

PrzemoF · 23-04-2012 5:15pm

irishdude11 wrote: »

So what, windows has open source audio and video editors too. And if you want to a few quid you can get some commercial software that will blow the open source stuff out of the water.

That's an argument that will make me buy windows 7 - thanks! :eek:

Monty Burnz · 23-04-2012 5:17pm

I've been using computers since I was a child, worked in IT for a while and am not the slightest bit intimidated by technology.

But Linux isn't exactly straightforward. I installed Ubuntu a while back on an old PC and tried to install Vuze. After about an hour I gave up. I tried to get a wifi adapter to work. Two hours on that one. Still doesn't work.

I know there's a learning curve involved, but I'm not going to spend months asking people questions or trawling forums every time I want to do something when I can do the same thing in Windows with two clicks of a mouse (for all the flaws of Windows...).

syklops · 23-04-2012 5:18pm

PrzemoF wrote: »

That's an argument that will make me buy windows 7 - thanks! :eek:

Yeah, when did I last buy software. Thinks back...

Ah yes, Counter-strike.

irishdude11 · 23-04-2012 5:28pm

Monty Burnz wrote: »

I've been using computers since I was a child, worked in IT for a while and am not the slightest bit intimidated by technology.

But Linux isn't exactly straightforward. I installed Ubuntu a while back on an old PC and tried to install Vuze. After about an hour I gave up. I tried to get a wifi adapter to work. Two hours on that one. Still doesn't work.

I know there's a learning curve involved, but I'm not going to spend months asking people questions or trawling forums every time I want to do something when I can do the same thing in Windows with two clicks of a mouse (for all the flaws of Windows...).

Yep, that is what Linux is all about, looking up answers on forums for hours. It's an absolute pain in the hole. Speaking of mouse clicks, one of the side buttons on my mouse didn't work with Linux so I actually had to click the back buttons on browser or file explorers rather than just move my thumb. Too much hassle. And it's not like's some no-name obscure mouse, it's a microsoft wireless laser mouse that you will get in any pc world.

PrzemoF · 23-04-2012 5:33pm

Monty Burnz wrote: »

But Linux isn't exactly straightforward. I installed Ubuntu a while back on an old PC and tried to install Vuze. After about an hour I gave up. I tried to get a wifi adapter to work. Two hours on that one. Still doesn't work.

For me windows isn't exactly straightforward i.e. how to search through saved 500 emails in msg format using a regular expression? Or why outlook keeps showing wrong info about language settings? (I'm forced to use xp at work)

Lads, have you ever tried to explain on the phone where to click on the screen to do something in windows (look for the icon that looks like ...., it might be next to "My Computer")? Now compare it to: press Alt-F2, type xterm, enter, type bla-bla-bla enter, close terminal - job done.

Groinshot · 23-04-2012 5:38pm

I'm only going to address some of the things that you say ntlbell. I'm not ignoring the other points you make(some are valid, granted.)

ntlbell wrote: »

But, not everyone has a beast of a PC/laptop to run windows 7 and nor should one have to when you can run linux/BSD on very low hardware spec.

You don't need a beast of a computer to run Win7. If you're doing anything with rosegarden or Cinelerra you'd be absolutely insane to run it on low spec hardware.

ntlbell wrote: »

own an OS that 99.9% of viruses/spyware/rootkits target?

If linux becomes more popular, then this becomes a problem for linux then too.

ntlbell wrote: »

have full control over your OS. Don't need xy and Z no problem, just remove it.

Why is this an issue for most people? don't need it? don't use it. What if someone decides they don't need gcc, or gnome, because they don't know what they are? remove them?

ntlbell wrote: »

keep all software and the system up to date in the same place.

Coming from the group of people who are most opposed to keeping up to date.

ntlbell wrote: »

Don't want to wait 3/4 years for features to be added to your OS? no worries run current.

This is pure crap, absolute crap. features such as what?

ntlbell wrote: »

maybe you're tired of re-installing windows as it turns to ****e over a a few months?

only as bad as the user. I guarantee you if I gave my GF ubuntu the only reason she wouldn't cram it so full of **** is because she wouldn't be able to figure out how. If she did, she'd be more than happy to stuff as much crap in as many inconvenient locations as possible, without any thoughts and **** it up just as badly as she does a windows laptop.

ntlbell wrote: »

This is just for personal desktop's there's a platora of reasons for the server and hence the majority of internet facing servers are not windows.

Mmm, I disagree here, I would imagine the reason most of the servers are running *nix is because it's free, and because everyone else already does it. If they run windows server 2003, finding someone to maintain it is much harder than finding someone who can maintain ubuntu 10.04

For me windows isn't exactly straightforward i.e. how to search through saved 500 emails in msg format using a regular expression? Or why outlook keeps showing wrong info about language settings? (I'm forced to use xp at work)

Lads, have you ever tried to explain on the phone where to click on the screen to do something in windows (look for the icon that looks like ...., it might be next to "My Computer")? Now compare it to: press Alt-F2, type xterm, enter, type bla-bla-bla enter, close terminal - job done.

I've been programming for three years and I still use an online tool to generate my regex's. You're also making an unfair comparison there, in comparing a 10 year old, almost unsupported, operating system.

You can do that with win+r, cmd.exe, type bla-bla-bla enter, close.
Except tell that to an average joe....They'll take a more complicated GUI over a text interface any day.

syklops · 23-04-2012 5:42pm

irishdude11 wrote: »

it's a microsoft wireless laser mouse that you will get in any pc world.

:pac:

BostonB · 23-04-2012 5:42pm

My XP development box fell over after nearly 7 yrs uptime on the last install. Dang flaky box.

Its mainly hobbyists who have this desire to keep re-installing and formatting things. Most people really shouldn't need to. XP/W7 and W8 run well on older machines. So its a bit disingenuous to suggest you need a beast of a machine. Unless you mean you are running it on something truly ancient.

Its like most of these negatives against windows are really non events for most people. That someone can struggle to do any of that with Windows, but can do it with Linux, which is much more technical is not credible.

Thats not to say Linux isn't better in so many reasons. But if you are picking up virus'es every time you move the mouse the problem isn't the OS.

irishdude11 · 23-04-2012 5:45pm

ntlbell wrote: »

If windows suits your needs and you have no problems not owning your software there's no need for linux your right.

But, not everyone has a beast of a PC/laptop to run windows 7 and nor should one have to when you can run linux/BSD on very low hardware spec.

Beast of a PC/laptop?? Hardware has developed much more than software over the last 10 years. Any laptop or pc you bought in the last 6 years would run Windows 7 easily. Sure my brother is still using Vista on a dell laptop he got back in 2007. And Vista is badly written, eats resources and is harder on hardware than Windows 7. If you have a very low spec system then of course you'd be better off with a version of Linux designed for that kind of environment. But any normal machine released in the last 6 years will have no trouble with Windows 7.

Maybe one doesn't want to wait 6 months for MS to fix known vulnerabilities?

own an OS that 99.9% of viruses/spyware/rootkits target?

Big deal, viruses/spyware are waaaayy wayy overhyped. Just install some free antivirus software and you don't have anything to worry about.

have full control over your OS. Don't need xy and Z no problem, just remove it.

keep all software and the system up to date in the same place.

Don't want to wait 3/4 years for features to be added to your OS? no worries run current.

What features would these be? Feck all has really changed with operating systems since windows 95. They've just got slicker and run better, that's why people upgrade. What's the point in installing the latest version of a Linux distribution if you still can't get your wifi card/sound card/camera, etc... working with it.

maybe you're tired of re-installing windows as it turns to ****e over a a few months?

Lol, maybe if you are talking about the 11 year old Windows XP. That doesn't happen with Windows 7.

This is just for personal desktop's there's a platora of reasons for the server and hence the majority of internet facing servers are not windows.

Internet servers are the one situation where Linux, being a free operating system, is worth using.

BostonB · 23-04-2012 5:46pm

syklops wrote: »

:pac:

When you can buy a Linux Mouse in a shop then your :pac: would be relevant

BostonB · 23-04-2012 5:50pm

Groinshot wrote: »

...You can do that with win+r, cmd.exe, type bla-bla-bla enter, close.
Except tell that to an average joe....They'll take a more complicated GUI over a text interface any day.

Except you wouldn't, you'd actually tell them to RTFM...

http://linux.about.com/od/funnymanpages/a/funman_rtfm.htm

irishdude11 · 23-04-2012 5:51pm

syklops wrote: »

:pac:

This is one of the most common mouse you will find, there are probably tens of millions of them out there. And they are not supported properly on Linux. If the Linux community can't support easily one of the most used peripherals is it any wonder people are always running into trouble getting hardware to work with Linux.

Groinshot · 23-04-2012 5:53pm

BostonB wrote: »

Except you wouldn't, you'd actually tell them to RTFM...

http://linux.about.com/od/funnymanpages/a/funman_rtfm.htm

was so disappointed when this didn't exist

Johnboy1951 · 23-04-2012 7:26pm

irishdude11 wrote: »

This is one of the most common mouse you will find, there are probably tens of millions of them out there. And they are not supported properly on Linux. If the Linux community can't support easily one of the most used peripherals is it any wonder people are always running into trouble getting hardware to work with Linux.

So the manufacturer refuses to support their own product, but you expect others to do so?

Something askew with that reasoning .....

23-04-2012 7:39pm

For me, I'm more hardware focussed. I'm not a software guru at all, so what I perceive as an over-reliance on the terminal and the need to compile software from source is what puts me off. I tried downloading a NES emulator on Ubuntu on one occasion and couldn't work out how to compile the source to get it working. On Windows I downloaded the EXE and ran it. Much easier.

I used to reinstall Windows a lot, but that was when I was messing around a lot. I don't do that anymore with my personal machine, have plenty of time to do that in work, and as a result I've never once had a need to reinstall Windows 7.

irishdude11 · 23-04-2012 7:54pm

Johnboy1951 wrote: »

So the manufacturer refuses to support their own product, but you expect others to do so?

Something askew with that reasoning .....

I dont expect them to, you do. You use Linux, you are expecting people do write drivers for hardware devices, otherwise you wouldn't be able to use Linux.

Johnboy1951 · 23-04-2012 7:57pm

irishdude11 wrote: »

I dont expect them to, you do. You use Linux, you are expecting people do write drivers for hardware devices, otherwise you wouldn't be able to use Linux.

No I do not.

I do not have any of those Microsoft products that they refuse to support.
Neither will I ever buy one ... unless the manufacturer supports their product! ..... and even then I very much doubt I would.

ntlbell · 23-04-2012 8:00pm

Groinshot wrote: »

You don't need a beast of a computer to run Win7. If you're doing anything with rosegarden or Cinelerra you'd be absolutely insane to run it on low spec hardware.

The point being I can have my FreeBSD desktop fly along happily on 10yr+ old hardware. Obviously this isn't a burning concern for every tom dick and harry, but it is for some and Linux/BSD allows them to have that choice and still have a relativley very up to date OS. Also I'm not sure why people are talking about rosegarden etc i've never even heard of these packages untill a few hours ago.

Groinshot wrote: »

If linux becomes more popular, then this becomes a problem for linux then too.

We have no idea what will happen, but linux/BSD is designed with security in mind from the ground up plus it encourages things like sudo reducing "accidents"

Groinshot wrote: »

Why is this an issue for most people? don't need it? don't use it. What if someone decides they don't need gcc, or gnome, because they don't know what they are? remove them?

It means I have the choice of what to install from the off and can have everything i require in a couple of hundred megs if that's what needed, it gives me control.

Groinshot wrote: »

Coming from the group of people who are most opposed to keeping up to date.

I'm not sure what you're referring to here? being able to install security patches software updates etc with one "click" or one command will never be a negative thing"

Groinshot wrote: »

This is pure crap, absolute crap. features such as what?

As soon as a feature is added for example in FreeBSD -CURRENT

you can have it that day. with windows you have to wait for the next release of the OS, again i'm not sure why you're trying to turn that into something negative?

Groinshot wrote: »

only as bad as the user. I guarantee you if I gave my GF ubuntu the only reason she wouldn't cram it so full of **** is because she wouldn't be able to figure out how. If she did, she'd be more than happy to stuff as much crap in as many inconvenient locations as possible, without any thoughts and **** it up just as badly as she does a windows laptop.

I've been in IT for more years than I care to remeber I've been using windows and an endless amount of linux/BSD distro's I've managed to mangle many a windows box from what I would consider basic day to day useage.

Groinshot wrote: »

Mmm, I disagree here, I would imagine the reason most of the servers are running *nix is because it's free, and because everyone else already does it. If they run windows server 2003, finding someone to maintain it is much harder than finding someone who can maintain ubuntu 10.04

No it's because an internet facing windows box has been a liability for years and you had to reboot after moving a mouse. hotmail wasn't running FreeBSD because it was free it doesn't run yahoo/gmail/google because it's free multi billion dollar companies don't have to worry about a few hundred bucks for some server licenes. they need 99.99999% uptime. They require secure robust OS's with highly tuned tcp/ip stacks. not a bunch of telly tubby servers.

It's why microsoft don't use exchange on their internet facing mail servers, odd no? or they do it because it's easier to find a *nix admin?

Your arguments hold no water and seem to be pointing out negativity where there is none for arguments sake.

imitation · 23-04-2012 9:20pm

The real question is why Linux for most people, as almost every computer comes with Windows. Asking John Q Consumer to install linux is like asking them to perform open heart surgery.

For a home user it limits the number of well known applications they can use and the number of games they can play. At the end of the day for most home users the OS is the means to the end, and Window's delivers the most "ends", just like most people drive a car just to get around as opposed to picking up a special model and lavishing it with care and attention.

In enterprises the concerns are similar, many companies are going to be using specialized applications (ERP, Business analytics etc ) that have more presence on windows. Its alot easier to find Windows IT people (even though they too are in reasonable demand.)

gimme5minutes · 23-04-2012 9:35pm

ntlbell wrote: »

As soon as a feature is added for example in FreeBSD -CURRENT

what are these features you are talking about?

No it's because an internet facing windows box has been a liability for years and you had to reboot after moving a mouse. hotmail wasn't running FreeBSD because it was free it doesn't run yahoo/gmail/google because it's free multi billion dollar companies don't have to worry about a few hundred bucks for some server licenes. they need 99.99999% uptime. They require secure robust OS's with highly tuned tcp/ip stacks. not a bunch of telly tubby servers.

linux is good for servers but pointless for home users. I know many people, including myself, with an interest in IT who tried out linux for a while to see what its all about. an after the novelty wears off it just another os except it cant run games or lots of applications and you are regularly battling to get something or other working with it. i had to spent 5 hours trying to get my printer to print with it. i had two different broadband dongles at one stage, couldnt get either to work after trying out several guides i found on the net. there was hype a few years back when netbooks started coming that linux was now usable for the average home user and was going to take off. well I think many realised that wasnt the case after giving it a go.

stuff just works with windows. it is only going to get worse for linux as there are so many connectable devices these days that is just not possible for the open source community to make all these devices compatible with linux. and people have an expectation these days that devices will just sync up and work together. as soon they run into one of these issues compatibility issues with linux they just realise its too much hassle.

ntlbell · 23-04-2012 9:42pm

gimme5minutes wrote: »

what are these features you are talking about?

It could be anything from a new filesystem to swivelling your desktop in that aero nonsense. the point is as soon as it goes in, you can have it.

gimme5minutes wrote: »

linux is good for servers but pointless for home users. I know many people, including myself, with an interest in IT who tried out linux for a while to see what its all about. an after the novelty wears off it just another os except it cant run games or lots of applications and you are regularly battling to get something or other working with it. i had to spent 5 hours trying to get my printer to print with it. i had two different broadband dongles at one stage, couldnt get either to work after trying out several guides i found on the net. there was hype a few years back when netbooks started coming that linux was now usable for the average home user and was going to take off. well I think many realised that wasnt the case after giving it a go.

stuff just works with windows. it is only going to get worse for linux as there are so many connectable devices these days that is just not possible for the open source community to make all these devices compatible with linux. and people have an expectation these days that devices will just sync up and work together. as soon they run into one of these issues compatibility issues with linux they just realise its too much hassle.

if one has no use for it, don't use it.

I knew nothing about IT and very little technical knoweledge when I first tried to install RH 5.x but the reason I attempted it was I was sick and tired of the problems I had with windows.

I paid for FreeBSD and bought a book and put the time in. Right one shouldn't have to and that;s fine don't bother. but people seem to be putting their technical limitations and laziness down to a problem with an OS.

ntlbell · 23-04-2012 9:44pm

If your purpose is to use a pc to play the latest and greatest games and pull the belly off yourself. then there really is no need to learn *nix.

In fact you should most deinfiltley for the benifit of everyone else, stay away from it.

Why not Linux

Comments