Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 9th Sep 2012 22:58 UTC
Thread beginning with comment 534717
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Windows is ill suited...
by Neolander on Tue 11th Sep 2012 08:59
in reply to "RE[2]: Windows is ill suited..."
RE[4]: Windows is ill suited...
by moondevil on Tue 11th Sep 2012 09:55
in reply to "RE[3]: Windows is ill suited..."
OSX also has developer-friendly package managers (fink, homebrew...), though they are not officially supported. And if you want to nitpick, pretty much any BSD has them too.
Try to find there user software related packages, instead of the typical vi, gcc, gimp and friends.
Thus, I tend to agree with the OP that Windows is indeed weak on this front as compared to competition.
There many more operating systems out there than Linux, OSX and Windows. Sadly Windows happens to be much better than many of them.
RE[3]: Windows is ill suited...
by Soulbender on Tue 11th Sep 2012 14:40
in reply to "RE[2]: Windows is ill suited..."
Windows is no different than other commercial operating systems.
Except Windows sucks balls with POSIX semantics while most other operating systems, commercial or not, doesn't. This makes a big difference for most things that aren't .Net or Java. Sure, you can do it but it's not much fun. I've done Python on Windows and I'd rather not.
Don't even get me started on the fun that is fskcing around with cygwin or even trying to build stuff from source. Breeze on Linux/BSD, not so much on Windows.
Linux is one of the few cases where package management real works nicely
It works really well on BSD's too.
RE[4]: Windows is ill suited...
by f0dder on Tue 11th Sep 2012 17:40
in reply to "RE[3]: Windows is ill suited..."
RE[4]: Windows is ill suited...
by moondevil on Tue 11th Sep 2012 18:43
in reply to "RE[3]: Windows is ill suited..."
"Windows is no different than other commercial operating systems.
Except Windows sucks balls with POSIX semantics while most other operating systems, commercial or not, doesn't.
This makes a big difference for most things that aren't .Net or Java. Sure, you can do it but it's not much fun. I've done Python on Windows and I'd rather not.
Don't even get me started on the fun that is fskcing around with cygwin or even trying to build stuff from source. Breeze on Linux/BSD, not so much on Windows. "
There are commercial operating systems that are even less compliant with POSIX than Windows is.
It would help if people would write portable code to start with, instead of trying to run POSIX everywhere.
RE[3]: Windows is ill suited...
by ilovebeer on Tue 11th Sep 2012 17:05
in reply to "RE[2]: Windows is ill suited..."
Linux is one of the few cases where package management real works nicely, assuming all you need for your work is available as package.
And assuming all of the dependencies aren't broken of suffering compatibility issues.
And assuming you don't mind all the dependency bloat that is typical of most linux distros.
Generally speaking it works good though, yeah. I agree there.





Member since:
2005-07-08
Windows is no different than other commercial operating systems.
Linux is one of the few cases where package management real works nicely, assuming all you need for your work is available as package.