“Things are looking up thanks to bridge software that lets it run Microsoft Office programs, but the Windows alternative has a long way to go.” Read the article at SunSpot.net.
Linux Options Still Boxed in
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
Compared to Windows, Linux is not easy for most end users. He gives props to linux and he admits to loving Windows.
And it is true “While the Linux scene is looking better, it’s still got a way to go.”
magine being able to do all those computer tasks you’ve grown accustomed to – checking e-mail, writing Word documents, balancing your checkbook, storing photos, and listening to MP3 music – on a PC that doesn’t run Windows.
How is this difficult in Linux. It is very easy. The only moderately difficult thing is balancing the check book. Use TheKomanany’s Kapital for that.
And that is all that matters.
Not to many people used to typing ./make to install software.
I found openoffice easy to install and easy to use. In some cases I found it to be better than MS office so much that I have both at work on my Win2k box
More Linux applications should be that easy.
“Imagine being able to do all those computer tasks you’ve grown accustomed to – checking e-mail, writing Word documents, balancing your checkbook, storing photos, and listening to MP3 music – on a PC that doesn’t run Windows.”
This is so easy in Linux! And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows. Not to mention that all that software is free. And the statement that there’s no software enough for Linux is about the most stupid thing I’ve ever read.
The bottom line: “Compared to Windows, Linux is not easy for most end users.” –>> To use a computer, you need an IQ higher than 50. Enough said.
CodeWeavers is working on adding Adobe Photoshop to its next release of Crossover Office.
Better would be if Adobe would make a native port. And Macromedia too of their software.
Anyway, I can’t seem to understand whyppl want to install MS Office or IE on a Linux machine? Isn’t the point of using Linux to get away from MS? Why do our best to let MS apps run on Linux? Their should be native alternative programs for MS apps. OOo does it perfect for example, Mozilla is superior to IE, etc ….
When are you Linux zealots going to get it? Apparently never. (Now who has an IQ lower than 50)?
Let me say it one more time…
You are not going to gain any users for Linux by insulting their intelligence level when they complain that something should be easier to do.
Which part of this don’t you people understand?
“And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows.”
Name one thing.
Their should be native alternative programs for MS apps.
“OOo does it perfect for example”
No it doesn’t. I deal with scientific spreadsheets created in Excel. I tried to use them in OO. Guess what? OO doesn’t understand the math formulas so it loses about 70% of the spreadsheet.
That’s one reason people would want to run MS Office on Linux. Because they have to work with MS Office documents that have formulas and such that OO simply can’t understand.
Mozilla is superior to IE, etc ….
Mozilla doesn’t even handle Java support correctly. I filed a bug report about this with Bugzilla several months ago. To this day no one has even looked at it.
“””And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows.”
Name one thing. “”
Have a funky penguin appear and take away 5 lines of space when you’re looking at boot messages.
You did say just one thing :>
/”””And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows.”
Name one thing. “” //
Use an early (but still widely distributed) ediiton of up2date from RedHat, download a kernal update and completely hose your system.
Windows Update *never* lets me do that. Stupid program!
“Have a funky penguin appear and take away 5 lines of space when you’re looking at boot messages.
You did say just one thing :>”
LOL
But, if I wanted to, I could always replace the Windows splash screen with a funky penguin.
Not exactly the same, but close. :p
And by the way… My penguin would be much better looking than that fat Tux. :p
“Use an early (but still widely distributed) ediiton of up2date from RedHat, download a kernal update and completely hose your system.”
Ok… I admit my error. There ARE things you can do in Linux that you can’t do in Windows.
I am alright with Crossover office I suppose. However, I don’t really believing emulating windows api on linux. Overall, I would say it is good for some individual users, but bad for the community. I mean, look at OS/2?
OS/2 had an excellent windows/dos compatability layer. Most early windows apps installed and ran perfectly on it. So developers said, “Why choose between OS/2 or Windows? If I write for Windows, it will work fine on OS/2.” This lack of native apps became a problem for users of OS/2 and the same could happen to Linux. I don’t want developers deciding that Linux support isn’t important just because we can emulate windows.
Almost all of the software I’ve installed on my PC (Red Hat 8) was done by double clicking on an RPM file I got from the Internet or the Red Hat CD, and clicking “install” on the dialog that pops up. That’s significantly easier than in Windows.
If I want to surf the net, I click on the Redhat menu, then choose “Internet” then “Web Browser”, or click the short-cut icon. That’s AT LEAST as easy as in Windows.
One of my other machines is running Mandrake, and it’s been up for almost 200 days (since the UPS was installed). That’s MUCH mores stable than I’ve seen a Windows computer being.
Redhat comes with a media player, choice of e-mail apps and web browsers, MSN/AIM/ICQ/IRC/jabber clients (that’s more than you can say for Windows).
I fail to see why that’s not ready for the desktop. If someone mentions ease of installation, I’d like to point out that Average Joe has no idea what to do with a Windows CD, boot floppy and blank hard disk.
>No it doesn’t. I deal with scientific spreadsheets created >in Excel. I tried to use them in OO. Guess what? OO >doesn’t understand the math formulas so it loses about 70% >of the spreadsheet.
try to use spreadsheets created in OO format in Excel. Excel does not understand anything so it loses about 100% of the spreadsheet
Sometimes I wonder if Linux users aren’t the most hypocritical bunch out there. You berate people that find the OS confusing or hard to use, while preaching about the sense of “community” you all have. You damn Windows, but KDE and Gnome are looking more and more like the environment you hate so much.
No, really. I mean, I like the turn things are taking – because, believe it or not, I’m fairly intelligent, but I find Linux too hard to use to swap completely over instead of using Windows.
Really.
I like the Wine-based projects because they let me use various software — such as QuickTime — that I can’t use under Linux right now. And for such a wonderful OS, I mean, really… why can’t I install programs and uninstall them? Is it really that hard? It seems like all the install programs are “make install” to compile, and then you’re screwed when you want to uninstall. Should I just delete the folder? Does that take care of my menus and my file type associations?
It’s funny to me that the more Linux looks and feels like Windows, the more Linux users bash the Microsoft OS the DEs are being based on. Windows may not be the most stable OS out there — but it’s easy to use. It’s got hundreds of thousands of applications and drivers. It’s got a ton of support. It’s the majority. Microsoft has actually made a lot of steps toward stability – and Windows 2000 is the most stable OS I’ve used yet. Windows XP is getting there.
With Linux, my scanner doesn’t work. I don’t think my art pad or QuickCam would either. What about my PSX to USB converter for my joystick? I want to be able to use Yahoo! Messenger, AIM, MSN/Windows Messenger, and ICQ without signing up for some “Jabber” pay service. I want to be able to make upgrades without crashing everything.
I tried to update the kernel under Linux – BIG honkin’ mistake, man. Thought it was just a simple module add-on for nVidia drivers, and crapped out the kernel. Format, reinstall. Tried to upgrade the kernel point release, crapped out, format, reinstall. Tried to upgrade XFree86. Craped out, format, reinstall. Tried to add OpenGL/Mesa supports, crapped out, format, reinstall. Tried to get surround sound going, couldn’t. Tried to get anti-aliased fonts, crapped out, format, reinstall.
Linux is, in general too hard to use. People familiar with Windows want point and click. Don’t tell me to use a text editor, and don’t tell me to use a terminal window. If it works in a terminal, for God’s sake make a GUI wrap for it too – GUI wrappers around console apps are a dime a dozen under Windows, and they work well enough. Give me my ‘task notification area’. Give me my uninstsall program. Give me a “system update” that will make my scanner work, and give me antialiased fonts. Give me a pretty taskbar that fits on one line and doesn’t have huge icons all over the place.
I’m sick of Windows. It’s like eating the same cereal every day of my life. I’ve seen the new flavor and I want a bite — but it’s just too crunchy.
If I had the money I’d consider a Mac. But don’t get me started on Hardware monopolies versus OS/software monopolies.
>>”And there are many things you can do in Linux but are >>impossible in Windows.”
>Name one thing.
Setup a webserver that boots and runs from a floppy.
Setup a router that boots and runs from a floppy.
Not everyone is importing spreadsheets from Excel.
>Setup a webserver that boots and runs from a floppy.
>Setup a router that boots and runs from a floppy.
Finally, a solution for those of who can’t afford hard drives.
If only the desktop side could have been designed with such efficiency.
Affording hard drives isn’t the issue.
A small system footprint for embedded style application is.
Anyway, I can’t seem to understand whyppl want to install MS Office or IE on a Linux machine?
I think somebody has already mentioned MS Office, so I’ll tackle IE … my job’s intranet uses several ActiveX controls and therefore, I need it for that.
Their should be native alternative programs for MS apps. OOo does it perfect for example
So far, I haven’t figure out a way to open Access files in OO
I fail to see why [Red Hat is] not ready for the desktop.
Last I checked (RH 8.0), Mozilla in Redhat comes loaded with like zero plugins. At least with IE, when you’re missing a plugin, a dialog box comes up … one click affair. Of course, this also causes security nightmares, but that’s beside the point
[i]I’d like to point out that Average Joe has no idea what to do with a Windows CD, boot floppy and blank hard disk.
No, but there’s probably a Windows-literate friend nearby that could show him.
Setup a webserver that boots and runs from a floppy.
Setup a router that boots and runs from a floppy.
Of course, this kind of thing before for server use .. I don’t think anybody here is arguing that Linux isn’t ready for the server.
I’ve been running Windows for years but switched to Linux (RH 8.0) on my home computer about a year ago. Took some time to get used to but one thing I really like about Linux is my ability to ssh into my home computer from my work computer. You see I’m a sysadmin stuck on a 128k IDSL at work but I have 1.5 connection at home, often during the day I’ll find a file I want to download but because of its size I can’t do it at work. Presto I pop open putty and ssh into my home computer from there all I have to do is type “wget file” and when I get home from a long day browsing the internet my file is waiting for me. While you can set up ssh on Windows (and I’ve done it) and you can find a commandline downloader, its simply not as easy a task to complete in Windows as it is in Linux.
“That’s MUCH mores stable than I’ve seen a Windows computer being.”
Then explain why Windows 2000 is on the top 50 uptimes on the Netcraft site and no version of Linux is? BSD versions (except MacOSX) take up 48 of the slots, a box Solaris is #18 and #27 is Windows 2000.
While you can set up ssh on Windows (and I’ve done it) and you can find a commandline downloader, its simply not as easy a task to complete in Windows as it is in Linux.
More difficult, but not impossible, no ?
Then explain why Windows 2000 is on the top 50 uptimes on the Netcraft site and no version of Linux is?
I think there was some sort of bug in the Linux uptime command that reset after a certain number of days. Nevertheless, this is mainly a discussion about desktops, where uptime (as measured in months or years) isn’t that critical.
umm I’m not trying to bash your or anything but all those boxes that say Unix on netcraft are either Unix or Linux. You’d be quite suprised just how many of those boxes in the top 50 actually are linux.
QuickTime? Install libquicktime -> Play with KMPlayer
Remove software? YaST2 module -> Software -> Install or remove software -> check/uncheck
All my hardware detected, run perfectly: Epson Stylus C80, Epson Perfection 1250, Logitech QuickCam Pro 3000, Logitech Internet Navigator, Logitech optical -> all USB devices.
I just need a single package program for AIM + ICQ + MSN Messenger -> Kopete.
I use the latest nVidia driver pairs with XFree 4.3.0 -> KDE 3.1 run beatifully all fonts anti aliased including Windows ttfs.
KOffice is fine, OpenOffice is OK for me. I love tux racer and Frozen bubble.
I can open any given windows partition from linux, but not the other way round.
Have a lot of fun 🙂
And that is all that matters.
Exactly! I’m too tired of trying to convince people to use Linux anymore. Use what you want, just don’t ask me for help.
Do you want to know why you don’t see Linux box in the top 50 uptime ?
Easy…
From the Netcraft site:
“Additionally HP-UX, Linux, Solaris and recent releases of FreeBSD cycle back to zero after 497 days, exactly as if the machine had been rebooted at that precise point. Thus it is not possible to see a HP-UX, Linux or Solaris system with an uptime measurement above 497 days”
Paolo
At first I didn’t believe you until you quoted from the Netcraft site.
I was thinking that 1000 days is an aweful lot. The most I’ve seen is around 400. Now I know why.
Actually I don’t think I’ve seen many Linux systems with over 400 days of uptime, but I regularly see them with 60-100 days. My system has been up for 23 days since I decided I was going to attempt to run it without swap while I had KDE and GNOME, galeon, evolution, etc. running and only 256MB of RAM (had about 200MB paged out in swap at that time and 100MB of RAM available, not a good idea). It didn’t like it, but I bet the 2.6 kernel might be more responsive or at least handle the test better. I could have recovered without a reboot, but that might have taken me a day.
Try it sometime.
“try to use spreadsheets created in OO format in Excel. Excel does not understand anything so it loses about 100% of the spreadsheet
”
This might be true. But whether I like it or not, Excel is an industry standard and I have to play by that standard. That means if I want to use Linux I either need:
A: A spreadsheet that has TRUE Excel compatibility. Not just the ability to import simple Excel spreadsheets.
B: A way to run MS Office on Linux.
I would prefer A. But I think B is probably a more realistic answer because obviously Microsoft is not going to port Office to Linux, and Microsoft changes the document formats so often that OO or other open source spreadsheets simply couldn’t keep up.
“I don’t want developers deciding that Linux support isn’t important just because we can emulate windows.”
Yes, but you have the classic chicken and the egg problem.
Right now, developers decide that Linux support isn’t important for their desktop apps because the user base isn’t large enough to make it profitable for them to port to Linux. And users decide not to run Linux on their desktops because they can’t get the apps they are used to working with. So basically, users won’t start using Linux until the apps are available. And vendors won’t start porting to Linux until users start using it.
That’s why its so hard for new operating systems to get established on the desktop.
>This is so easy in Linux! And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows. Not to mention that all that software is free. And the statement that there’s no software enough for Linux is about the most stupid thing I’ve ever read.
It’s true that you can do all those things in linux, but you’ll have to tolerate buggy software usually lacking in features, with dreadfull and ugly interfaces. Even listening to mp3’s was not a very good experience the last time i tried it , there were latency problems with the sound, alsa probably fixed this, i don’t really know.
Besides server software i really don’t see many apps that are better than the ones on windows.
The big plus however is that everything is free, wich in any case isn’t very relevant because most people prefer to install pirated apps rather than using the free ones on linux.
When are you Linux zealots going to get it? Apparently never. (Now who has an IQ lower than 50)? Let me say it one more time… You are not going to gain any users for Linux by insulting their intelligence level when they complain that something should be easier to do.
I have two comments regarding this. First off, you chastise the “Linux Zealots” and then turn around and to the same thing you chastised them for. Interesting. So if I understand correctly, the real taboo is insulting the intelligence of people who’s opinions agree with yours. Otherwise it is considered insightful?
My second comment is that most things ARE easy to do in Linux. They are different however. Here is a very real scenario (it happened yesterday):
My Father bought Quickbooks yesterday to do his finances, but he couldn’t figure some things out, he didn’t like some things, and he didn’t like the fact that Quickbooks requires the internet to run properly (he doesn’t use the internet).
I showed his Appgen on Linux. He liked it very much and seemed very excited to use it. He also liked how responsive my Linux machine is. He thought Gnome looked really good, and he asked if I could install Linux on his laptop. Everything was going well until I had him walk through the process of booting, logging in, and launching Appgen from the menu. He didn’t like that he had to remember a password and that the menu didn’t look like Windows XP. He gave up.
So guess what. He is unhappily sitting at home using Quickbooks on Windows. This in spite of the fact that Appgen makes a Windows version (the obvious opinion was if it runs on Linux it must be hard). This is VERY typical of Windows users. At least I have seen it quite often.
The point of all this is that people are okay with not being able to figure things out in Windows. They are okay settling with subpar quality in software products. They are okay with dealing with bugs. They are okay learning new things is Windows. However, if you ask them to do any of those same things in Linux, you are instantly subjected to a disertation of how hard everything is in Linux. Also, if you mention anything that exposes the double standard, then you are instantly labeled a “zealot”, which is really pathetic.
“And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows.”
Name one thing.
Well, for one, I can get Linux for free; legally. You can’t do that with Windows. Also, I can optimize my kernel for my machine, cutting out the cruft, thus drastically improving performance on my desktop. I can’t do that with Windows. I can run an MP3/OGG player, update my desktop, and watch media files and DVDs while hooked to the internet without the fear of my viewing and listening habits, along with an accounting of everything installed on my computer, being sent up to Microsoft’s “customer database”. Windows doesn’t offer that level of customer consideration.
There is probably a shload of things I can append here if I think about it for a minute.
I think one of the reasons why linux desktop is, in general, totally lame is because the open source community lacks one really important thing: women developers. Lets face it, (we) men just do not have the skills or good taste to design a good ui, and the result is that linux ui’s seem to have been designed by crocodile dundee.
>I don’t think my art pad or QuickCam would either. What about >my PSX to USB converter for my joystick? I want to be able to >use Yahoo! Messenger, AIM, MSN/Windows Messenger, and >ICQ without signing up for some “Jabber” pay service.
Either this is FUD, or you geniunely don’t know.
I know the quickcam works, becuase I’ve used one with linux before.
Both AIM and Yahoo offer linux versions of their software, in addition to various FREE 3rd party offerings. There are about a thousand ICQ clones available. And there are MSN solutions available (gaim, trillian). None of which force you to sign up for some “Jabber” pay service.
Iconoclast
Well, for one, I can get Linux for free; legally. You can’t do that with Windows.
Yeah, God forbid that anybody charge for their products. This is more political than technical.
Also, I can optimize my kernel for my machine, cutting out the cruft, thus drastically improving performance on my desktop.
AFAIK, Windows uses a micro-kernel which means it doesn’t come loaded with all of the shit you don’t need and would therefore have to remove. And even if that is not the case, there is still PLENTY of ways to optimize a Windows box. I can get a 2-3x performance boost just by tweaking the default install, making it rock solid in the process. (I’ve been considering writing an article on how do this for OSNews.)
I can run an MP3/OGG player, update my desktop, and watch media files and DVDs while hooked to the internet without the fear of my viewing and listening habits, along with an accounting of everything installed on my computer, being sent up to Microsoft’s “customer database”. Windows doesn’t offer that level of customer consideration.
Again, political .. it always comes down to politics, doesn’t it? There’s no way that a person could have a discussion on DESKTOP Linux vs. Windows and defend Linux on its technical merits alone without dragging politics into it. “Oh, but I can browse the web, write letters, and chat!” Great, so what do you want, a cookie?
>Sometimes I wonder if Linux users aren’t the most
>hypocritical bunch out there. You berate people that find
>the OS confusing or hard to use, while preaching about the
>sense of “community” you all have. You damn Windows, but
>KDE and Gnome are looking more and more like the
>environment you hate so much.
KDE and Gnome are looking more like windows? You surely
mean that they CAN BE MADE to look like windows. It’s
called flexibility. Distros ship with Windows-like defaults
simply because a familiar interface eases migration. NOT
necesarily because the Windows GUI is better.
>No, really. I mean, I like the turn things are taking –
>because, believe it or not, I’m fairly intelligent, but I
>find Linux too hard to use to swap completely over instead
>of using Windows.
Takes time. Apparently you have not invested enough. How
long have you been using Linux? and how long have you
been using Windows?
>Really.
Yes. Really.
>I like the Wine-based projects because they let me use
>various software — such as QuickTime — that I can’t use
>under Linux right now. And for such a wonderful OS, I mean,
>really… why can’t I install programs and uninstall them?
>Is it really that hard? It seems like all the install
>programs are “make install” to compile, and then you’re
>screwed when you want to uninstall. Should I just delete
>the folder? Does that take care of my menus and my file
>type associations?
Then don’t install from source! this misconception is
oh-so-common with you guys.. If you want to
install/uninstall, shortcut/mimelink management and
easy maintenance, then you use BINARY PACKAGERS, NOT SOURCE.
Install Mandrake and use it’s control center to add or
remove packages. Install RedHat. Install SuSe. DO NOT
install Slackware if you want package management. That is
for big boys.
>It’s funny to me that the more Linux looks and feels like
>Windows, the more Linux users bash the Microsoft OS the DEs
>are being based on. Windows may not be the most stable OS
Once again, Windows is NOT the base of all Linux DEs.
The possibility to make them look like it exists and
it certainly is the default. But for the last time, this
is a matter of familiarity, and not a matter of which one
is copying who. Windows is more popular. That is the only reason.
>out there — but it’s easy to use. It’s got hundreds of
>thousands of applications and drivers. It’s got a ton of
>support. It’s the majority. Microsoft has actually made a
We’ve got a cool saying for people like you in my country:
“Ten thousand trillions of flies cannot be mistaken: eat
sh*t”
If you want easy to use, then choose what you find more
comfortable. If you like Windows, it’s perfectly fine
by me, and i do think it is a valid choice. But that
“it’s the majority” argument is simply dumb.
>lot of steps toward stability – and Windows 2000 is the
>most stable OS I’ve used yet. Windows XP is getting there.
Personally, i like W2K better.
>With Linux, my scanner doesn’t work. I don’t think my art
Does the scanner manufacturer support Linux? if not, then
duuuuuh. There are a lot of scanners that work in Linux.
>pad or QuickCam would either. What about my PSX to USB
>converter for my joystick?
…dunno. never tried.
>I want to be able to use Yahoo!
>Messenger, AIM, MSN/Windows Messenger, and ICQ without
>signing up for some “Jabber” pay service. I want to be able
>to make upgrades without crashing everything.
Jabber pay service? WTF?
You want a REALLY easy to use IM client? use Gaim. It’s
the best multi-protocol IM program. It handles all
of those protocols and more (you can even IRC in it)
and it can maintain multiple accounts/protocols active
simultaneously and handle them in such a transparent
way you soon forget if your friends are on ICQ or Yahoo
os MSN or whatever.
>I tried to update the kernel under Linux – BIG honkin’
>mistake, man. Thought it was just a simple module add-on
You are damn right it was a big mistake. You state
below that you don’t know how to resize an icon in KDE’s
kicker and you want to mess with kernel stuff? Buy
Mandrake 9.0, subscribe to the Club and they will give you
a nice custom-made RPM for you. This is how the Linux
world really works as of today. You want support?
Then you’ll need to go get it.
>for nVidia drivers, and crapped out the kernel. Format,
>reinstall. Tried to upgrade the kernel point release,
>crapped out, format, reinstall. Tried to upgrade XFree86.
>Craped out, format, reinstall. Tried to add OpenGL/Mesa
>supports, crapped out, format, reinstall. Tried to get
>surround sound going, couldn’t. Tried to get anti-aliased
>fonts, crapped out, format, reinstall.
Same deal, Same deal, Same deal, Same deal, Same deal.
If you can’t customise a friggin DE, you shouldn’t be
messing with the lower system. I’m sure the first time
you used Windows, your very first steps were editing
registry keys and tweaking the boot process. right?
In Windows i can EASILY make a registry key that assigns
.exe files to notepad. crap out, format, reinstall. Big
deal.
>Linux is, in general too hard to use. People familiar with
One of the reasons Linux looks harder is because it
doesn’t hide anything. If you were unable to see the
config files/sourcecode/underlying libs then you
wouldn’t be trying to mess around with them before
you can resize a toolbar. Use Lycoris, use Xandros,
use RedHat. No need to tweak nearly that much stuff
in those.
>Windows want point and click. Don’t tell me to use a text
>editor, and don’t tell me to use a terminal window. If it
I’m telling you to find a distro that is suitable for you.
>works in a terminal, for God’s sake make a GUI wrap for it
>too – GUI wrappers around console apps are a dime a dozen
>under Windows, and they work well enough. Give me my ‘task
>notification area’. Give me my uninstsall program. Give me
>a “system update” that will make my scanner work, and give
>me antialiased fonts.
USE AN APPROPRIATE DISTRO.
> Give me a pretty taskbar that fits on
>one line and doesn’t have huge icons all over the place.
in KDE, right click on the “taskbar” (as you call it)
—>size—>tiny
Be sure to learn this kind of extremely difficult
operations before you attempt to recompile a friggin
kernel.
>I’m sick of Windows. It’s like eating the same cereal every >day of my life. I’ve seen the new flavor and I want a bite >– but it’s just too crunchy.
It takes time. And strong teeth.
>If I had the money I’d consider a Mac. But don’t get me >started on Hardware monopolies versus OS/software >monopolies.
IMHO if you are the kind of person that considers a MAC
(www.apple.com/switch for a pathetic bunch of sample losers)
then you should not consider Linux at all. Get your MAC
and move on with your life.
Be happy.
Damian.
Here is where I think DESKTOP Linux’s shortcomings are …
1. There are a lot of apps available for Linux, but there are many more (for different tasks) for Windows. It really depends on what kind of apps a user wants tu use and if Linux currently has those types of apps.
I think a lot of people make the mistake of putting the average user in a ‘sandbox’ and say “Ok, he’s only going to use this app and that app”, and not suprisingly, all of the apps you THINK a person will ONLY use are all supported in Linux. And for the stuff that is supported in Linux some (not all of it) is either alpha quality (eg – Roadmap) or missing features as compared to their Windows counterparts (eg – Yahoo Messenger).
2. Games – Face it, Tuxgames and the handful of commercial offerings Linux supports are only going to go so far. WineX is about as workable solution as Wine, which means it’ll support some games, but not all the games you could get in Windows. And how many of the newest commercial games will work in WineX right out of the box? Of course, there’s always consoles, but most hardcore gamers will tell you that the PC and consoles offer completely different kinds of gaming experiences – though some games are cross-ported between PCs and consoles, they are not interchangable for the most part. (Of course, this is also starting to change with the advent of online gaming for consoles, but not yet.)
3. We live in a Windows world and 97% of things (software & hardware) was built to run on Windows. On Linux, there’s only so many things you can ‘hack’ to make work or offer alternatives for. Sooner or later, you’re going to come up short. For example, I just bought a Roland XV-5050 sound module that has a USB interface and comes with a sound editor. Think there was Linux drivers or a Linux version of the sound editor on the CD? Nope, not a chance in hell. Will this work at all under Linux? Well, maybe and mabye not, but surely not when it was first released, meaning that if I want to buy something like this and interface it with my computer, I’ve gotta wait until somebody either builds support for this on Linux or I do it myself. For any ‘early adopters’ of hardware (meaning you want to buy that snazzy new MP3 player that just came out), Linux is clearly not the best chose. And just like software, some (not all) of the hardware supported by Linux is supported half-assed, where not all of the features of the hardware work.
On ease of use:
I really don’t think this is as big of a problem as people think it is. As hard as Linux can be to learn, Windows isn’t really much better. From what I’ve seen, the way most Windows users ‘learn’ how to use the OS is to call their friend or relative who knows Windows and say “Hey, can you come and show me how to use this thing?” Of course, this is a disadvantage for Linux because not as many people know it (yet). But if you have a Windows & a Linux user who have boxes set up for them by someone else and had someone to show them around, one probably isn’t going to be any harder than the other. I’ve been able to make 2k/XP rock solid and nearly crash-proof, but I sure as hell didn’t learn how to do it overnight – that kind of knowledge comes with lots and lots of experience using the OS.
But the people who think that DESKTOP Linux can do everything Windows can (but just differently) need a serious reality check. That’s why if you enter a Windows vs. Linux debate and you’re on the side of Windows, you have to point out all of the things that Linux can’t yet do.
. . .to the worm, fishing is not a relaxing activity.
To: Andrew G and Dani M,
The line you both quote from the second paragraph of the article is a rhetorical statement. It is intended to provoke thought. It is not a statement indicating that one cannot do these functions under Linux.
First, the article is written by someone who comes from a Windows background. Second, the article is in the Business section; not in the Technology section. The reporter is covering this from a business aspect. In business, training is money. If you can use Crossover Office to run the software with which you are already familiar, there is almost no training expense.
To Quote:
more than 100 million people in the United States alone have been using Windows for much of the past decade, and they’re not going to make a change to something new without some phasing in.
Crossover Office would allow the change and phasing in of new applications with a minimum of turmoil.
I see people complaining that Linux has an ugly UI. This…
http://www.sorn.net/screenshots/apps/some_apps.png
… doesn’t look any more ugly than Windows 2000 to me.
“And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows.”
Name one thing.
1) Be able to examine Oracle threads to see what’s going wrong (and this one has bitten me a lot). For that matter being able do an instance recovery in Oracle is pretty much impossible and this is one of Oracle’s primary advantages.
2) And the above is really because… You can’t see a list of threads but only of processes.
3) Have a halfway decent pipe for scripting. Even something as simple as echo is broken. Try typing echo “hello” notice the quotes?
4) Drag and drop between local and remote apps.
5) Have a case sensitive filesystem for compiling apps that depend on this.
6) Have Perl work right (though it is getting much much better)
7) Not run browser code as part of your desktop
8) Make settings changes without a reboot
9) Join an NT domain without the domain administrator’s OK (unlike a windows 95/98 or Linux box)
10) Support different internationalizations on a per user basis.
I could keep going…
Isn’t this discussion about Linux desktop, my grandmother wants to use email, transfer photos from camera to her comp and play a few CDs, even if she were using CAD, DV or some other hi-tech app would she or anybody else give a damn. How in hells name do the things you mention put any Linux distro ahead any MS Win flavor. Reality check old boy!!!
You want a REALLY easy to use IM client? use Gaim. It’s
the best multi-protocol IM program. It handles all
of those protocols and more (you can even IRC in it)
Easy to use? This is what I saw the first time I loaded up Gaim.
http://www.brokenwatch.net/gaim.png
And, as I’m trying to clear up the list that was causing all of those problems, all of those messages would kindly repeat themselves. Lucky me. Like it or not, many open source programs are buggy, just as many Windows programs are (the difference is- there are more programs available for Windows). And I would definitely disagree with you that Gaim is easy to use (if you care to have that discussion- just say so). Have you tried Trillian Pro? Much better (imho of course).
Takes time. Apparently you have not invested enough. How
long have you been using Linux? and how long have you
been using Windows?
Maybe the interface is just poor.. Mac OS X is not “like windows” and yet OSnews is not cluttered with complaints about its UI. Just food for thought.
I’m getting to the point where I think it is an act of futility to try and compare linux and Windows (ans OS X) to each other, partly because of the politics, but also because they really are set up differently.
For Linux and the average user, the way things currently are, there pretty much has to be some kind of set up Lindow’s Click & Run or Lycoris’s IRIS download area…or perhaps if the person could learn to use YAST2 with Suse, which is easy. And really, again regarding the average user, that’s the way things are.
It’s tough too. You take an outfit like Lindows and you don’t know if you want to support them or not. Lycoris painstakingly tries its best to make a really nice and friendly user experience, but it’s slow going and they’re still using KDE 2.2.x. At any rate, there has to be some kind of set up like this or it just won’t work for the average user.
I believe there is truth in the comment about people willing to put up with bugs and other problems in Windows. It’s only natural because Windows is everywhere and with the advent of XP, it even works pretty well, compared to former incarnations. It’s just a natural thing though – people want to use what everyone else is using.
It is still the case that a user who tries out Linux, even if it’s Lindows, Lycoris or Xandros, is somewhat of an adventurer, even if they are buying a Microtel through Wal-Mart with Linux pre-installed. Despite how much easier it is to use Linux now than in the past, you have to be a little different to take that kind of plunge.
So, I don’t find comparing the two as useful as I once did. Because of all the various things involved, they are still in different universes for the vast majority of people, not because either is so much harder to use or has more problems than the other, but because they reside in totally different places in most people’s minds.
Isn’t this discussion about Linux desktop, my grandmother…
You can’t have it both ways claiming that Windows does everything that Linux and then when someone posts a list claim “well that list bother my grandmother”. The stronger claim was made first and needs to be retracted before we address the best OS for your grandmother.
Everything I mentioned is stuff I do on my desktop, those are all desktop issues, none of those are issues on servers. The disadvantages with Windows Server compared to Linux are so great at this point that the sole area that Windows has the lead is ease of administration for undertrained staff; the list would almost have to go the other way.
Home multimedia (stuff like the camera) is not Linux’s strong suit (commercial multimedia OTOH it can give Windows for its money). I’ll be happy to grant your grandmother would probably be happier with Windows (though Mac sounds like a better fit than either Windows or Linux), but that wasn’t the original question.
Ah how I LOVE discussions like this! The the blatant flaming, the misinformation and put-downs of linux vs. windows. Always an entertaining read.
“the installation of Lindows takes about five to seven minutes and is quite easy compared to a traditional Linux installation that can take an hour or more.”
-funny, I have a fairly outdated comp, p3-450 and there isn’t one distro I’ve tried, with the exception of Gentoo, that took longer than 45 mins or so…
“‘And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows.’
Name one thing.”
-Not having to wade through miles of EULA?
“Last I checked (RH 8.0), Mozilla in Redhat comes loaded with like zero plugins. At least with IE, when you’re missing a plugin, a dialog box comes up … one click affair. Of course, this also causes security nightmares, but that’s beside the point
”
-Yeah, the security of computer systems is highly overrated, isn’t it? We don’t need no stinkin’ security!
“AFAIK, Windows uses a micro-kernel which means it doesn’t come loaded with all of the shit you don’t need and would therefore have to remove. And even if that is not the case, there is still PLENTY of ways to optimize a Windows box. I can get a 2-3x performance boost just by tweaking the default install, making it rock solid in the process. (I’ve been considering writing an article on how do this for OSNews.)”
-This kind of arguement kind of nullifies the old ‘would joe-user be able to use it?’ argument, dontcha think? I have difficulty imagining my parents firing up regedit on a whim.
“But the people who think that DESKTOP Linux can do everything Windows can (but just differently) need a serious reality check. That’s why if you enter a Windows vs. Linux debate and you’re on the side of Windows, you have to point out all of the things that Linux can’t yet do.”
-No reality check needed here. All it takes is patience and a little effort to find solutions for any problem. Hell, I’ve finally managed to get my favorite app, counterstrike (lol) working on linux. It took some effort, sure, but that makes it all the sweeter in the end, IMHO.
Apps are too hard to install? As stated somewhere else in these comments, don’t compile from source. Or better yet, learn what apt-get is… nothing could be easier.
Is linux ‘ready for the desktop’? (whatever that means…) No, not for the average Joe, because the average Joe will flat-out refuse to even attempt to learn a new OS. They install linux thinking that they’ll be greeted with the same familiar windows they were using before. Is this a realistic assumption? Then there’s complaints that KDE and Gnome are ‘ripping off’ Windows interface ideas, though these ideas would make it ‘easier’ for them to use, it all makes so little sense. My opinion has always been that linux is for people with the patience and the interest in spending a moderate amount of time into ‘crafting’ their OS. Sure, everything may not run straight out of the box, but it IS possible.
“1) Be able to examine Oracle threads to see what’s going wrong (and this one has bitten me a lot). For that matter being able do an instance recovery in Oracle is pretty much impossible and this is one of Oracle’s primary advantages.”
And the average desktop user cares about this because….
Besides, no serious business is running Oracle on Linux anyway.
“4) Drag and drop between local and remote apps.”
Tried Windows 2000 lately?
“5) Have a case sensitive filesystem for compiling apps that depend on this.”
And when has this ever caused problems in Windows? Besides, if programmers are writing apps that depend on case sensitivity for compiling, they should lose their job. That’s just dumb.
“6) Have Perl work right (though it is getting much much better)”
ActiveState Perl for Windows works just fine.
Besides, I prefer Python. And Python works great under Windows.
“8) Make settings changes without a reboot”
Tried Windows XP lately?
“9) Join an NT domain without the domain administrator’s OK (unlike a windows 95/98 or Linux box)”
I call this a security flaw.
“10) Support different internationalizations on a per user basis.”
Tried Windows XP lately?
Right now, developers decide that Linux support isn’t important for their desktop apps because the user base isn’t large enough to make it profitable for them to port to Linux. And users decide not to run Linux on their desktops because they can’t get the apps they are used to working with. So basically, users won’t start using Linux until the apps are available. And vendors won’t start porting to Linux until users start using it.
I see this problem as one that is less and less every day. The truth is, more people are using linux, if for no other reason than because more and more people are using pc’s.
There is a critical mass linux will have to reach before it begins being supported. I think, the way things are going, it will get there. I don’t mind if most people never use linux, but if linux had a good 7% desktop market share… that would rock hizzay.
“First off, you chastise the “Linux Zealots” and then turn around and to the same thing you chastised them for. Interesting”
You don’t understand correctly. It’s called making a point. “Hi pot. My name is kettle” is the point I was trying to make.
“Also, I can optimize my kernel for my machine, cutting out the cruft, thus drastically improving performance on my desktop.”
You call this an advantage? I call it a symptom of a kernel that is so badly desinged you have to recompile it to optimize it. And besides, how many people actuallly recompile their Linux kernels anymore? Most of the functionality that used to be statically compiled into the kernel is now available as modules. Linux finally learned the lesson that SUN and Microsoft learned years ago.
Apparently, dynamically loadable modules don’t mean much to you?
“I can run an MP3/ OGG player, update my desktop, and watch media files and DVDs while hooked to the internet without the fear of my viewing and listening habits, along with an accounting of everything installed on my computer, being sent up to Microsoft’s “customer database”. Windows doesn’t offer that level of customer consideration.”
You are truely naive if you believe this. Remember the bitchX backdoor? If you think your Linux apps aren’t subject to backdoor snooping and such, try again.
AFAIK, Windows uses a micro-kernel which means it doesn’t come loaded with all of the shit you don’t need and would therefore have to remove. And even if that is not the case, there is still PLENTY of ways to optimize a Windows box. I can get a 2-3x performance boost just by tweaking the default install, making it rock solid in the process. (I’ve been considering writing an article on how do this for OSNews.)
Of course Windows is quite tweakable when you know what to do, but you cannot tweak windows clearly as much as you can a linux machine. This is a simple truth and cannot be argued. With linux you can compile your kernel and most of your programs with whatever flags you please, optimized for your processors specific instruction set. Windows cannot touch this. That isn’t an insult to Windows. It is just the nature of business model.
Again, political .. it always comes down to politics, doesn’t it? There’s no way that a person could have a discussion on DESKTOP Linux vs. Windows and defend Linux on its technical merits alone without dragging politics into it. “Oh, but I can browse the web, write letters, and chat!” Great, so what do you want, a cookie?
Dislike of Microsoft spyware is not only a political issue. Spyware is a technical issue as it involves not only the policies of the company making the software, but also the function of the software. In Windows, MS spyware is a fact of life. You live with it, you have no choice besides unplugging that network cable from the back of your computer.
It disgusts me that you act with such contempt for someone just because they are offended by spyware. YOU SHOULD BE OFFENDED BY SPYWARE. It should bother you that you pay hundreds of dollars to a company so that they can track your every move, and it is ridiculous to suggest that it is wrong for someone to be upset about it. If a linux developer were to use spyware in their programs I would feel the exact same way and rightfully so. Spyware is technically wasteful and morally reprehensible. Defending it is a lost cause.
But the people who think that DESKTOP Linux can do everything Windows can (but just differently) need a serious reality check.
Linux CAN do anything Windows can do. It just needs a little developer support, which is slowly coming. It is ridiculous to blame “Linux” on this lack of support.
I must however say, at long last, I have found something we agree on. That is that Linux and Windows are equally hard to use. Most of us here have used windows for a long time, so on the surface it seems easier to use to us because that is what we grew up on; however, new users just cannot get ANYTHING right on either linux or windows. It has been so long since I was a newbie that it is easy to forget things like this.
I call this a security flaw
If it is, it is a Windows security flaw. Linux distros have no responsibility to stick to Microsoft’s awfuls security model.
I’ve tried to. On more than one occasion. Way back with Red Hat 4.2, which didn’t support the IDE drives in my home computer, but did support the SCSI drives on my workstation at school. I’ve tried Mandrake 7. I tried Debian (Potato). My friend played a practical joke on me and made me try Slackware.
More recently I’ve tried Red Hat 7.3 and Lycoris Build 46.
I also tried BeOS Developer Edition 1.1 – and liked it better than any distro of Linux I’ve ever used. Of course, that’s because BeOS sat down and actually wrote an OS, rather than a supposed community sitting down and writing whatever struck them as interesting that day.
For the record, I did go for binary downloads wherever possible, and was somewhat successful. That still didn’t give me much of an “uninstaller” however. And other times, I couldn’t find an RPM for my Distro. You’re telling me I’ve gotta know Lycoris is based on Corel and Corel is in turn based on Caldera? (I think I got that right.) And at that point, why can’t I ever find RPMs marked properly, then?
I mentioned Windows and MacOS – and immediately got a “Peh, if you’re thinking about using one of them, then don’t bother.” Is this the general attitude of Linux users? Well no wonder you don’t have any corporations willing to hand out drivers – between this… distain for everything else, and your battle cry that “everything must be Open Source! Anything that is not is Spyware and will fail!” gets a bit tiring.
For the record, as far as IM protocols go – I did a search online for what could connect me to “the big four” – and everything pointed me to this Jabber client. I can’t remember the name… but what it would do is let me connect to Jabber and one other IM – AIM I think. And I would have had to pay to use the other protocols it supported. Trillian at the time wasn’t on Linux as far as I know, because I was using Trillian on the PC side and didn’t see a “download for Linux” anywhere. I’ll have to see if their free client is out – because I’m not going to pay to use Trillian Pro if that’s all they’ve got for Linux.
Why? Because I thought Linux was Eden – this great, marvellous place where money didn’t exist. People could get anything and everything for free, and everyone was more than happy to give a newbie like myself a helping hand. Because you wanted more people on your OS – because you believed in it. Not this “it works for me, so don’t ask me for help” stuff.
I wanted anti-aliased fonts. Windows 2000 and Windows XP supports this right out of the box. I think ME might have… I can’t remember. Anyway, I wanted that under Linux too – so I downloaded the Xfree86 binary upgrade and tried that, which crapped out the system. This was under Debian and Red Hat. Okay… format, reinstall. Under Windows, it’s long since been known that you don’t want Microsoft’s version of a driver – you want the manufacturer’s. Okay, go to nVidia… (I’ve since upgraded to an ATi card) …Ooh. Linux binary kernel module. ReadMe… do this and this. Nifty. Went to my Windows box and printed out the instructions. Followed it step by step, and rebooted like it said to. Damn! Format, reinstall.
Now, my friend – who was the local Linux expert – had his jaw hit the floor when I described my “problem” to him, and basically told me what I’ve been told here – until you’re more into it, don’t mess with anything. What? I had to install drivers the first day I used Windows, and that didn’t make the system not boot. He also told me it was a horrible idea to use binaries for things like that, because you never knew how your system was configured. Oh… okay.
I’m pretty sure the “taskbar” used to be called a “dock” under Gnome – nomenclature that Apple’s since borrowed. It’s funny how hostile the attitude to that was. I realize that this is OSnews.com, and anyone mentioning anything other than “I love Linux! Tee-hee!” is going to get numerous flames – hell, Eugenia does and she’s on staff.
As much as everyone touts “flexibility” and “choices” on Linux, has anyone ever stopped and asked if there was too much out there? With Windows you sit down and start learning. Things work inheriently because it’s a mature OS. With Linux, you need more than that. What makes Sawfish better than WindowMaker? What’s the big difference between Gnome and KDE? …More importantly, why should I even care? Why can’t I just sit down, put in a Linux CD, install, boot up, and start learning in a comfortable environment?
It’s getting to that point. It’s in the near future – the people and companies behind Linux distros are finally learning that presentation is almost more important than functionality and security for the desktop market.
1) Be able to examine Oracle threads to see what’s going wrong (and this one has bitten me a lot). For that matter being able do an instance recovery in Oracle is pretty much impossible and this is one of Oracle’s primary advantages.”
And the average desktop user cares about this because….
Besides, no serious business is running Oracle on Linux anyway.
Funny Oracle’s recommended standard enterprise configuration is a Dell/RedHat cluster; I guess Oracle doesn’t know what serious businesses run when they choose Oracle. As for the average desktop user caring about it, they don’t. The point is that Windows has noticalbe disadvantages.
“4) Drag and drop between local and remote apps.”
Tried Windows 2000 lately?
Yes and it doesn’t work.
“5) Have a case sensitive filesystem for compiling apps that depend on this.”
And when has this ever caused problems in Windows?
Because you want to compile software for a Windows environment that wasn’t originally written with a Windows environment in mind.
Besides, if programmers are writing apps that depend on case sensitivity for compiling, they should lose their job. That’s just dumb.
Not at all, it can work very nicely. CONFIGURE can be a script that generates configure, a program can come at either level and its very clear. The fact windows people don’t do something doesn’t make it dumb. In fact this technique is part of variable naming conventions in many companies:
i.e. x is an object and X is the struct with the same data.
“6) Have Perl work right (though it is getting much much better)”
ActiveState Perl for Windows works just fine.
No it doesn’t. That’s why you see all the documenation on Windows32 Perl. Many more things work than used to, back in the 5.4 days almost no modules actually worked. But there are still thousands of bugs and differences, its a major porting hassle.
Besides, I prefer Python. And Python works great under Windows.
Read your original post. It didn’t talk about “some languages work fine under windwos” but rather you claimed desktop windows did everything that desktop Linux does.
“9) Join an NT domain without the domain administrator’s OK (unlike a windows 95/98 or Linux box)”
I call this a security flaw.
How is that a security flaw? Its not a desktop’s job to enforce security that’s up to the server.
“10) Support different internationalizations on a per user basis.”
Tried Windows XP lately?
Yep and it doesn’t have it. Try running your windows in Japanese.
>KDE and Gnome are looking more like windows? You surely
>mean that they CAN BE MADE to look like windows. It’s
>called flexibility. Distros ship with Windows-like defaults
>simply because a familiar interface eases migration. NOT
>necesarily because the Windows GUI is better.
I didn’t say the Windows GUI was better – I said that KDE and Gnome look more and more like Windows all the time. You yourself admitted that’s the default nature.
>Then don’t install from source! this misconception is
>oh-so-common with you guys..
>DO NOT
>install Slackware if you want package management. That is
>for big boys.
With “you guys”? “big boys”? What is this, an argument between children? What “guys” am I? Why are you a “big boy”? I’m your target market, kiddo – someone wanting to make the big switch.
>Once again, Windows is NOT the base of all Linux DEs.
>The possibility to make them look like it exists and
>it certainly is the default. But for the last time, this
>is a matter of familiarity,
I didn’t say it was the base of all DEs – so don’t put words into my mouth. And what’s this “for the last time” crap?
>We’ve got a cool saying for people like you in my country:
>”Ten thousand trillions of flies cannot be mistaken: eat
>sh*t”
>If you want easy to use, then choose what you find more
>comfortable. If you like Windows, it’s perfectly fine
>by me, and i do think it is a valid choice. But that
>”it’s the majority” argument is simply dumb.
This is why I love talking to people that use Linux – they’ve got to call you various names to get their point across and reestablish their dominance over “you guys”.
Microsoft OSes are most definitely the majority for Desktop use. There are more copies of various builds of Windows out there being used than any other OS – including MacOS. I’m not going to get into why, with the OEM bundling and whatever, but the simple fact remains that if given a choice between Windows, Mac, and Linux, a developer is that much more likely to develop for Windows because it has the largest installed consumer base. I don’t see how that’s an “argument” – it’s a fact.
>Does the scanner manufacturer support Linux? if not, then
>duuuuuh. There are a lot of scanners that work in Linux.
Thanks for the remark, Professor Homer. I know there are a lot of scanners that work in Linux, but mine doesn’t. And for me, that’s what matters. I’m not going to buy a new scanner just to use Linux. God forbid someone point something doesn’t work out there – “you guys” just gets “buy new hardware then” for an answer.
>Buy
>Mandrake 9.0, subscribe to the Club and they will give you
>a nice custom-made RPM for you. This is how the Linux
>world really works as of today. You want support?
>Then you’ll need to go get it.
Subscribe? – as in Pay? No, I don’t think so. I thought Linux was about “open source” and “free as in beer” and “choices, always choices”. When I want support, I do the same thing as I do under Windows – I go to websites, read up on what I can, and ask people for help and guidance. I don’t pay for it under Windows, and I’m not about to under Linux. Assuming that I tried to do everything under Linux without asking for help is a fallacy – but just goes to show you what type of ‘support’ I received – being laughed at, called names, and told to stick to Windows because I was too stupid to use Linux effectively. Sounds a lot like being back in grade school.
>If you can’t customise a friggin DE, you shouldn’t be
>messing with the lower system. I’m sure the first time
>you used Windows, your very first steps were editing
>registry keys and tweaking the boot process. right?
Yes, I was as a matter of fact. Windows 95, I sat there with a magazine that gave me little registry tweaks, and from my previous use of DOS, I did tweak the autoexec and config scripts so that it booted cleaner, faster, and got rid of stuff I didn’t want. And you know — it didn’t crash anymore than Windows 95 crashed without that stuff done to it.
>In Windows i can EASILY make a registry key that assigns
>.exe files to notepad. crap out, format, reinstall. Big
>deal.
So you’re comparing installing drivers under Linux to purposefully opening exe files in an exe file? That’s a funny argument.
>Use Lycoris, use Xandros,
>use RedHat. No need to tweak nearly that much stuff
>in those.
I used Lycoris and Red Hat – and if you’ll notice, that didn’t help. I had to tweak just as much as I have to tweak Windows to be comfortable.
>USE AN APPROPRIATE DISTRO.
Yes, using all caps to scream at me gets your point across. Thank you for that insight.
>in KDE, right click on the “taskbar” (as you call it)
>—>size—>tiny
>Be sure to learn this kind of extremely difficult
>operations before you attempt to recompile a friggin
>kernel.
And if I use Gnome? Yes, I called it a “taskbar”. Oh dear God in Heaven, whatever shall I do? I didn’t call it a “dock” or “tasker” or whatever. I’m a Windows user – and I call that thing a “taskbar” because that’s what it is under Windows. Just be happy I don’t call my wallpaper my “screen saver”, and talk about having 80 GB of “memory”.
Coming off so condesending – telling me right-clicking is an “extremely difficult operation” is laughable. You’re acting like I’ve personally offended you. Your reply was full of “friggin” this and “friggin” that, and that’s not the attitude to take with someone wanting to use the OS you love so dearly.
I don’t understand what this debate is about. Linux is easy to use. It took me a year to learn Windows and 3 months to learn how to use Linux. After spending a year leaning about all the things that could go wrong with windows (and I experienced them all) moving to Linux was like a natural progression. Sure some things required a little more advanced knowledge, but I was ready for that. Windows and its many quirks had prepared me for that. I would say that Windows is like a beginners OS and Linux is like a more advanced OS. (The command line in Linux is like nothing Windows possesses). Windows is fine, but if you really want to learn about computing then Linux is the way to go. As for Linux on the desktop? Well admittedly not all applications work yet, quite as well as some might like. But hey, Linux on the desktop is still a pretty young idea, previously it was seen as a pure server OS. In 4 or 5 years MS will have some real competition on their hands. Right now Linux on the desktop has taken some huge leaps forward, the latest versions of KDE and Gnome are often eye achingly pretty. Of course not everything is where a Windows user might expect to find it.
Personally I use Linux and Windows. I have both on my computer, but as time has gone on I have less and less reasons to use Windows. I don’t know why. I just like using Linux more. If I was asked if I preferred Linux or Windows, I would say Linux, because it affords me total control over my system and everything I do.
A lot of people here are criticising Linux because they don’t understand it. But how can you criticise something you don’t understand? It makes no sense. Its like saying I don’t like this thing, because I don’t know what I’m talking about.
I’m not deriding anyone here. Ease of use still has to be worked on (and it is being worked on every day) but really I don’t think were even talking about easy of use here. Linux is easy, but it is very different if you’ve been used to running Windows for 5 years. Most people get set in their ways – and give up after only a few hours of using Linux. If you think back though, ask yourself, did it really only take you a few hours before you fully understood Windows? If so I would wonder how much you really do know about windows.
My main criticism of the Linux community is that its far too fragmented. There are just too many distributions and too many people working on different projects. If Linux is ever to be any real competition for Windows, a lot of that fragmentation will have to end. Choice is fine, but too much choice stifles development. What is needed is that work be better allocated to specialist teams so that new features can be designed and implemented more effectively. Right now MS is leading the way in terms of innovation on the Desktop and the Linux community (due to this fragmentation) is only able to follow. Only when developers stop following and start taking the lead themselves will Linux truly begin to win the hearts and minds of Windows users.
Q
>With “you guys”?
Yes. “You guys” as in “people that try Linux for a week and
decide they already know enough to criticize it.
>”big boys”? What is this, an argument
>between children?
No. it is an argument about people with great knowledge
as opposed to whiners.
>What “guys” am I?
gee. i dunno.
>Why are you a “big
>boy”?
Did i say i was? I use Mandrake 9.0 and love it.
> I’m your target market, kiddo – someone wanting to
>make the big switch
Good for you.
>>Does the scanner manufacturer support Linux? if not, then
>>duuuuuh. There are a lot of scanners that work in Linux.
>Thanks for the remark, Professor Homer. I know there
You are most welcome.
>are a lot of scanners that work in Linux, but mine doesn’t.
It’s a simple matter, don’t you think? When you think about
the kind of computer you want, you have to consider
issues like these. The moment you go to the computer
store and buy a scanner, read the damn box and
make sure it’ll do what you want!
>And for me, that’s what matters. I’m not going to buy a >new scanner just to use Linux.
Exactly, if i’ve got my shotgun shells i shouldn’t need to buy
more ammo to make my .22 work.
>God forbid someone point
>something doesn’t work out there – “you guys” just gets >”buy new hardware then” for an answer.
Better yet, learn to buy hardware that meets your needs.
>Subscribe? – as in Pay? No, I don’t think so. I thought
>Linux was about “open source” and “free as in beer” and
wrong. OK, right. But wrong. lemme explain this to you:
People make software and to whatever the hell they
want with it.
Is that clear enough?
You will find commercial software in ANY OS. The fact
thar you can get most software for free in Linux is NOT
and excuse to demand more.
And you DO pay for your copy of windows + Office +
Photoshop, don’t you? i bet you do.
>”choices, always choices”. When I want support, I do the
>same thing as I do under Windows – I go to websites,
>read up on what I can, and ask people for help and
>guidance. I don’t pay for it under Windows, and I’m not
>about to under Linux.
fine, but that’s a different kind of support and you missed my
point. I was talking about people making RPMS
built completely custom and fitting yous system. There’s
no such thing on windows that i know of, but if you
can find a website maintained by people that will
recompile Photoshop7 so it works better for you, lemme
know.
Guessing from your description of support, i’m pretty sure
you can get the very same thing on Linux. I do.
>Yes, I was as a matter of fact. Windows 95, I sat there
>with a magazine that gave me little registry tweaks, and
>from my previous use of DOS, I did tweak the autoexec
>and config scripts so that it booted cleaner, faster, and
>got rid of stuff I didn’t want. And you know — it didn’t crash
>anymore than Windows 95 crashed without that stuff
>done to it.
Great! I can’t guess why recompiling a kernel with
near-zero knowledge didn’t work for you, then.
>So you’re comparing installing drivers under Linux to
>purposefully opening exe files in an exe file? That’s a
>funny argument.
You missed my point again. Take a deep breath, read
my post again, and repeat with me:
“Breaking Windows is even easier”
> I used Lycoris and Red Hat – and if you’ll notice, that
>didn’t help. I had to tweak just as much as I have to tweak
>Windows to be comfortable
Are we talking about getting an easy distro or getting
to learn the tweaks? You seem to think you need
both, but you are mixing things up. If you want to tweak
stuff, then Linux has got what you want. Pick ANY distro
for that. If you want to install the OS and start working
with email, office documents and web browsing, then
distros like Mandrake, RedHat or SuSe do not need
tweaking at all. What tweaking do you need in order
to open evolution, mozilla, OpenOffice?
>And if I use Gnome? Yes, I called it a “taskbar”. Oh dear
Dunno. Don’t use Gnome. But i can bet it’s just as easy.
<snipped defensive and insecure remarks>
At the moment, I’d say about 80% percent of the worlds population don’t have access to a computer. Same time, I’d say about 80% of the PC hardware available for them is unable to run Win2000 or XP. Or latest KDE and GNOME. Sure, it works, but slooooooow…
What about an Average Joe who’s not part of the “lucky 20%” (or less?) of the human population? He also has a need for desktop PC. With the hardware available, the only suitable options are Linux or win95(98). Linux offers more.
On old hardware, I would say that Linux is an excellent choice
You can use the latest distributions and get them running with lightweight windowmanagers like IceWM. (Just an example). Including support for all the latest hardware, plus heaps of new software available. Sure, some skills are needed. Just like riding a bike. Learn the basics, not the tricks.
With all my 133 MHz:s of DESKTOP power, BRING IT ON!!
– USB? What’s that? –
I will be upfront and admit that I’m a longtime Windows user and a Linux newbie. Using Windows is nothing to be ashamed because that’s the prevalent OS for millions of people. That does not mean that it works for everyone though. There comes a time when some of us are ready to move on.
My first computer had Windows 3.1. At the time, it was comforting to see a GUI that kept ugly DOS out of sight. Eventually I opened the hood and learned to use and appreciate DOS. DOS was powerful and sometimes awkward to use but it got the job done. This is the same way I feel about Linux. I am now ready to give it a try, however, I need something familiar and easy to use. Then let me peek inside and explore the OS at my own pace.
There are numerous distros of Linux with support coming from all over. Because the majority uses Windows, help is usually abundant. Linux inherently requires more effort. That’s not wrong, just the way it is. It may be easy to some people to install & use Linux but not for the casual Windows user. That doesn’t mean that I’m incapable of installing some “flavor” of Linux but prefer to start out easy then go from there. Linux is intriguing and Lindows looks like a great way to get introduced to it.
There’s a lot of debate about GPL and other issues. That’s not important to me at the moment. I want a computer with minimal fuss to start with and am willing pay for an OS that works upfront. Right now the only preinstalled Linux OS I could find is Lindows. My computer is old and in dire need of replacement. I just ordered a new system with Lindows installed and will try going cold turkey from Windows. It will arrive in a few days. If things don’t work out I’ll go back to Windows (but hopefully Lindows will prevail).
In the meantime, I have read all your posts and appreciate the constructive criticism and useful suggestions you all have. Two things that will be addressed immediately with the new system: create a new user account to avoid the root problem and learn the apt-get command to get replacement programs equivalent to their windows counterparts.
Thanks,
A Shea
Think of it in terms of evolution. When you understand Linux, you will have evolved.
It took me 3 moths of intensive effort to lean Linux, but after all my troubles with windows it was a natural progression. Curiosity drove me – and a determination that I was as smart as anyone and wouldn’t be put off just because I didn’t immediately understand something. I persisted. And I have to say that I am now very pleased that I did. There is a certain hobby element in Linux – it’s about learning and getting things to work. For me the fact that this doesn’t always happen in the most obvious way adds to the interest. It was the challenge of getting things to work that kept me going. I admit that I kept going long after many others may have given up, but that is the level of determination that is required in these things. If you don’t have that curiosity, or that determination, or are not interested in learning an awful lot about computing then no, perhaps Linux isn’t for you. But the truth is that Linux is an extremely powerful OS, and it’s only when you get to grips with some of this power that you learn to love it, despite some of the imperfections it still has at this early stage. (These imperfections are no worse in my view than in Windows though). Give it a go. And when you really do understand Linux, come back here and criticize it. I’m almost sure though that anyone who does understand it will never do this. It takes a while to catch the bug, but when you do there’s no looking back…
Q
Run on PowerPC, Sparc, Alpha etc
I have a friend that uses Linux on a Sparc (which recently died) he’ll get a new one. Can windows work on sparc machines?
And no this is not a server issue as it is a workstation class machine not a server.
Hope thats not too political for Darius
Here’s a list of 10 good desktop applications for Linux that means I never have to use Windows any more…
http://www.sorn.net/linux/apps/
It’s got screenshots with thumbnails, descriptions, and links to applications’ homepages.
Besides, no serious business is running Oracle on Linux anyway.
Oracle suggest that you run their system on Unix. Linux is a Unix system.
“4) Drag and drop between local and remote apps.”
Tried Windows 2000 lately?
Yes. It’s got nothing like the flexibilty of running an app on a friend’s box, or on a server, and redirecting it’s output to your screen like X does (unless you want to pay for an overpriced terminal server license).
“5) Have a case sensitive filesystem for compiling apps that depend on this.”
And when has this ever caused problems in Windows? Besides, if programmers are writing apps that depend on case sensitivity for compiling, they should lose their job. That’s just dumb.
In a point-and-click environment, the case of a filename is irrelevant. Even on Unix, file managers can sort icons in a folder ignoring what case they are. Unless you require to use a terminal, you won’t have to type a filename so can’t get it wrong. having case sensitivity makes no difference for most people.
“6) Have Perl work right (though it is getting much much better)”
ActiveState Perl for Windows works just fine.
Besides, I prefer Python. And Python works great under Windows.
Agreed.
“8) Make settings changes without a reboot”
Tried Windows XP lately?
Yeah, I had to reboot to join a domain, then reboot to allow it to send plain text passwords to older NT servers. Two reboots in one day without having installed any new software. I don’t have that much time to waste when configuring a PC.
“9) Join an NT domain without the domain administrator’s OK (unlike a windows 95/98 or Linux box)”
I call this a security flaw.
Your linux box can’t join the domain if the MS Windows domain server is set up securely. Nothing can. If this guy did it, it’s either because his server isn’t set up right or there is a flaw in Windows’s domain controlling code.
“10) Support different internationalizations on a per user basis.”
Tried Windows XP lately?
Yeah. It’s on par with Gnome for internationalization.
I apologize Kristain for people who are mean to you because you had problems with linux. That isn’t really the right attitude to take. However some thing are clear hear.
First of all, if you aren’t comfortable using the command line at all you probably shouldn’t be using linux. Some people will tell you different, but I say that the command line is still essential to doing anything in linux.
Secondly, in a lot of place yous say your system “crapped out.” I am pretty sure what you mean is that X wouldn’t start. Someone with a little command line know how could have brought the machine back in a matter of seconds as opposed to a format/reinstall. For the nvidia drivers, it sounds to me like your driver in your XF86Config was not changed properly. I have had the same problem with some rpms from nvidia and it is bad. It causes newbies a LOT of trouble to have edit that file manually, but it is just something you have to deal with sometimes. Nvidia really dropped the ball on that driver.
Hopefully you can find an OS that you’re happy with. If that is Windows, then fine. But I really wish you wouldn’t insult Linux simply because you had a trouble with. Linux has a steep learning curve. Once you push past the start it actually does get really easy. It is the initial “getting used to it” that kills a lot of people.
“4) Drag and drop between local and remote apps.”
Tried Windows 2000 lately?
Yes. It’s got nothing like the flexibilty of running an app on a friend’s box, or on a server, and redirecting it’s output to your screen like X does (unless you want to pay for an overpriced terminal server license).
Errrm….you obviously haven’t tried RDP in Windows XP?
I’m on a university campus and my gf can quite happily run a remote session on her pc to get files, send/receive email, use a messenger etc as if it was in front of her. In case you hadn’t noticed:
Start > All Programs > Accessories > Communications > Remote Desktop Connection
If you’re gonna argue about linux vs windows at least get all of your facts straight.
Dear jbolden1517 as you have not realized and old Romans had is this “Vox populi, vox dei” The fact that you need to monitor Oracle threads and other things, in your mindset, gives you the right to assume a god’s position (so does the majority of Linux advocates) and become so petty in your claims. Through my job I come in contact with academia, business and government, not to mention regular Janes and Joes, nobody gives a damn about Oracle or Perl or …, even though it’s in the background helping them do their jobs. They weigh the ratio cost-productivity-support and Linux goes down the drain together with proprietary Macs. Once again WAKE UP!!!
Errrm….you obviously haven’t tried RDP in Windows XP?
I don’t think you understand the issue here. The issue is, can you drag and drop from a remote desktop session to a program running locally or vica-versa. So far I believe we’ve had two people saying you can’t and one saying you can. I think I will do an experiment with this and post my results here so that everyone can know the truth… when I get around to it.
In fact this technique is part of variable naming conventions in many companies:
i.e. x is an object and X is the struct with the same data.
What do variable naming conventions have to do with file naming?
“I don’t think you understand the issue here. The issue is, can you drag and drop from a remote desktop session to a program running locally or vica-versa.”
Yes, you can. Because Windows 2000 and Windows XP have an X Server like functionality for Windows applications. You can run a remote application and shoot the display to a different system, just like you can in X. And you can copy and paste from that application to an application running locally, just like you can in X.
“Funny Oracle’s recommended standard enterprise configuration is a Dell/RedHat cluster; I guess Oracle doesn’t know what serious businesses run when they choose Oracle.”
You apparently didn’t follow the Oracle / Linux / Sun story very well. Oracle is recommending Linux clusters because they have an axe to grind with SUN. It’s political, not technological.
But, how many enterprises are actually using Oracle on Linux clusters? None that I have ever worked for. Almost all of them are using SUN servers. Something like 80% of fortune 1000 companies are running Oracle on Sun boxes.
“Tried Windows 2000 lately?
Yes and it doesn’t work.”
It does work.
“Not at all, it can work very nicely. CONFIGURE can be a script that generates configure, a program can come at either level and its very clear.”
It’s still dumb. It’s a source of confusion for anyone who has to maintain the code at a later date. And explain to me why you would ever have to do this?
“How is that a security flaw? Its not a desktop’s job to enforce security that’s up to the server.”
Try configuring your domain controller correctly.
“Yep and it doesn’t have it. Try running your windows in Japanese.”
It doesn’t huh? That’s interesting because my Windows XP Professional box will maintain internationalization settings for different accounts. I guess I must have gotten a defective copy of XP or something since you seem to claim Windows can’t store individual internationalization settings for different users.
“And there are many things you can do in Linux but are impossible in Windows.”
Name one thing.
– Automation of interactive sessions. No chance to do it in Windows (any).
– Change MTU without reboot.
“- Automation of interactive sessions. No chance to do it in Windows (any).”
Explain. Because I can think of multiple ways to automate an interactive session in Windows.
“- Change MTU without reboot.”
I can do this in Windows XP with no reboot.
” “Not at all, it can work very nicely. CONFIGURE can be a script that generates configure, a program can come at either level and its very clear.”
It’s still dumb. It’s a source of confusion for anyone who has to maintain the code at a later date. And explain to me why you would ever have to do this?””
BTW, I would also point out here that porting to OS/2 or VAX would have the same issue. Maybe relying on case sensitivity isn’t such a hot idea after all huh?
#1: It results in programmer confusion when someone else has to maintain the code.
#2: It’s just bad practice since as you can see, it results in very non-portable code.
Yes, you can. Because Windows 2000 and Windows XP have an X Server like functionality for Windows applications. You can run a remote application and shoot the display to a different system, just like you can in X. And you can copy and paste from that application to an application running locally, just like you can in X.
Once more, the copy and paste is not what we are talking about. The words used in the original comment were DRAG AND DROP. Can you DRAG something from a remote application and DROP it into a local application and have it work as expected? Can you DRAG something from a local app and DROP it in a remote app and have it work as expected? Unless you are answering this question then your comment has no bearing on the discussion that was taking place.
Jeff: In fact this technique is part of variable naming conventions in many companies:
i.e. x is an object and X is the struct with the same data.
Sagres: What do variable naming conventions have to do with file naming?
Because its an example of using case sensitivity that Windows users would be exposed to. In other words when their OS does support case sensitivity they use it in essentially the same way Unix users use it.
Jeff: “Funny Oracle’s recommended standard enterprise configuration is a Dell/RedHat cluster; I guess Oracle doesn’t know what serious businesses run when they choose Oracle.”
Simba: You apparently didn’t follow the Oracle / Linux / Sun story very well. Oracle is recommending Linux clusters because they have an axe to grind with SUN. It’s political, not technological.
That’s not what Oracle says. They make the point pretty clear:
Old configuration: 1m oracle, 1m for sun
New configuration: 1m oracle, 150k dell, 10k redhat
That’s sounds pretty financial to me. In any case it is very hard to argue that no one uses Oracle on Linux when Oracle itself considers Linux to be their recommended enterprise configuration.
Simba: But, how many enterprises are actually using Oracle on Linux clusters? None that I have ever worked for. Almost all of them are using SUN servers. Something like 80% of fortune 1000 companies are running Oracle on Sun boxes.
I wouldn’t disagree with those numbers. Oracle made the switch less than a year ago. The real question is how many will be running it over the next 3 years.
Jeff: “Not at all, it can work very nicely. CONFIGURE can be a script that generates configure, a program can come at either level and its very clear.”
It’s still dumb. It’s a source of confusion for anyone who has to maintain the code at a later date. And explain to me why you would ever have to do this?
I did. I gave you a windows analogy in fact. As for confusion
program x pulls data from datafile X is pretty easy to understand.
program xyz pulls data from datafile ABC is much more complicated.
BTW, I would also point out here that porting to OS/2 or VAX would have the same issue. Maybe relying on case sensitivity isn’t such a hot idea after all huh?
I suggest you reread my 10 point. The fact that NT’s default filesystem is case insenstive is not a huge problem. The fact that the only filesystems are case insenstive is. With a VMS box I could just create a virtual filesystem that is case senstive inside a datafile and I’m off to the races. I don’t know about modern OS/2 enough to comment.
“That’s not what Oracle says. They make the point pretty clear:”
Old configuration: 1m oracle, 1m for Sun
New configuration: 1m oracle, 150k dell, 10k redhat
If you are talking 1 million for SUN, you are talking a pretty high end E10K. Sorry, but the 150k Dell Linux cluster is not going to perform nearly as well. Neither is it going to be as easy to maintain.
And of course Oracle didn’t come right out and say “We don’t get along with SUN anymore.”
“The real question is how many will be running it over the next 3 years.”
Probably not very many. Corporations have too much money invested in their SUN systems to make that kind of a switch.
Besides, when was the last time you installed Oracle on Linux? Last time I did the installer was an extremely buggy script, and you had to manually patch the Linux kernel so that would even run Oracle with any thing that resembed reasonable performance.
“I did. I gave you a windows analogy in fact. As for confusion
program x pulls data from datafile X is pretty easy to understand.
program xyz pulls data from datafile ABC is much more complicated. ”
No it isn’t. XF86Config vs. xf86config is one of the most common sources of newbiew confusion when it comes to XFree86 configuration.
There is no reason at all that one cannot simply come up with two different file names that make sense. Example: configure2 pulls data from configure1 makes more sense than configure pulls data from CONFIGURE.
“The fact that NT’s default filesystem is case insenstive is not a huge problem. The fact that the only filesystems are case insenstive is.”
It’s only a problem is programmers make it a problem. And there is no good reason why programmers should be making it a problem.
It reminds me of when I ported a certain Linux application to another version of UNIX (don’t remember what the app was). It was a nightmare because the programmer had used a bunch of API calls where he should have been using GCC library functions instead. The port was only a problem because the original programmer made it one by writing non-portable code.
Yeah, God forbid that anybody charge for their products. This is more political than technical.
I don’t recall the discussion being limited to technical items. It wouldn’t matter anyway, no matter what I say, you will get all contrary about it and say it doesn’t matter; just like you always do.
AFAIK, Windows uses a micro-kernel which means it doesn’t come loaded with all of the shit you don’t need and would therefore have to remove.
Having worked on Windows code personally, I can confidently say that your statement is conjecture and it is wrong. Windows is loaded with stuff you don’t need.
And even if that is not the case, there is still PLENTY of ways to optimize a Windows box.
Are you seriously suggesting that Windows is anywhere near as configurable as Linux?
I can get a 2-3x performance boost just by tweaking the default install, making it rock solid in the process. (I’ve been considering writing an article on how do this for OSNews.)
There is no such thing as a “rock solid” Windows desktop. By its very nature, the more of a desktop you make out of Windows, the slower and less stable it becomes. Servers can be fairly solid depending on what you do and do not put on them.
Again, political .. it always comes down to politics, doesn’t it? There’s no way that a person could have a discussion on DESKTOP Linux vs. Windows and defend Linux on its technical merits alone without dragging politics into it. “Oh, but I can browse the web, write letters, and chat!” Great, so what do you want, a cookie?
Our privacy is political? No offense Darius, but that is a pretty dense statement for you to make. Perhaps you wouldn’t mind if someone broke into your house and rumaged around in your computer, but I would. When software companies build this kind of functionality into their software, you should view it in the same way as you view somebody breaking into your house. If you don’t, you have a problem.
You don’t understand correctly. It’s called making a point. “Hi pot. My name is kettle” is the point I was trying to make.
No it wasn’t. The point you were trying to make (or rather the point that you did make, I don’t know what your intentions were, just what you actually said) was that you think “Linux zealots” are stupid because they call people who can’t use Linux stupid. You also seem to think that calling “Linux zealots” stupid is okay because they disagree with you, while those “zealots” calling Windows users stupid is a travesty because you like Windows.
You call this an advantage?
Yes, I do.
I call it a symptom of a kernel that is so badly desinged you have to recompile it to optimize it.
And that would probably be because you use Windows and are unfamiliar with such things.
And besides, how many people actuallly recompile their Linux kernels anymore?
The last time I walked around the Earth with my accountant, it was several million.
Most of the functionality that used to be statically compiled into the kernel is now available as modules.
What if that isn’t what you want? At least you have a choice to optimize to your hearts content right? Well, you wouldn’t understand that, of course, being a Windows zealot.
Linux finally learned the lesson that SUN and Microsoft learned years ago.
What, don’t fart in a one-man tent? Oh, you’re referring to modules. I guess its a good thing Linux finally came out with those, um, yesterday wasn’t it?
Apparently, dynamically loadable modules don’t mean much to you?
How exactly in your mind do loadable modules nullify the neatness of being able to customize your own kernel? I guess reality and common sense don’t mean much to you.
You are truely naive if you believe this.
I’ve seen the code spanky. You are truly naive if you don’t.
Remember the bitchX backdoor? If you think your Linux apps aren’t subject to backdoor snooping and such, try again.
Oh please set that connection between your brain and your fingers when you post. A backdoor in BitchX is a far cry from Microsoft, and other software companies, building into their product the ability to grab information off your machine and place it into a large customer database. Also, BitchX is a small program that is not exclusive to Linux. Windows Update and Windows Media Player are integrated into Windows by the company who made Windows. When somebody like Linus or Alan Cox inserts code into the kernel that caputers all your files and sends them to a large Transmeta or RedHat database, then I will take your comparison seriously.
Another thing. What happened when people found out about BitchX? Do Linux users still willingly launch the problematic versions of BitchX and send out posts in various IRC channels letting everyone know they are online and ready to be prodded (they don’t in case you haven’t decided yet)? Windows users do this every single day by running things like Windows Update and Media Player (well, with the exception of advertising it, but that’s okay because Microsoft has them covered as far as that goes).
That’s the problem with the majority of Windows users. They hear about these things and they don’t care. Darius calls it “political”. If you guys were smart, your response should be: “Hey, I’m going to start checking what packets are sent from my machine and to who,” instead of, “Well, I know of a program that ran under Linux that had a security issues once, so….” Linux users hear about security issues and within days a patch is available and the smart users will download it, or stop using the offending program. Windows users just lick their minty Start buttons and go on with the business of the day; populating Microsoft’s databases.
“- Automation of interactive sessions. No chance to do it in Windows (any).”
Explain. Because I can think of multiple ways to automate an interactive session in Windows.
The following is taken from a book I owe:
Pretend that you are working late and that the last thing you need to do before leaving is to log onto your remote site, make sure that a specific action has completed (it is always done by 3:00 AM), and then download the file that application generates back to your local site. It is now 10:00 PM and you would rather go home than wait for the magic moment when the file is ready. You could just lounch an at job that starts ncftp for the download, but you don’t know the filename because the output name changes at each run. You find the name by logging into the menu system and checking the completion log.
You can do this in Linux using expect. Tell me how to do it in WInXP? Even more, tell me how to deal with applications tha require user intervention such as typing a password?
“And that would probably be because you use Windows and are unfamiliar with such things.”
Yep. I use Windows… And Solaris… And Linux…. And FreeBSD… And AIX… Somehow I think I am quite familiar with such thing.
“The last time I walked around the Earth with my accountant, it was several million.”
And you can cite your source for this?
Fact is most people don’t ever recompile their Linux kernel.
“What if that isn’t what you want? At least you have a choice to optimize to your hearts content right?”
I see… The “Linux is better because it can do something that I don’t need to do anyway, and that really can be done better using other methods. But I can do it, so Linux is better.” syndrome.
“Oh, you’re referring to modules. I guess its a good thing Linux finally came out with those, um, yesterday wasn’t it?”
Which SUN had been using for years before Linux ever added module capability. You completely missed the point of this. The whole reason recompiling the Linux kernel was necessary is because of its lousy module support. I mean give me a break! Until very recently, you had to rebuild the kernel just to add USB support! How stupid is that?
“How exactly in your mind do loadable modules nullify the neatness of being able to customize your own kernel? I guess reality and common sense don’t mean much to you.”
Apparently they don’t mean much to you. Modules are faster, easier, and far less error prone than rebuilding the kernel. And they are more efficient because they can be loaded when you need them, and unloaded when you don’t. And they often don’t require a reboot the first time they are used, unlike recompiling a kernel. So now tell me. Which one makes more common sense in the average work situation?
“When somebody like Linus or Alan Cox inserts code into the kernel that caputers all your files and sends them to a large Transmeta or RedHat database, then I will take your comparison seriously.”
When you stop making hugely exagerated claims that Windows doesn’t really do, then maybe I will take you seriously.
“If you guys were smart, your response should be: “Hey, I’m going to start checking what packets are sent from my machine and to who,” ”
Actually, I do check what packets are being sent and where they are going to. And if I can’t determine why they should be going to where they are going, I block them. I do this with both Windows and UNIX.
“There is no such thing as a “rock solid” Windows desktop. By its very nature, the more of a desktop you make out of Windows, the slower and less stable it becomes. Servers can be fairly solid depending on what you do and do not put on them.”
Well, first of all, this is just wrong. Windows XP has more features than Windows NT 4 did. And Windows XP is a lot more stable than Windows NT 4. (It might be slower, but then again, KDE 3 is slower than KDE 1. So Linux has the same problem with performance degredation as more features are added.)
There is no such thing as a rock solid Linux desktop that contains the features most users want either. Case in point: I have seen buggy programming make KDE 3 become so unresponsive, that you won’t be able to move the mouse. You won’t even be able to switch to another VT to kill the offending app. Your only option is a hard reset.
To Simba:
I work in a company that uses WinXP delivered on COMPAQ PCs. There are only 65 PC in the network. Our database server is Oracle running on SuSE. WinXP is so good that we are now starting to receive COMPAQs with Mandrake preinstaled.
“work in a company that uses WinXP delivered on COMPAQ PCs. There are only 65 PC in the network. Our database server is Oracle running on SuSE. WinXP is so good that we are now starting to receive COMPAQs with Mandrake preinstaled.”
Sorry. Your personal experience with your company does not mean WinXP sucks, especially when you fail to provide any reason whatsoever that you think it sucks.
NSF stopped supporting Macs this year for desktop use and only supports Windows now. Guess Macs must suck and Windows must be superior huh? Of course not. But that statement could be made going by your logic.
BTW, if you only have 65 PCs on your network, it sounds like you are a pretty small company. I’d guess that cost of XP licensing played a role in this decision.
Want to know about my last IT job? (I freelance consult now)
Over 200 UNIX servers
Multiple NT servers.
Over 20,000 client workstations
And almost all of those workstations were running Windows. (I might also add that we spent a far greater amount of time supporting UNIX than supporting NT. Windows is simply easier for users to figure out.
BTW…
“WinXP is so good that we are now starting to receive COMPAQs with Mandrake preinstaled.”
As a commercial company, you might want to consider preloading with a distribution that will still be around a year from now to support your stuff. Mandrake is history. Their chance of recovering from bankruptcy is virtually nil.
Look guys. I’m talking about the administration part of the company which runs on WinXP and I say that WinXP is awfull. That is the critic to WinXP, not to the number of PCs. I just want to say that if you try to measure Network Utilisation on a network made of various OSs, WinNT/2K/XP makes it go over 50% (70-80% most of the time) which is unacceptable. BTW, most of the computers we have are HP-UX and Solaris based, but I’ll leave them aside of this discussion. Anyway, Win sucked, sucks, and it will suck! If you want to prove the other way, try to make that thing I talked about earlier (ncftp & expect/autoexpect) under Windows. No chance!
Yep. I use Windows… And Solaris… And Linux…. And FreeBSD… And AIX… Somehow I think I am quite familiar with such thing.
I can’t personally recall a single post that you have made that would suggest you are familiar with ANY of those systems.
And you can cite your source for this?
Of course. Sarcasm.
Fact is most people don’t ever recompile their Linux kernel.
And exactly how does that statement make the fact that you CAN do it stupid? By the way, what are your sources for “most people”?
I see… The “Linux is better because it can do something that I don’t need to do anyway, and that really can be done better using other methods. But I can do it, so Linux is better.” syndrome.
Oh I see, it’s the classic, “I don’t know how to do it so it must be dumb,” syndrome.
Which SUN had been using for years before Linux ever added module capability. You completely missed the point of this. The whole reason recompiling the Linux kernel was necessary is because of its lousy module support. I mean give me a break! Until very recently, you had to rebuild the kernel just to add USB support! How stupid is that?
Modules are great, but they don’t nullify the need, nor the desire, to recompile a kernel. For instance, what do YOU do (seeing as you are such a mighty demi-god of Linux thaumaturgy) if you want to make use of things not in the kernel that shipped with your copy of RedHat? That’s what I figured. You wait until RedHat ships a new version. I’m too impatient for that.
Apparently they don’t mean much to you. Modules are faster, easier, and far less error prone than rebuilding the kernel.
Why are you stuck on Modules? By the way, just because you can’t successfully rebuild your kernel without screwing it up (if you actually use Linux in the first place) doesn’t mean that the rest of us can’t.
When you stop making hugely exagerated claims that Windows doesn’t really do, then maybe I will take you seriously.
Ah, but Windows DOES do exactly what I said. No matter of stubborn pig-headednes will change that either.
Actually, I do check what packets are being sent and where they are going to. And if I can’t determine why they should be going to where they are going, I block them. I do this with both Windows and UNIX.
I don’t think you do, otherwise you wouldn’t have said that my statement was an exaggeration. You would know first hand (well, at least you would know that programs like Media Player are indeed sending packets larger than simple handshakes to download internet content).
Well, first of all, this is just wrong. Windows XP has more features than Windows NT 4 did. And Windows XP is a lot more stable than Windows NT 4.
I normally try to conduct my vocabulary with a bit more decorum than this; but that statement is a steaming lump of fecal horror from the posterior end of a large bull. XP is less stable than both NT 4 and 2000.
(It might be slower, but then again, KDE 3 is slower than KDE 1. So Linux has the same problem with performance degredation as more features are added.)
You are referring to a larger codebase, due to more features, and the inherant performance hit that stems from added features. I’m referring to the fact that if you install 20 commercial applications on a Windows XP machine, all of the sudden you global XP performance has been cut by at least a quarter. That does not happen in the Linux and BSD distributions I use.
There is no such thing as a rock solid Linux desktop that contains the features most users want either.
Hmm, I beg to differ. I had a Linux desktop/development box, which also ran several testbed servers running the code I developed (Apache/Tomcat/Zope/MySQL) which was not rebooted for more than two years (It may still be running for all I know. I left the company a year ago). At my current job, I have a Linux machine I installed a year ago when I started that has never been rebooted since then. Your experience may be different, but that does not make it true.
Case in point: I have seen buggy programming make KDE 3 become so unresponsive, that you won’t be able to move the mouse.
I’ve seen buggy programming bring Windows to a crashing halt or a blue screen of death. What’s your point?
You won’t even be able to switch to another VT to kill the offending app. Your only option is a hard reset.
Remind me later and I will send you less than 8 lines of C code that can destroy Windows if buggy programming is what you are using as a measurement of a systems stability.
“I can’t personally recall a single post that you have made that would suggest you are familiar with ANY of those systems.”
Then apparently you haven’t been paying attention for the last year and a half that I have been posting here.
“Oh I see, it’s the classic, “I don’t know how to do it so it must be dumb,” syndrome.”
I do know how to do it. What is your attitude? “I do it because I can”? That’s not very productive.
“if you want to make use of things not in the kernel that shipped with your copy of RedHat?”
Like something as standard as USB support for example? You recompile the kernel and than you complain to the vendor about why the hell they don’t have something as standard as USB support installed by default.
“Modules are great, but they don’t nullify the need, nor the desire, to recompile a kernel.”
They often do. Case in point: You rarely need to recompile a kernel to add support for a sound card anymore. It is available as a module.
“Why are you stuck on Modules?”
Why are you still stuck on trying to argue the benefits of rebuilding a kernel? Is it because you haven’t figured out KLMs yet?
“Ah, but Windows DOES do exactly what I said. No matter of stubborn pig-headednes will change that either.”
No it doesn’t. What you said is that it sends every file on my computer to Microsoft’s servers. It doesn’t. My word documents, my email, etc. do not get sent to Microsoft servers. No amount of exagerating on your part will change that.
“I’ve seen buggy programming bring Windows to a crashing halt or a blue screen of death. What’s your point?”
My point is that you made a statement about WinXP that applies to Linux as well.
“but that statement is a steaming lump of fecal horror
from the posterior end of a large bull. XP is less stable than both NT 4 and 2000.”
I see. You make your point. You don’t know how to properly configure XP. Either that or you have never used it.
“Remind me later and I will send you less than 8 lines of C code that can destroy Windows if buggy programming is what you are using as a measurement of a systems stability.”
And your point is what? I can send you a few lines of C code that does some funky things with array allocation and loading and causes Linux to grind to an unusable halt because its VM subsystem is so weak.
The same program when compiled in VC++ will simply cause an illegal operation error in Windows and terminate quite nicely without affecting the rest of the system. In FreeBSD it will seg fault. In Linux it will happily grind away, using up all of the swap space and grinding the system to a halt.
Then apparently you haven’t been paying attention for the last year and a half that I have been posting here.
I have seen most of your posts. If there is anything in them that indicates a grand knowledge of all things Linux, Unix, and Windows, and a subsequent knowledge to back up the Windows zealotry you always display, I haven’t seen it.
What is your attitude? “I do it because I can”? That’s not very productive.
Simba, Simba, Simba. If you are such a grand master of Linux, why do I constantly have to outline the most basic items for you? Here are three simple reasons (totally unrelated to modules) why you would want to compile your own kernel:
To upgrade the kernel to a newer version (for any number of reasons).
To remove items, that are NOT set as modules by default, which you don’t need (e.g. all the chipset bugfix support), or to add items that are not installed by default (such as Amature Radio, etc).
To install source based distributions such as Gentoo.
And as a bonus, extra credit reason, it is a part of obtaining Linux proficiency whether YOU like it or not.
Like something as standard as USB support for example? You recompile the kernel and than you complain to the vendor about why the hell they don’t have something as standard as USB support installed by default.
I see. So you are unwilling to take control of your own system and would rather whine to a vendor about something that you could do yourself in less than an hour; instead waiting months for them to possibly release a new version with support for whatever it is you are whining about? And you are calling ME unproductive? This attitude explains why you love Windows so much.
Why are you still stuck on trying to argue the benefits of rebuilding a kernel?
Because you keep saying things that are dumb and I don’t want uninformed readers out there thinking you know what you are talking about and believing things that aren’t accurate.
No it doesn’t. What you said is that it sends every file on my computer to Microsoft’s servers.
I did not say that Simba. I said it sends an accounting of everything installed on your computer; which it does. Go here: http://www.tecchannel.de/betriebssysteme/1126/index.html , download the tool mentioned at the bottom of the screen, and if it still works, look for yourself. As I said before, I know first hand that they do this; I used to work there.
It doesn’t. My word documents, my email, etc. do not get sent to Microsoft servers. No amount of exagerating on your part will change that.
You are the only one I’m aware of that ever made these claims. Quit superimposing your straw-man arguments onto me.
My point is that you made a statement about WinXP that applies to Linux as well.
No, I made the statement that Windows XP is not very stable. I did not say that XP crashed because of buggy code and Linux didn’t. You said that.
I recently bought a laptop from Dell that came with Windows XP. It crashed all the time. I know Dell installs a bunch of Dell specific junk, so I formatted the drive, installed our site license version of XP and tried it again. Crashed all the time. Sent the machine back to Dell. Got it back, and it crashed all the time again. Most of the time, there was nothing but XP installed. Other times, MS Office XP was installed. Formatted the drive again, installed Windows 2000, and it hasn’t crashed since. So, it would appear that either Windows XP just isn’t very stable, or that it and MS Office XP are riddled with bugs (if one is to believe your argument). By the way, this is not the only system that I have used XP on. I’ve used it on many. I develop programs for Linux, Windows, Solaris, BSD, and on occasion, IRIX and AIX. I check my code on all of these platforms; including XP.
I see. You make your point. You don’t know how to properly configure XP. Either that or you have never used it.
Uh-huh. I see your point as well. You are such an entrenched Windows zealot that trivial items such as reality don’t have any bearing for you.
And your point is what?
My point is that your point was pretty irrelevant.
I can send you a few lines of C code that does some funky things with array allocation and loading and causes Linux to grind to an unusable halt because its VM subsystem is so weak.
So, to crash Linux, you have to do some “funky things” with array allocation and loading. All you have to do to crash Windows is write a one line for loop.
My question is: Is this how you determine the value of a system? Whether or not you can crash it by writing crap code? I would rather have a system that didn’t handle code with “funky things” in it than a system whose performance degrades just by installing programs (even if you stick to MS ones).
I’m not saying that Windows crashes every 5 minutes, but anybody who has used Windows, Solaris, AIX, HP-UX, Linux, BSD, etc. can easily tell you that Windows is the least stable of the bunch (unless they are lying). Of the flavors of Windows, Windows 2000 is the most stable in my experience. It is also the most plesant to use.
“To upgrade the kernel to a newer version (for any number of reasons).”
And that, my friend, is one of the problems that makes Linux a headache for new users. Upgrading the kernel by recompiling it. (and then when it doesn’t work, the user gets to learn about things they really shouldn’t have to know about, like bintuils).
“To install source based distributions such as Gentoo.”
Yep. That’s a real productivity booster for most users. Or most businesses for that matter.
“Time is money” — Benjamin Franklin
“I see. So you are unwilling to take control of your own system and would rather whine to a vendor about something that you could do yourself in less than an hour; instead waiting months for them to possibly release a new version with support for whatever it is you are whining about? And you are calling ME unproductive?”
See previous quote from Benjamin Franklin. I shouldn’t have to waste time building a kernel just for something as standard as USB support which should be enabled by default.
“Because you keep saying things that are dumb and I don’t want uninformed readers out there thinking you know what you are talking about and believing things that aren’t accurate.”
It is quite accurate. The benefits of a modular kernel are clearly established. Go take a CSci course on OS internals.
“I did not say that Simba. I said it sends an accounting of everything installed on your computer; which it does.”
That is not what you said. Your exact statement:
“When somebody like Linus or Alan Cox inserts code into the kernel that caputers all your files and sends them to a large Transmeta or RedHat database, then I will take your comparison seriously.”
“You are the only one I’m aware of that ever made these claims. Quit superimposing your straw-man arguments onto me.”
I’m not. You are trying to back peddle
“So, it would appear that either Windows XP just isn’t very stable, or that it and MS Office XP are riddled with bugs (if one is to believe your argument).”
No. It would appear that you didn’t take Statistics 101 in college. So let me give you some hints. A sample size of one is not valid data for making a general statement. You would need at least 6 for the P values for regression testing.
In other words, your personal experience with WinXP does not reflect the experience of most users. I currently deal with over 500 systems that have XP and Office on them. None of them crash on a regular basis.
“My question is: Is this how you determine the value of a system? Whether or not you can crash it by writing crap code? ”
In part, yes. Because whether crap code can crash the system or not is crucial to a multitasking and multiuser system. The operating system shouldn’t allow code to do those kinds of thing. But in this case, Linux allows it.
“in it than a system whose performance degrades just by installing programs (even if you stick to MS ones).”
You are making this up. I have never seen this happen except for programs that load a bunch of TSR type things. And you can always turn those off if you don’t want them.
You accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about? You are such a Linux zealot that you are resorting to making things up about Windows that aren’t even true.
And that, my friend, is one of the problems that makes Linux a headache for new users. Upgrading the kernel by recompiling it. (and then when it doesn’t work, the user gets to learn about things they really shouldn’t have to know about, like bintuils).
It really isn’t that hard to compile a kernel. Type a few commands, wait, reboot, done. Anyway, if you don’t want to compile a kernel, run RedHat or SuSE. If new users aren’t interested in doing these things, then there’s always Windows.
Yep. That’s a real productivity booster for most users. Or most businesses for that matter.
Depends on what you are doing. For development, I find it well worth the time.
“Time is money” — Benjamin Franklin
See previous quote from Benjamin Franklin. I shouldn’t have to waste time building a kernel just for something as standard as USB support which should be enabled by default.
First of all, you don’t have to do that if you don’t want to. Again, you are drastically overexaggerating the situation since USB support is pretty standard in current most current distributions.
Secondly, how do you suppose “wasting” an hour recompiling a kernel is unproductive and costly, but waiting for a vendor to support something you need is not? I would rather spend an hour recompiling my kernel and having a working product afterwards, than spending an hour on a customer support call only to be hooked up with some doofus who knows less about the subject than I do. Your ideas of what is productive and what is not seem all goofed up.
It is quite accurate. The benefits of a modular kernel are clearly established. Go take a CSci course on OS internals.
I don’t have to, I already know. Why don’t you actually learn how to use Linux instead of parroting back the same myopic nonsense in every post?
That is not what you said. Your exact statement:
“When somebody like Linus or Alan Cox inserts code into the kernel that caputers all your files and sends them to a large Transmeta or RedHat database, then I will take your comparison seriously.”
Where in that sentence do you see the word Windows? It is obviously an exaggeration to make a point. Why not look at my original post that you were responding to? Here it is again for your convenience. Try reading it slowly so it all sinks in:
I can run an MP3/OGG player, update my desktop, and watch media files and DVDs while hooked to the internet without the fear of my viewing and listening habits, along with an accounting of everything installed on my computer, being sent up to Microsoft’s “customer database”. Windows doesn’t offer that level of customer consideration.
I’m not. You are trying to back peddle
Obviously you are mistaken.
No. It would appear that you didn’t take Statistics 101 in college. So let me give you some hints. A sample size of one is not valid data for making a general statement. You would need at least 6 for the P values for regression testing.
Okay sherlock, I have a few hundred machines running XP that I use on almost a daily basis. I have seen the problems I have mentioned across the board. I guess you didn’t take that class in college that told you not to make dumb-ass assuptions about things you can’t possibly know.
In other words, your personal experience with WinXP does not reflect the experience of most users.
Google suggests otherwise.
I currently deal with over 500 systems that have XP and Office on them. None of them crash on a regular basis.
Do you ever actually use them? What about performance degredation (you keep adroitly ducking that subject)? There have been many scholarly articles written on the subject. How is it that your experiences differ from nearly everyone else who owns a computer?
In part, yes. Because whether crap code can crash the system or not is crucial to a multitasking and multiuser system. The operating system shouldn’t allow code to do those kinds of thing. But in this case, Linux allows it.
So does Windows. I can crash Windows with a single, one line for loop. So, by your definition, Windows has to be the crappiest operating system on the planet.
You are making this up. I have never seen this happen except for programs that load a bunch of TSR type things.
Well, you are blind then. Run performance tests against a newly installed Windows system. Then, install MS Office, Photoshop, Macromedia Studio, Visual Studio, update Windows, and then run your performance tests again. Then, uninstall everything, install new things, and run it again. Rinse and repeat and each time you will notice the machine getting slower and slower.
The fact that Windows does this is very well documented and discussed. I find it surprising that someone of your self-proclaimed magnitude has managed to miss something so obvious and ubiquitous.
You accuse me of not knowing what I am talking about? You are such a Linux zealot that you are resorting to making things up about Windows that aren’t even true.
Obviously you have not read any of my posts. Everything I have written to you in this thread has been from a Windows 2000 machine. I am a truth zealot, and when anybody spreads reality manure on as thick as you do, I tend to respond.
I don’t care what OS you use, I don’t care what clothes you wear, and I certainly don’t care what you think of my choices in these matters.
This is off the main page, so I probably will refrain from discussing this topic with you any further. Hopefully anybody reading our diatribe will see it as such and choose the system that is best for them in spite of our girly fighting.
“It really isn’t that hard to compile a kernel.”
Sure. But the average user doesn’t even know that their computer has a kernel, much less what it does or how to tweak it. The computer is a magic box to them.
Have you ever worked in tech support? I did it for several years. Trust me. Any IT professional who has never done tech support overestimates the average computer user. I’m not saying that to be insulting to the average computer user. It’s simply a fact of life. We live in a world of specialization. The average user wants to use their computer to do work. They don’t want to have to worry about it does the work as long as it does it. I don’t know how my car’s engine works. But I don’t need to in order to drive my car to work. My mechanic might very well think I am stupid because I don’t know how my car’s engine works. Just like a lot of IT professionals think their users are stupid because they don’t know how their computer works. But I have used this analogy before. I would rather that a brain surgeon spent his time reading the New England Journal of Medicine instead of reading the Linux Kernel HOWTO. His specialty is medicine. It is not IT. And he should not have to know how his computer works in order to get his work done anymore than you or I should have to know how our cars work in order to drive to work.
“Depends on what you are doing. For development, I find it well worth the time.”
If you are a developer, yes. But most people aren’t.
“Secondly, how do you suppose “wasting” an hour recompiling a kernel is unproductive and costly, but waiting for a vendor to support something you need is not?”
Windows generally supports it already, so one does not have to wait for the support. Linux is quite a ways behind when it comes to hardware support.
“Why don’t you actually learn how to use Linux instead of parroting back the same myopic nonsense in every post?”
Considering I have been using it since before SLS, I’d be willing to be I know how to use it better than you. And considering I have been trained on UNIX administration by SUN Microsystems itself, and have even pulblished technical training material on UNIX, I would be willing to bet I am more knowledgable on UNIX than you are. Do you want to play 20 questions and find out?
“So does Windows. I can crash Windows with a single, one line for loop. So, by your definition, Windows has to be the crappiest operating system on the planet.”
Oh please do share this code with me. And I will bet that it will not crash Windows XP Professional. In fact, I have tried it, and I know it won’t crash Windows XP Professional. So unless you are doing something really strange in the for loop that I haven’t tried, I can tell you that it will not crash Windows XP.
“The fact that Windows does this is very well documented and discussed. I find it surprising that someone of your self-proclaimed magnitude has managed to miss something so obvious and ubiquitous.”
The fact that the problem has been greatly reduced in XP is also well documented. Win XP even keeps track of what order pages are loaded from the HD and dynamically page aligns files on the disk. Even the most advanced Linux file systems don’t do that.
“Hopefully anybody reading our diatribe will see it as such and choose the system that is best for them in spite of our girly fighting.”
Hopefully they will. Because OS zealotry is stupid. Use what works best for the situation. In some cases that will be Windows. In others it will be Linux or BSD. In others Solaris. But on the desktop, more often than not, it is going to be Windows. On servers, it is probably going to be UNIX or Linux or BSD. There are exceptions of course. For example, science and engineering desktops are traditional UNIX strongholds where Linux works really well.
“Everything I have written to you in this thread has been from a Windows 2000 machine.”
And everything I have written to you in this thread has been from a FreeBSD machine running XFree86, FVWM-2, and Netscape for Linux.
I guess that makes us pretty close to even huh?
User-Mode Linux allows you to run Linux within Linux. See here: http://user-mode-linux.sourceforge.net/
Aside from windows, does anyone know if this can be done within Solaris or the BSDs? I’d be very interested in finding out.
Thanks in advance.
Yes, it can be done in Solaris (Trusted Solaris). In fact, Solaris was the first to implement this. Linux followed shortly after. I don’t think it can currently be done in BSD, but there is a project (Trusted BSD) in the works.