Preston Gralla, a well-known technology expert and windows user for a long time, tries Linux after his son suggests it to him. I found his testimony brief but very honest.
A Windows Die-Hard Confronts Linux
About The Author
Eugenia Loli
Ex-programmer, ex-editor in chief at OSNews.com, now a visual artist/filmmaker.
Follow me on Twitter @EugeniaLoli
The author makes the point that there is much more shareware available for windows than there are programs for linux. While I’ll give him that point (especially if you consider the thousands of shareware programs since windows 3.1 that were great, but have dropped off the map), in the last 3 years I’ve found that it is much easier to find a program for linux that just works than wading through the windows quagmire of shareware. For one thing, much shareware has only a few features, is way overpriced, may contain spyware or stupidware, and is often so crippled I have to download 4 or 5 programs, and most of them are crippled to the point I can’t even get what I was trying to do to work without shelling $30. On the other hand, a quick search on http://freshmeat.net/ can find me dozens of potential applications, the vast majority of which don’t ask for a dime except perhaps for donation (fair). True, many of them are in development, but at least they aren’t asking you to shell out $30 for a trial. There are exceptions to what I’ve described (try finding a lot of linux programs that contain the full functionality of windows shareware in regard to Quake 1 utilities…tough.)
In general though when people try to dis linux because of not enough application support it generally means they haven’t tried very hard. The author admits as much, and his point is taken.
So security is not a something he thinks about or looks for in a OS ? Oh and to bad he didn’t try Fedora with APT-GET/SYNAPTIC or Mandrake with URPMI. Set up with the right repositories they and other Linux distros would offer him gigs more software to play around with and use. Also why didn’t his son let him try KOffice instead ? I find that it is well integrated into KDE and does not seem like a kludge in terms of use and appearance like OO.
so it’s a non-issue.
Some of us are just not going to change. Leave us alone. That’s like convicing me to switch to Windows or Mac. I’m not going to. I don’t care if they fart diamond and gold pearls.
Yes, I have Windows, Mac, Linux and BSD boxes. If Windows isn’t giving him issues, why the hell should he switch? Now, if his been hacked countless number of times, his box reboots everytime he blinks, and the “wife picture” attachment he double-clicked on reformatted his hard disk, then there is much thought for consideration.
And even then, it might not just be personally, economically and pragmatically viable. We also have people called fanatics. For them, software is politically, philosophically and religiously motivated. And then we have people who just don’t give a damn. They’d use anything in front of them.
So what’s up with all these switch inducers? Bah, I blame Steve Jobs and Apple.
“On the desktop, Linux may be more stable than Windows”
I never got why people keep making this claim, desktop stability really comes down to applications, and I can’t say my Linux system is any more stable than my windows system.
On OpenOffice.org, this is one of the things I like least about being a Linux user. I lost track of how many times I clicked on OO to wait there for it to load, only to give up trying to spell check a word with it and use Google.
I often will be off by one letter in OO.o and have it suggest some other word that does not even have the same number of syllables.
Besides, I takes me less time to open a new tab and let google spellcheck a word over the intrnet than it does to open OO.o from my HDD and spell check it.
As far as Shareware vs GPL, I do actually like that a great deal of what I need is already on one of the distro CD’s. I also have a strong distaste for a great deal of windows software that seems to NEED to run when my PC starts. Real, Quick Time, winamp, acrobat reader, AIM, windows messenger etc.
I know I can remove most of it, but I get sick of constantly having to do so. Windows software in general is several times more intrusive. This is a huge pet peeve for me.
Acrobat Reader is so bloated these days that I have avoided even reading PDF’s from Windows, ghost view blows it out of the water.
I became much more comfortable using Linux on my desktop after I switched to Gnome, KDE makes me so angry I don’t know if I should scream or kill puppies.
If this is all it takes, who’s hiring? This guy didn’t even load the OS, and someone who knows better (pretty much anyone), please inform SHAREWARE ISN’T FREEWARE. He forgot that small detail. Wake me up when the author has a clue.
Being wowed by the Linux desktop enviroments, but also being unimpressed with the apps. I have a feeling that most people made the jump to Linux either for religious reasons or because they were tired of all the security problems and BSODs with Windows.
But for those of us who have been using Windows for many years and made it our bitch to the point where the OS is rock solid and nearly bulletproof security-wise, there’s just that much appeal to Linux, except for the price
That’s sort of an odd thing to draw issue with (spell checking). I would have never thought to use OO.org to spell check one word. Google’s not a bad choice, but you always run the risk of it simply finding websites where the word has been misspelled. Try dictionary.com which gives reasonable suggestions, or even better, gnome comes with a dictionary application that queries the MIT dictionary server. I use that all the time.
…please inform SHAREWARE ISN’T FREEWARE. He forgot that small detail. Wake me up when the author has a clue.
Maybe you need the clue. Most people don’t see software as a political statement. In that light, shareware, freeware, and “Free Software” don’t seem that much different from each other. It really doesn’t have anything to do with how much you know about technology.
windows user tries kde, sorta likes it, but doesnt use it because he cant install applications. i personally know a good 25 people to whom that little story applys. not really worthy of a tech article, but whatever floats your boat…
Actually for most of the “Experts”, shareware is very free. Not trying to troll, but people paid for all the software they ever used, Linux (desktop) might have seen mainstream usage a long time ago, so it is a valid factor here.
Also this reminds me of another point, when a Windows user does not know much about Linux, he/she is criticized for lack of knowledge. When Linux users complain of constant BSOD’s, horrible stability, spyware all over, and viruses running rampant on the system, nobody seems to ask them why they demonstrate less administrative competency on Windows than your average granny?
If some of the Linux finatics are so poor at windows administratin, maybe more people need to discredit what it is they have to say.
It matters partly because he is the author of Windows XP hacks, A book I actually own but have not yet read.
http://www.oreilly.com/catalog/winxphks/index.html
The biggest reason I switched to linux is because of the community.
The fact that I could talk to a developer in IRC about a project, or email a developer with some ideas (which is one of the first things I did, since I didn’t know about bugzilla at the time), was one of the coolest things for me coming from the windows world, where getting information about something in windows is like breaking somekind of massive encryption.
I, back in the day, tried helping windows developers out in windows, and it was such a PITA to figure out what some of the api’s did. Combine that with the fact that many of the apis are hidden and have to be figured out by other people by reverse engeneering (and when the reversed engneering is used enough then it becomes a public api). Also, the .NET developer platform (used?) to have certian requirements that you would not develop certian competing software with MS.
So I went from an OS where I felt the OS didn’t ‘like’ me and pushed developers away, was a black box, always made me feel with a holier then thou attitude…
To a platform where I had a CONVERSATION with some guy from Sun about somecode he was writing for Gnome and helped improve it! I have made a change that has helped people around the world! I mean, just tell that to most 15-20 year old windows developers who just want somewhere to output programming creativity into, and that is an amazing thought!
(p.s. I didn’t actually contribute much at all to the OSS scene, but interms of potential and what I felt when I started out and did some small contributions)
@RJW (IP: —.sea1.dsl.speakeasy.net)
One thing is mixing up free as in beer and free as in speech, but another one is being an “expert” and don’t be able to see the difference between a reduced commercial application and another one that is given for no charge with all the expected functionality.
@Anonymous (IP: —.adelphia.net)
A Windows user that isn’t familiar with GNU/Linux perhaps says it is “bad” because he can’t install an application, but they can never see constant BSOD’s, horrible stability, spyware all over, and viruses running rampant on the system, as both people familiar and non-familiar with MS Windows use to see.
>I can’t say my Linux system is any more stable than my windows system.
As a long time Windows user, I can, completely and with little reservation. When first installed Windows XP (and even 98/ME) is decently stable, but over time as more and more software is installed and uninstalled and various things accumulate in the system (and viruses and spyware do sometimes take hold on windows systems — my next door neighbor can attest to that) it becomes unstable.
And I’ll admit there’s a nice seleciton of shareware for WIndows, but far too much of it is of the: “Shareware version runs for 60 minutes, full version = $20” type.
What’s his problem. He likes it but it’s not worth the move to easy software installation and adequate software?
I think he just doesn’t feel like moving, which is fine but what does he want? Flashy lights and a laser show?!
What an odd and uninformative article.
And I’ve had plenty of app crashes in XP. In fact, my biggest problem with XP is that stupid “do you want to send an error report” screen that pops up when it kills one of my programs (you know when it fails at a point that normally works…). Maybe he doesn’t put things through the paces very well…
First the guy writes windows books and article. If that is how he makes a living, what do you expect. He isn’t going to suddenly say… don’t buy my books or read my articles because linux is the way.
Second don’t discount the cost of software just because you run pirate versions. Not everyone does. So for those people all those little shareware costs add up in addition to the big costs of the OS and major apps. He says the linux apps were sufficient but didn’t wow him. Why should they wow him. They say that the average user doesn’t use 90% of what MS Word can do. So for most users what open office or one of the other packages offers is all they will ever need.
galio
A Windows user that isn’t familiar with GNU/Linux perhaps says it is “bad” because he can’t install an application, but they can never see constant BSOD’s, horrible stability, spyware all over, and viruses running rampant on the system, as both people familiar and non-familiar with MS Windows use to see.
This is a good point. I think anybody who doesn’t know what they’re doing in either OS (and doesn’t have a lot of help) is going to screw it up.
Chris
I think he just doesn’t feel like moving, which is fine but what does he want? Flashy lights and a laser show?!
Well, it’s like this .. Linux reminds me of a friend who sets me up with a blind date, telling me how hot she is, and that she’s got these huge knockers and an ass that won’t quit. But whenever I meet her, I find out she’s 5’1 and only a B cup. Not that there’s anything wrong with her per se, she just wasn’t what I expected.
Since when is someone who is only familiar with one OS for a “Technology Expert”? I can’t even imagine the brain size needed by someone whose knowledge encompasses all technology. I used to be awed by people who are experts in just one dicipline like chip design, control systems, wireless, medical, physics but now I know better.
I was amazed that he didn’t want to say anything about the
server side of things. It should have been a snap for him.
I,ve used suse for quite a while and i must say it really
does come down to a matter of choice, i now use mostly win xp
and i am very happy with the product, and most people i know are that way and for the most part XP is very stable.
and when i do decide to use linux it is on one of the live
CD’s.(knoppix etc…) and since i dont use IE very much i’ve had no problems
on the web i have no problem with linux i just prefer windows linux can be very quite good, and i use it sometimes
for right now i will stay with windows XP
1997+ Slackware, Laptop: difficuulties with sound, no “practical” GUI. > fdisk > Windows 95 (b,c)
1998+ RedHat 5.x – 7. Desktop: Difficulties with cyrillic+USeng funcionality. Fonts, Some other crap. > fdisk > Windows98 (SE)
1999+ Mandrake. Desktop: Major issues with Cyrillic+Eng, Horrid Unicode implimentation, fonts issues, KDE instability+Gnome inadequacy > fdisk > Windows 2000 Pro
2004 Slackware 10, old box: aRts (KDE) 100%CPU spikes, crashes, Horrid cyrillic fonts… no urge to fdisk yet, but apathy is creeping in.
For every one rock solid server-type app for linux, there are 10 free desktop-type apps that are unstable/unfuctional/work in progress.
I love the freedom of choice/source, but living in a permanent state of work-in-progress is unsettling to many.
So, here’s a guy that had no intention to switch over or even *seriously* evaluate Linux in the first place, ranting about how Linux is “adequate, but not spectacular”? Yes, if you are satisfied with Windows, stick with Windows. This sounds more like a monologue addressed to his son who recommended Linux. Nothing wrong with that, but what’s the point of making it into an article?
>I don’t know anyone that pays for windows software, so price isn’ an issue…
That’s you defense? That the Windows world is so full of thieves that the price doesn’t matter? Amazing.
“Not that there’s anything wrong with her per se, she just wasn’t what I expected.”
Well, at least you didn’t write an article about that.
Hopefully..
“Yes, the desktop is pretty, but I was expecting more than a pretty face.”
What was the author expecting? What was missing? What did not work? No elaboration. Maybe the author should have spent a few hours more.
The Linux desktop – in this case KDE – is certainly more than a pretty face. I don’t even find it particularly pretty nor do I care. I use it – also at work – because of its usability.
“it just seems like too much labor and work to try and live in desktop Linux.”
Shouldn’t that rather have been
“it just seems like too much labor and work to try and live in another desktop.”
How about a couple of hours review of the MAC desktop? And then a comparison of that review with this one.
I’m actually surprised to see such article from O’Reilly. But good if they are non-biased.
Linux is not Windows. Anyone who expects it be like Windows will be disappointed. Just as anyone who expects Windows to be like Unix will be disappointed. Each has strengths, and each has weaknesses.
A test drive only reveals perceived weaknesses, not strengths. We know how to get things done with the familiar system, because we know how to take advantage of its strengths. And we know how to work around its weaknesses. But we aren’t likely to know how to use the strengths of a new system in a short test drive. And we aren’t likely to know how to work around the weaknesses. What shows up is not the strengths and weknesses of the two systems, but the strengths and weaknesses of our knowledge.
This article says nothing useful about Windows or Linux. It simply points out that change is uncomfortable. In the short term, it is. In the long term, it’s inevitable. And you can’t do anything better without changing the way that you do it. Windows has changed a great deal, and will continue to change. Linux has changed a great deal, and will continue to change. We are all in for some discomfort.
As a concrete example, consider how the command line interface is viewed by Windows users and Unix users. In general, Windows users see little value in command line tools. They’re right – for Windows. Windows CLI sucks. And Windows users trying Unix systems tend to see no value in Unix CLI tools, because they have no experience with good CLI tools. A Unix strength goes completely unrecognized. And Unix users coming to Windows see a serious weakness in Windows CLI tools. So one set of users misses a strength in the unfamiliar, and the other sees a weakness.
Here’s the dreaded car analogy, for another example. Suppose that I took a test drive in a new car. I might be disappointed that I couldn’t listen to my cassettes. And if I’d never had a car with a CD player, I might not think to try them. This is how an improvement can be viewed as a weakness during a short test drive.
Test drives only show weaknesses. They never show strengths. It requires hard work to learn new tools and new ways of thinking. It takes time. And without spending that time, there’s no point in publishing a meaningless test drive.
What apps. I’ve not found any shortage of apps in the unix field. ^_^
What area you thinking of?
And free bad anologies, which often fail to point to the truth behind it all and make vague and useless political statements that just blur the matter.
You don’t have to be getting political to ask for a distinction between shareware, freeware, and OSS.
Shareware is freely downloadable limited software, which is closed source.
Freeware is closed source and free.
OSS is just open source.
With unix I don’t have to spend for ever custamizing it to my liking. I can easily import stuff from another system. Easy mobility of my settings nearly any where on the net.
Great men!?!?! What are ye smoking? 40G in the bank and they can’t smash linux, freebsd, aix, and solaris like it was absolutely nothing!?! That smells of inept management and developers. Heck, give me 1G and I will smash all of those and microsoft with ease and still have massive cash reserves.
That is the best part about unix, you are not limited to one company. You can get support any were. Try looking, it is not hard to find.
It is also rather funny. Windows which is suppose to have such great software aviablity, yet I rutinely have troubles locating stuff that can get a job done as well as it can be done on unix.
The applications didn’t win me over, though.
That’s all she (he) wrote. You have to have the killer apps.
The first is that he calls his Windows PC a trusty one. Gee, with spyware, viruses, adware and other crapware running rampant on Windows boxes, can they really be trusted ?
I realise this might be hard for Linux zealots to understand, but there are some of us that can quite happily run Windows machines – even whole networks full of them – without being infected, infested, hacked, cracked, pwn3d or even unexpectedly rebooted.
drsmithy,
please point me to those companies who are running Windows (version X) happily without having virusses and/or unstable behavior.
I mean, the guy didnt actually find anything difficult or impossible!!!
He said the apps were all adequate!
Considering all the apps are entirely free, and are all in constant development, how long until guys like this are ‘wowed’ by Linux.
2 years ago, reveiws like this were peppered with terms like ‘incomprehensible, impossible, arcane’
1 year ago is was ‘unclear, difficult’
Now it’s ‘adequate’
Next year it will be ‘good’, ‘better than expected’
and the year after, maybe it will be ‘best’, excellent’
Doesn’t bother me, I’m happy with Linux (GoboLinux, Slackware, Fedora) right now – But to me a review like this (lacking detail and short as it is) is illustrative of Linux’s growing desktop presence.
It’s easy to take this guys comments the wrong way, but he didn’t say anything bad about Linux at all.. Thats got to be a good thing.
Ugh. It sickens me to see ignorant, flaming responses like yours on sites such as this. Usually I think Darius is kind of unreasonably pro-Windows but he is infinitely more balanced than you guys.
Yes, it is possible to run Windows without getting viruses and spyware. I did it myself for years before I switched to Linux on my home desktop. I ran MS DOS, Windows 3.1/3.11, Windows 95 (for a long time), Windows 98, Windows 98Se, Windows 2000, and then XP. I never had any major problems with any of them. Windows annoys me in other ways but I have NEVER had a virus or spyware in all my years of using Windows.
Sure, its easier to get a virus in Windows, but if you’re a little careful it’s also easy to avoid. I use linux now but not for stability or security, I just happen to like running legal software.
The choice of OS has come down to user preference, and you guys are just making the Linux community look bad with your idiotic rants.
Well I have been using Linux since Slackware 7 but I’m mainly a Windows user.
I never switched to Linux completely because It doesnt help me do my job. It doesnt have the necessary tools. Only Windows has it. So if you are only doing programming using php for apache and not needing anything special beside this it is perfect to use Linux, you wont even miss Windows or any other OS. It all depends on how you use the computer, what you want to do with the computer.
If your OS can do/allow what you want to do, fine use it.
From a technical stand point Windows is not only Windows 98 anymore, all those stability problems are almost gone with NT series. About those spyware and security things, well if you spend 10 minutes for Windows administration you can pretty much configure your system as secure as Linux.
>The choice of OS has come down to user preference, and you guys are
> just making the Linux community look bad with your idiotic rants.
You are prob. right.
Your comments are a lot more solid and wise.
Leo,
I did not deny that you or anyone else could run Windows without getting virusses but the fact is that everbody around here is always saying like: i know people that and i had really no problems etc etc. while the reality is that Windows is the most unsecure and untrusted OS in the world. The only thing that makes Windows more secure and not crack on its own virus weight is 3rd party software.
I have been using MS products since the time where you needed those extra Ks to get a game running. Linux I know since Debian 3.0. I use Windows 2000 with Office 2000 at work. Windows is stable, Office less so. At home I use SuSE 9.0 with all updates, beta KDE etc. I like to run the cutting edge at home. Linux is stable, OpenOffice less so. Linux has prooved to me to be a better Server for all the little services I like to provide myself with (web server, database, irc, edonkey, fileserver and others), and I think if you use Software, then you should pay for it.
Now, my sister runs SuSE 9.0 but thinks its Windows. I never told her since I updated her screwed up Windows that was full of Ad/Spyware. She is happy to say the least.
My mother runs Windows on her old Pentium 1. I can not change her to Linux as she lives about 6000 km from the country I live in now. She used email me, but the amout of spam she gets, even with filter, has stoped her. Now we talk on the phone more… In august she will visit us, and will get a Laptop as a present. It will be SuSE Linux for sure! But I will not tell her.
Which is better? I don’t care. If you want to use Windows, BeOS, MacOS or DOS, I don’t care and you should not care. IT is supposed to solve problems and not to be a _religion_. So, if Linux fixes the problem I use Linux. At work our IT deparment has decidet to use Windows, thats fine with me, since I don’t have to administer it.
Garla didn’t mention open source or free software at all. That’s important. Here’s a guy who took a look at a couple of Linux flavors, decided they were about as good as, but no better than, Windows, and walked away. The GPL and other licensing frameworks had nothing to do with his decision. People who still believe licensing matters to individuals desktop users need to pay attention.
Linux is not Windows. Anyone who expects it be like Windows will be disappointed. Just as anyone who expects Windows to be like Unix will be disappointed. Each has strengths, and each has weaknesses.
Why not just try a mac? For anyone who can tell you that the Macintosh these days is just ‘gay’ just simply has not used one for more than 5 seconds. The only people who can truly mock the MacOS are the people only talking about OS9. The quote above simply says linux is nothing like windows, and windows is nothing like unix… the message I get from that comment is simply “USE ONE OR THE OTHER, YOU WILL NOT FIND ANY IN-BE-TWEEN SOLUTIONS” If anyone is actually looking for it, try a mac.
Mac’s are not ‘too’ expensive. I understand you can ‘throw a box together’ for less than $350 today, but if you wanted to measure the cost factors with a PC vs. Mac – Goto Alienware’s website, you will find them very much priced in the same range (and even if you get the Alienware PC, you are still stuck with the same viruses, ad/spyware & popup issues you had with that $350 PC.
There are small glitches with the MacOS, and it’s not going to always be ‘viurs free’, but I think this platform is the best combo between UNIX and WINDOWS. Both the Linux community & Microsoft have a lot to learn from Apple.
Those Windows users savvy enough to give Linux a try have probably got their Windows machine firewalled, Win Updated and AV’ed so there is less incentive.
I’m holding out hope that KDE will create a version of Firefox that’s integrated instead of shoving Konqueror down our throats. Don’t get me wrong, it’s great as a file manager but why are the re-inventing the wheel with the web tech?
Many KDE users are already using Konqueror (KHTML) as a web browser, and prefer it to Firefox. KHTML has just been getting better and better and it’s an awesome browser now. And it has plenty of room for improvement.
I agree it’s not a bad browser but for those making the transition to Linux, it’s nice to have some of the same applications available. At the very least they need the same keyboard shortcuts. Ctrl+Shift+N to open a new tab?? :p
You are, of course, a simple troll, but….
Sure, there’s a difference between shareware, open source, free software, GPL’d stuff, etc., etc.
The difference is in the price and the license. Here’s the question: Why should I care about the license? If I want to use a particular piece of software, why would I care if it is open source or shareware?
Too many zealots — like you — expect people to migrate to Linux for all the wrong reasons. When someone calls you bluff about the irrelevancy of licensing, open source, community, and all the rest to their individual preferences, you simply resort to personal attacks on the individual.
This is juvenile and insulting behavior.
As he has been using Windows for so many years, ofcourse it’s easier for him to find software for Windows then Linux. When I started with Linux, I didn’t know every software depot, but I’ve found the most important ones for me.
And we live in a Windows centric world?
Well, I love manga/anime, but I don’t go around saying we live in a manga/anime centric world. Get the point?
“I agree it’s not a bad browser but for those making the transition to Linux, it’s nice to have some of the same applications available. At the very least they need the same keyboard shortcuts. Ctrl+Shift+N to open a new tab?? :p”
Agreed, but nothing prevents you from using Firefox under KDE- If integration with the desktop underneath it’s a priority I think Konqueror it’s up to the task. BTW, Ctrl+T opens a new tab in Konqui 3.2 just as it does in Firefox
Well I use XP at home. I use XP at work. I develop software and get paid to do it. I have run Linux at home, but really have no need to conitue down that path, why, XP does what I need.
Now I would consider switching at home if my lesure time activities (read games) would run under Linux. My wife could do the same, since all she does is email and games.
I have tried all the office solutions in Linux, sure they are fine, but they are either missing some functionality, or trying to find the feature is harder than on the Microsoft versions.
If XP works for someone, and they are confident that they are protected, they are not going to switch to Linux, “just because.” Linux is nice, it has decent tools, and decent software, but that is not enough.
Personally Linux will be a fringe OS for me until, either games are all being ported (I don’t care if the games you play work on Linux, I only care if the games I play work on Linux, so don’t bother listing all the games on Linux), or someone starts paying me to develop on it.
Lastly, sure XP costs money, but, for me, not alot. Being a software developer also makes paying for software less of a “bad thing.”
I’m no great fan of windows shareware. But if you know where to look there is some great freeware. Try pricelessware.org – all freeware, all pre-screened.
Also, I don’t know why so many people overlook the fact that most popular gpl software that is available for linux, is also available for windows: mysql, perl, apachee, openoffice, mozilla, mplayer, video-lan, etc.
James Dorn–
There are small glitches with the MacOS, and it’s not going to always be ‘viurs free’, but I think this platform is the best combo between UNIX and WINDOWS. Both the Linux community & Microsoft have a lot to learn from Apple.
Not much of an article or opinion piece, really. He says he didn’t really like it too much, but is a die-hard Windows user, so couldn’t really be expected to in such a small amount of time. So, what does this article mean?
Also, as others have noted, the shareware point he makes is just plain wrong. I was looking for an HTML editor for Windows the other day (I wanted syntax highlighting). I embarked on a huge trip from site to site to find one that wasn’t incredibly bad (HTML kit has the most cluttered interface I’ve ever seen) or expensive. On Linux, I have scads of choices for editing: Bluefish, screem, quanta and more.
Debian has something like 10000 apps in it repos. Obviously not all huge or all that useful, but most of the apps found on tucows.com suck as well, sooo…
I choose Linux, type the name of the program I want to install and run it. Simple.
“If XP works for someone, and they are confident that they are protected, they are not going to switch to Linux”
I have been using computers for most of my life now… and been using windows OSes for the last 11 years…. I never started on a windows OS… I dont see myself die-ing with a Windows OS…
🙂
We even have morons in this thread arguing that a CLI has a place in a common use desktop.
Apple and Amiga quit that party in the 80’s. Microsoft didn’t really get it right till 95 (the year and the OS).
When are the Linux crowd going to admit they need a GUI (and underlying OS infrastructure) that does the most basic tasks for the user? They shouldn’t need to upgrade the kernel to support a piece of conventional hardware. Users don’t want to know about dependencies – they want to install an application. Linux is not fundamentally more secure – you have to be careful about the applications you install. And on and on and on.
“If some of the Linux finatics are so poor at windows administratin, maybe more people need to discredit what it is they have to say.”
well, of course not all linux users are administrator-gods. but neither are all windows user admin-gods (even less are than in other os’s!). the point is that, once you install a linux system, you get interested in it and almost automatically learn some things about how linux works. the linux-community is a driving force behin it in this respect. now, even if you`d want to be able to administrate a win-system properly, the restriction (kernel/sources that are not open to public) simply do not allow you to do so. but in a linux/bsd os, you do have the possibility to go into the deepest parts of your os and change whatever you want the way you want.
Maybe I’m just backwards…but my system is quickly looking like Windows backend, Linux apps.
Besides games (of which I don’t really do much of anymore), I don’t even use any of the normal windows software. Firebird, thunderbird, GIMP, openoffice…
Reasons why I have those apps:
1. Price…none of them cost a thing (mainly GIMP, open office). I still prefer MS OFFICE /photoshop
2. Usability. Firebird/thunderbird are…well just plain better than there free MS equivalents.
Reasons why I stick to the windows backend:
1. Drivers. I really don’t consider it my responsibilty to make drivers work. I just want it to work. So I was considering putting Linux on my desktop, until I found out my WLAN card was not compatible. I had to do ndiswrapper, or something…blah blah. Not going to do that. Couldn’t Suse or whoever just do that, but support that WLAN.
2. Stability. Yes, I just don’t have windows 2000/XP problems. The ones I have had in the past have mainly been due to ATI drivers Windows just don’t crash. Its really problem free except for IE crap.
3. Change needs a reason. i really have no need of Linux, so why would I change. I don’t see any benefits of switching to the Linux ‘backend’ as opposed to the windows ‘backend’. I don’t run servers and even I did, for my purposes, I’m sure windows would be fine. There has to be a reason to chance. GCC/bash and what not are all available for windows.
Ok, here’s my take on it. This guy’s bread-n-butter is Windows, then here comes this kid filled with wide-eyed enthusiasm about the OSS Linux solutions that he’s learned about.
Foists SUSE on the Windows dude. After hearing the gleaming “Linux is all things to everyone!” party line that zealots and new converts often have, the Windows dude expects to find a nirvana of wonderful new usability.
Instead he finds a so-so desktop, applications that are more or less half-finished, boring rehashes of browsers and office suites he’s already familiar with.
This, my friends and foes, was to be expected. Linux is good at what it does–allow the user to turn the thing into darn near anything else (desktop, router, gateway, firewall, etc.) But as the old saying goes “Jack of all trades; master of none.”
Linux hasn’t found it’s niche yet. Is it a server? How about a desktop? Is it an appliance or a fully functioning PC? What is it?
There are too many cooks, and too many directions that Linux is trying to go into. We have KDE and GNOME. We need only one superior desktop, instead we have 2 not so great desktops. I’ve advocated for sometime now that KDE and GNOME need to merge into a new, singular, desktop product. I’ve also beleived that there’s no need for linux to “do it all,” rather Linux needs to pick what it wants to be and do that.
We’re stuck with a bunch of fanboys determining the direction–and that’s the problem: there is no direction. Just flailing all over the place. The only place Linux has become truly superior is with Apache. Gee, that’s enheartening…. NOT!
Until Linux matures, it will never be more than a niche market OS. Linux can be great, but right now it isn’t. And that’s what the author was running into. Right now, Linux just “is”, and that only makes it an “also ran.” Until this changes Linux won’t be the pre-eminent solution.
And that’s why Windows will continue to dominate.
the linux-community is a driving force behin it in this respect
Sure, which driving force member of the Linux community would like to un-b0rk my urpmi install to use a mirror? I recently killed it and don’t feel like messing with it.
I just went to install KDE-develop from the distro disk and it failed becasue of a dependency conflict, I have made no changes to the system mdk10 (aside from urpmi). I might be able to work around it but don’t want to invest the time.
Using an operating system that software can’t easilly be installed on is kind of like surfing the web in telnet and parsing HTML on the fly.
but in a linux/bsd os, you do have the possibility to go into the deepest parts of your os and change whatever you want the way you want.
Cool feature in theory, although I have _never_ needed to do so. Besides I keep changing my hots file to include my ad filters and every time I reboot the system it reverts back to listing only localhost.
I also find the idea of using a restricted access accout much more annoying than it is useful.
“Maybe you need the clue. Most people don’t see software as a political statement. In that light, shareware, freeware, and “Free Software” don’t seem that much different from each other. It really doesn’t have anything to do with how much you know about technology.”
Shareware vs free software is so much more.
One point is the source to which you may reply the above. Fair enough.
The other point however is that you are not allowed to use the software in its full glory: functions are missing, 30-day-try-out, activation warnings at start up, etc. I hate the 2nd (loads of shareware) and 3rd stuff (eg WinZip). Fact that the application doesn’t stop working after 30 days says nothing (i repeat: _nothing_) about wether the license allows you to still use it.
I’m not at all surprised by this reaction. It’s the same reaction that’s to be had from anyone whose livelihood is linked to Windows.
From the article: “Preston Gralla is a well-known technology expert, and the author of Windows XP Hacks as well as nearly 30 other books. He is also the editor of WindowsDevCenter.com “
I have no doubt that I can demonstrate to you that the sky is orange, as well. All that’s required is that I disregard all evidence pointing to the conclusion that the sky is blue.
About the article: yeah it was small and not very informative. Would’ve been nice to see a little more meat.
About the share/free/FRRREEEDOMMM-ware licenses: personally, I don’t care. It’s a tool, a way of doing a task. I don’t get a special feeling when I use GPL’d software other than perhaps it was a no pay to download situation. If the license infringes upon what I intend to use the software for (say for commercial) I’ll either look for another solution that doesn’t or, if the product is good enough, I’ll pony up the dough if that’s what is required. Being open source means nothing because I probably won’t partake of whatever benefits that license has.
I mean, what’s the real diss against non-open source, really? The two things I get from the arguments is that open source=able to be used on all platforms and that one can do what they want with the source as long as they follow the license rules. The former doesn’t mean too much to me as I’m primarily a Windows person. Proprietary software has been around for many many years and I lived with that. So what if I couldn’t get Print Shop for my Color Computer, I had access to other programs that did the same things. The latter doesn’t mean squat as I’m not a programmer (or not enough of one to actually start fiddling with source code).
About security: I love reading about how Linux is always “safe” and Windows will always, however how much you lock it down, will always be a danger. Folks, a Windows PC can be virus free, spy/adware free as long as you use common sense. Just because you happen to own a bullet proof vest doesn’t mean you can go wandering about the seediest parts of town. The same common sense we use in life can be applied to computer use. Just because my computer is all firewalled and AV’d up I’m not going to start downloading crap from Warez sites or P2P networks. I’m not going to start opening strange attachments.
Hi all,
Well, I work actually since 10 years with M$ products and IBM’s OS2 (was really nice)…
I know only few about the Linux world but tried to step into it (will probably need it professionally one day 😉 ).
What came out for me is:
– It’s a nice environment, but it’s heavy!!! It’s possible to fine tune it, but you really have to know what you do. Win32 is easier with that.
– You can find almost everything for free (as long as you don’t look for a specific win32 app), that’s really nice and better than in the W32 world (even if you can find a lot of things)
– It’s absolutely not intuitive… That’s terrible with Linux, If you don’t have the Icon on your desktop you have to search around during hours on the web how to do something…
– Synaptic/APT is really a nice and useful product but you first have to know that it exists and then you have to find how to install it… You also have the problem of the repository list you must update all the time. You also get some inconsistency if you make frequent updates or install packages from other sources. The best with it is that it also updates the installed software (No equivalent in W32 world)
– YOU NEVER KNOW WHERE THESE RPMS INSTALL !!! That’s really awful. Installation through compilation isn’t really easy (especially for standard users). For that win32 installations are much better.
– The dependencies problem (even with synaptic) is a real pain… For example: Zope for win32 (5 minutes), Zope for Fedora Core 1 (at that time) 4.5 hours…
– Once installed I have nothing to complain… It works perfectly, and the price is hard to beat… But honestly, a new USER (not IT specialist) to Linux world will only hardly get over these difficulties.
That was my little experience with Linux… For the moment I’ll continue to try, hope it’ll be worth it 😉
Novad
PS : If someone has a good configuration file for APT/SYNAPTICS (fedora C2) don’t be shy… send it at novad[NO-SPAM please remove]@bluemail.ch Thanks
This man makes his money off of Windows. You can’t really expect him to dump it for X product, now can you? As for knocking GNU/Linux, he can’t really do that either, because his son is making money off that.
Alot off you have been pissing about this, that, and the other thing. But what that article comes down to is, money/livelyhood. What alot off your post come down to is the same.
“I’ve been using MS, for N years ….. Linux sucks, etc, etc.”
“I’ve been using UNIX, for N years …. MS sucks, etc, etc.”
“I’ve been using N OS, for N years …. N sucks, etc. etc..”
Of course, if you’re insecure, you’re going to have a hard-on for whichever technology allows you an oppurtunity to put food on your desk, and pearls on your whore.
But come on diversify, people. Learn some new skills, get some new ‘eXPeriences’ (get it?). You never know when a new gig will come up where you need to have more than a one dimensional view off the world.
Thanks for a fine example proving my point. Typical Windows users see no value in CLI. Is that because there is no value in CLI? No, it’s a case of generalizing the lack of value of the CLI furnished with Windows to an assumption that all CLI lacks value. A logical fallacy that is all too common in quick test drives.
If you had paid attention, you might have noticed that I made no claims about CLI vs GUI. My point was good CLI vs bad CLI. CLI vs GUI is a separate issue. There is no reason that you can’t have both.
A good GUI is no reason for not having a good CLI. GUIs are appropriate for some tasks, and CLIs are appropriate for others. A server doesn’t need a GUI, and an ATM doesn’t need a CLI. But a general purpose desktop should have both. A good GUI is not an adequate substitute for a good CLI, and a good CLI is not an adequate substitute for a good GUI. A good GUI with a weak CLI is a weakness. A good CLI with a weak GUI is a weakness. CLI vs GUI is a pointless distraction from the real issue, which is good vs bad implementations of both.
People can’t see the usefulness of features that they don’t know how use, or have never used. People who have always used single tasking systems don’t understand the power of multitasking right away. People who have always used single user systems don’t understand why multi-user systems are useful. People who who have always used stand-alone systems don’t understand why networking is useful. People who have only used AOL don’t understand that the Internet offers much more than the subset that AOL offers.
A quick test drive doesn’t provide much of a chance to learn how to use strengths that you aren’t aware of. That’s true regardless of whether the test drive is of Windows, Linux, or Mac OSX. A test drive of something unfamiliar will reveal uncomfortable differences, which are often portrayed as weaknesses. But there is very little chance that a test drive will highlight unfamiliar strengths. A test drive shows only similarities and differences, familiar vs unfamiliar. It doesn’t show actual utility. The true strengths and weaknesses require more than a casual test drive to discover.
The reason you can’t make full use of a lot of shareware is that you haven’t paid for it. It isn’t free. If you want to use it, buy it. People are trying to make money selling it. If that offends you, say so, but get your facts straight.
Don’t whine in public about how you’re “not allowed” to use shareware. Of course, you’re allowed to use it, after you buy it. Pretty much like everything else that’s on the market.
I don’t know if this will be read at this point, or perhaps someone has already stated this, but…
I feel that there’s a certain mentality to shareware that isn’t present on Linux that the author hints at, but never really hits. On both Windows and Linux, you can find little utilities for a variety of things. However, these utilities are simple to install on Windows (double click), but more complex on Linux. The new Linux user may have problems with the more complex procedure.
The thing is that distributions simply can’t include everything. There will always be new programs being released, or simply things that they leave out. On the GNOME desktop-devel-list there’s been a buzz about making the GNOME platform appealing to developers of 3rd party software for these small utilities. However, even with sites like gnomefiles.org, it doesn’t solve the fundamental problem of how to get stuff from a tar.gz file into a workable state on the user’s hard drive.
Sure Linux has a ton of Free utilities, but if a user finds themselves unable to install them and experiment with them, it will leave a bad taste in their mouth, PLUS the software developers may be missing out on valuable feedback.
I think this an underlying difference between shareware on Windows and Free software on linux, but hopefully one that will be resolved in the future.
Do the people in here who’ve been here awhile get tired of going over and over these same arguments for and against Linux, for and against Windows, etc? In a year, I don’t think I’ve seen a new argument, a new line of reasoning to convince people one way or the other. All you see is the same people making the same arguments day after day (and sometimes catch myself doing it to). Has anybody in here either been convinced of something new or successfully convinced someone else?
I don’t have a problem with shareware politically speaking, but when I’m in Windows and I need a little util for this or that, whenever I do find one, I get annoyed to find out it’s going to cost me $20-$30 for the privilege. Not that this is a bad thing, but when you’ve got a dozen or so of these, it adds up.
What I like about Linux is that most of these utils are free. In Linux, a decent telnet/terminal client somes with the OS. I’m still looking for one in Windows that’s free.
Although many of you refuse to see autors point, it’s clearly here – in current state linux is not enough attractive to switch from windows. (I’ll use word “linux” in meaning of all distros/desktops, built on linux kernel. Servers are different story.)
Yes, it’s nice, it’s secure, it runs plenty of useful applications (including all what you usually need) – but all this is present on windows already (don’t argue about security – see below).
It’s free? Doesn’t matter, I’m using legal copy of XP, like millions other users – I won’t save on this.
It’s GPL? I really, really like GPL philosophy (have added some lines to GPL projects myself) – but I don’t care, as far as I can find needed applications on windows. Usually I find, no cygwin needed yet:)
It offers a choice? Sometimes this is good, but not on first time. Like author, I started with Knoppix CD, it worked like charm – but I got one annoying question – why was there TWO web browsers installed?
It’s secure? Yes, it is, at least until it’s not used on 50% of desktops. This could be one of most attractive thing for newcomers – but wait, for which kind of users then?
– people (like me), who are used windows since MSDOS2.0 or smtg, who know something about windows structure, maybe even coded for windows (for last 15 years
can and have usually set their windowses up enough securely – linux doesn’t offer anything special;
– people, using windows at administered LANs – they even don’t know about windows security problems;
– home users, having their windowses full of ***ware either don’t know and care about that or have some good friend (windows “expert”), making their windows work – again no linux switch.
Well, if friend in last example is linux user, then linux takes over – but most of friends are windows users. This leads to potentially only group of people, switching to linux thanks to improved security by default – admins. Both corporate/LAN admins (if they’re allowed, of course) and “supportlive people, tired of repairing their friends/relatives corrupted windows installations” (they usually have some of admin’s skills) (sorry for my english, BTW).
Back to attractiveness of linux. What’s left?
It has powerful CLI? Absolutely doesn’t matter for ordinary windows user. Well, I’m using CLI (and batch and vbs files) to make some tasks fast – but I’m using it already in windows. More CLI functionality in linux is good, but not enough.
It is more configurable? Actually this is not good for everyday computer usage. Of course configurability is fine, if you are just interested in configuring something. If you need reliable working desktop, then you’ll get used to what you have and that’s all.
(Well, this would be psychologically valid point at least to try linux. People tend to imagine that using more configurable systems they have more power. Unfortunately this can be bit frustrating initially, especially if something needs to be configured using text files or CLI – and may cause fast switch back to windows. “I’ll try linux next year – currently it’s too messy” or something.)
What else? Nothing comes into my mind at the moment. Just one thing, which makes often even these possible good points to nothing – many users need windows. I’m working at company, developing windows-based applications, our customers are using these windows-based applications – no switch possible. Software development is too expensive to just [re]create our application for linux. (And don’t say – bad software design. I can agree, but many years ago there were no good enough cross-platform tools available and we decided to go with microsoft. Right decision so far – but things may change, fortunately not so fast.)
All this was about permanently switching to linux. There are lot of people, experimenting with linux and related OSes. Waiting for something really exciting and new…
You could grab yourself some decent utils which are freeware, or got ported over to Windows.
As for your question:
Free Telnet client (also SSH and Rlogin): PuTTy (license: MIT). It also runs on *NIX. Very stable program, widely in use as well.
And a Free compress/uncompress utility for Windows:
7-zip. No comment, i just know it supports quite a number of formats.
FTP client:
FileZilla. No clue about it, i know a few Windows users who like and thats it.
Just naming a few. Hope you enjoy.
its interesting that the old timer
is being shown the future by his son 
building a house is brick by brick
linux is building an os line by line… its been an interesting ride… but before long it will have all the tools and all the apps thats needed… the progress is faster then many can keep up with or want to keep up with but before long the old ways will be flooded with time..
=== still never seen a knoppix style microsoft product ===
By DonQ
“What else? Nothing comes into my mind at the moment”
I see things slightly differently to you sir… I believe a lot of companies are un-happy of the actions regarding Microsoft products…
From other software venders (normally offering a better product and being forced out of markets by constant mis-use of positional power).
To hardware venders being locked into MS only desktops.
To end users only ever going to get the same software. By this I mean look at the evidence over the years. Microsoft do not move their software forward for anyone else they are in the buisiness of printing money… If most of the customers are happy with Windows (1994) why change anything in Windows (2004) call it another name….. improve nothing just change the packaging….
For end users who are new to computing this has little effect as they know no other way of using a computer but for anyone thats been interested in computing for any amount of time this becomes tiresome….
if your interested in progress and creating the best product then monopolies must fall and fresh new ideas be injected into the IT world.
You asserted that shareware was deficient as software because people are “not allowed” to use it. You neglected to mention that applies only to people who refuse to buy it. A bogus statement, in other words.
“- home users, having their windowses full of ***ware either don’t know and care about that or have some good friend (windows “expert”), making their windows work – again no linux switch.
Well, if friend in last example is linux user, then linux takes over – but most of friends are windows users. This leads to potentially only group of people, switching to linux thanks to improved security by default – admins. Both corporate/LAN admins (if they’re allowed, of course) and “supportlive people, tired of repairing their friends/relatives corrupted windows installations” (they usually have some of admin’s skills) (sorry for my english, BTW). ”
This is probably all too true. Most average users wouldn’t switch to Linux at this stage in it’s development, however I do see alot of people fleeing to OS X. Could become a stampede if Mac prices keep going down.
@Filch Has anybody in here either been convinced of something new or successfully convinced someone else?
but yes I have been convinced of something new and have convinced many many hundreds of people if not thousands of people.
I first had a copy of *bootable beos on CD* then few years later Knoppix arrived and stole the king of bootable cd… I new from the very first version this would morph into many many useful and fun oses… ie clustering, partitioning hard drives, dvd version plus other uses i had not for seen booting hundreds of machine from one cddrive… thin clients or installing the whole os from that booted cd to harddrives…etc…. (surprised more distros dont work this way around now)…
I have constantly burnt Knoppix for many people and given the cds away free..
I have used it for desktop needs scanning documents on a scanner thats meant to be faulty or rcovering data fast from hardrives otherwise heading for scrap….
I have been convinced and have convinced people knoppix with its around 2gigs of applications is a useful tool…
Why because it touches on places others cant or dont dare to go… it opens ones mind….
Linux brings about choice. This guy seems to at least acknowledge the fact that another OS exists outside of Windows. In fact he even tried it. I give him credit for that.
I say use what works for you.
And yes, I’m a Linux user. I’m also an OpenBSD and FreeBSD user too.
As far going over to linux fully, when you put windows on 99%
of the pc computers you know it will work, and i dont have to
xf86config
my monitor or buy a new sound card. is it the best software? no
but for me i dont want to see the command line. now that being said i know linux will keep getting better. the competition
is great for all who use computers. software and O/S’s
will reach greater heights.
I think what this author failed to recognize is that Linux is a viable alternative to Windows. Mostly what I have heard is that Linux really isn’t a viable alternative. So for this Windows die hard to basically concede that the Linux desktop is on equal footing with Windows (with the exception of fewer apps) that is a big positive. If Linux can get increase the number of apps available then Windows will be in trouble-or so I believe. Like it or not, price is a huge consideration for most people. Windows is simply over priced.
Twits
By Matt (IP: —.vic.bigpond.net.au) – Posted on 2004-07-21 14:31:40
We even have morons in this thread arguing that a CLI has a place in a common use desktop.
Apple and Amiga quit that party in the 80’s. Microsoft didn’t really get it right till 95 (the year and the OS).
Urghh.. Yeah and thats why macs sucked so much till osx where they introduced a proper cli..
When are the Linux crowd going to admit they need a GUI (and underlying OS infrastructure) that does the most basic tasks for the user? They shouldn’t need to upgrade the kernel to support a piece of conventional hardware. Users don’t want to know about dependencies – they want to install an application. Linux is not fundamentally more secure – you have to be careful about the applications you install. And on and on and on.
Yeah yeah it is fundamentally more secure get a clue.. Its a multitasking multi user os.. Its designed to stop people running as admin.. Windows encourages it.. Therein lies 90% of windows problems..
Post when you have a clue about security. Btw linux has a perfectly capable GUI, infact it has a choice of guis. Choice is a wonderful thing. UPgrade the kernel ? most kernels supplied today, shock horror are completely modular.. even installing third party stuff like the nvidia drivers doesnt require reconfiguring the kernel.. Again you havent got a clue. Dependencies ? I just apt-get and have been doing so for +5 years. Of course you have to be careful of the applications you install.. In windows more so than linux, are you sure that app your about to install doesnt have spyware or any other for of malware ?
I have used windows since dos 6 even used dr dos. I was young I wont deny about 7 or 8 yrs old when I used to use windows and once upon a time thought it was better than sliced bread. Im older and wiser now and realise how crap it is in comparison to linux.
As to the Ive never had viruses or spyware etc etc.. complete and utter b******s that is an impossibility everyone on windows gets it. You may not now but you definately have gotten it in the past so dont lie.
I switched from XP Pro to Fedora Core 2 just shortly after it came out. Why? I’ve had time to think about it, and it had nothing to do with the normal reasons. The reason I switched was because of my brother.
Did he convince me through logic or passion or demonstrations of superior technology? Nope. He doesn’t even use Linux. He’s a Windows user (Windows 98 or ME). What convinced me were the times he would be over at my place and use my computer.
As I stated above, I used Windows XP Pro since Windows ME wouldn’t run on my Opteron box. Never figured out why, it would just die in less than 8 hours from a clean install. Wouldn’t even clean boot. I found XP Pro to be quite adequate. I surfed the net, I encoded videos, I played MP3s and OGGs, I wrote programs, I played games… it did everything I needed.
When my brother would borrow the computer, he’d run into something and swear for a few moments, then demand to know what the bloody h377 happened. I would think about what he did a moment, the respond “Oh, do it this way. If you do it that way, it goes boom. You’ll get used to it.” Just like I did. I never thought about the problems I had – I got used to it.
My brother, on the other hand, was not used to it and would cuss and swear, and on occasion I was forced to phyically restrain him from smashing in the monitor. So I thought about it – why was I learning to put up with problems which caused a family member severe mental distress? So I tried Fedora Core 2. I had to hunt around for things to replace the stuff I did in Widows. Guess what? I found them. I now do everything I used to do in Windows, but in Linux.
So what about my brother? He still glares at the machine and grumbles about having to cut and paste a mount command into the terminal to use his USB pen, but I can relax and know he isn’t about to smash the computer into little pieces. He hasn’t cussed at it once. He’s thinking now of setting up his own computer with Fedora Core. I think he might live longer if he does… the stress he endures in Windows has got to be taking years off his life.
A lot of fair comments and something to think about,
i may put linux back on my hard drive one day and not just
the live CD’s, we will see. i might leave XP,
“but i’ve been down the linux road before
i,ve not yet found that it is something i adore”
we will see, we will see, hee hee hee,
Linux isn’t a great experience unless you know how to set it up properly. It will do DVD and Digital Camera (and GIMP) and mp3. It will only do the digital camera stuff out of the box. You have to have experience in order to get the system you want. I like it a million times better than Windows.
To Steve:
I paid for my copies of Windows and Windows software. I didn’t mind doing it at the time, and I still don’t mind. If I found shareware useful, I paid for it. The software was created with the expectation that it would be paid for. If everyone you know pirates most, or all of the software they use, that says something about their ultimate trustworthiness. Personally, I would find different people to hang out with.
Money is not what drove me to Linux. It was partly the increasing use of copy protection. The old adage that it annoys the honest, while the dishonest circumvent it is pretty much on target. Companies treat users like thieves, because I suppose a fair number of them are. Frankly, with Linux, I don’t have to play those games.
For example to get the DVD working you have to install something by source. That will stump 95% of the people (including experienced windows users). Than you have to enter a command that is rather strange such as: mplayer dvd://1 -dvd-device /dev/hdc
Ofcourse you have to have a DVD player. This passage is too difficult for most humans, so it can be made into a desktop icon. The user puts in his DVD into the DVD player, and than presses the icon and the movie starts. With Linux, due to the criminal monopolies of the United States, it’s never going to be easy out of the box, but there are really only a handful of things you need to know in order to set your system up.
Advice is cheap, but here goes.
Use Linux, but don’t stop using XP. On a desktop, perhaps the best use of Linux would be Web browsing and e-mail. Switch just those two functions, and you can probably eliminate the use of anti-virus software and spyware scanners.
If you like Word, stick with Word, except if you need to write while connected to the Web, in which case Open Office will work fine.
I would rather not use a computer if I was forced by the government to use Windows. To tell you the honest truth, I think that FOSS is only half the battle, I would rather know how to build my own platform and just by the raw hardware. Ofcourse nobody is going to make it that simple. They would rather rip me off.
The author says:
“…but with Windows XP, I haven’t had problems with Windows crashes.”
I think he means that he hasn’t had crashes, not that he did not find it problematic to crash the OS. In which case, I have to wonder if he actually runs programs on XP or just lets it sit there.
Granted, XP crashes less than, say, 98 or ME, but that really isn’t saying much. That is like saying “It’s better to be deaf than blind.” Not the best choice either way.
“When Linux users complain of constant BSOD’s, horrible stability, spyware all over, and viruses running rampant on the system, nobody seems to ask them why they demonstrate less administrative competency on Windows than your average granny?”
I’m not a Linux user, but I’ll admit I’m ignorant. Explain to me how one uninstalls Internet Explorer and it’s associated junk from Windows XP while leaving XP usable and updatable and not reinstalling it to do simple tasks.
I haven’t been able to do it.
WOW! WOW! WOW!
Did that grab your attention?
Linux does not do this at this current time, and that was the main point of the article.
Windows XP does… Face it Windows XP is stable, spyware is easly dealt with if you use Adaware or similar. Security not a problem if you use a firewall and mozilla/firefox and lets face it the main problem with Windows XP is Internet Explorer (and I guess Windows Messenger which I removed with a registry command easily found on the Net anyway.)
I just installed CRUX 2.0 with Xfce4 on a 2.4 512mb and Linux does not boot quicker than Windows XP.
I remember BeOS having that WOW! factor, the boot time was explosive (10 – 20 secs) on my old machine compared to my Windows 98 setup that took 1 minute to load.
With BeOS you could copy/move a file to another part of the sytem with one right click… no multiple clicks, no multiple windows it was a real pleasure to use.
The one thing I found with Linux at least Xfce4 is that it leaves you with a feeling that the environment is snappy and quick.
But… If I reduce some of the shading features etc… Windows XP will just be as snappy but seeing I like the eye-candy I don’t want to do this. So I guess the one major drawback with Windows XP is its perceived sluggishness.
People want style… they don’t want command lines.
The way I remove Internet Explorer from Windows XP and 2000 is via XPLite (http://www.litepc.com/).
There are a couple of ways of updating your system without Windows Update. The first is manual. You watch for the monthly Microsoft announcements and follow the links to the downloads.
An alternative is Daisy. Daisy is a project of Virginia Tech. Think of it as a Windows Update without all that information sent back to Microsoft. You can find out more about it here: http://vtntug.w2k.vt.edu/daisy.htm
windows xp has a feature that allows you to turn off
all the fancy eye candy do it and you can speed your machine up quite a bit
oh yeah this note sent by slax linux
For example to get the DVD working you have to install something by source. That will stump 95% of the people (including experienced windows users). Than you have to enter a command that is rather strange such as: mplayer dvd://1 -dvd-device /dev/hdc
You haven’t used Linux in a long time obviously. Just install Synaptic to have a GUI driven package manager, then use it to install xine. Synaptic will also get the libraries needed to play various media, like DVDs. When you run xine, you get a nice GUI. To run a DVD, you just click the DVD button on the GUI and it handles your DVD like any Windows DVD player would. No weird commands and DVD navigation just like you’d expect. Quite a few of the complaints people make about Linux were dealt with LONG ago.
Hey, just adding what probably has already been said to the end of a LOOOOOONG reply chain.
Apparent contradiction
“….. pop in a CD and have a fully functional working version of Linux” leading to the statement that Linux needs to (but didn’t) wow him….
==> Yeah, he’s probably used to using his Live Windows CD all the time.
There’s great Shareware available on Windows.
==> 50 or so of the best SW packages at around $20 a pop already comes $1000. Of course, like most Windows users he just pirates/steals them (MS/BSA wording, not mine…) or he wouldn’t be so flippant about them…
why is this listed? it’s a page about how a guy popped
in knoppix and tried suse… WOW!
If he’s such an expert he would’ve went for something
a little harder and maybe actually used the system
for more than 5 minutes…
I don’t see anything worthy in this article of publishing.
A guy talks about rumours and facts he knows nothing about
(Ex. security, cost, speed) and doesn’t put a single
one to the test. WHO CARES?
I sure as hell don’t. Is he gonna make a post
about taking a dumb or how he chocked on a vitamin later
on?
Thanks to Peter Besenbruch for the info on how to remove IE. I might give it a try, although it gripes me that I should have to pay $40.00 for a utlity to use on an operating system I paid $200.00 for just to remove a program.
Obviously, with Linux, one wouldn’t have to do this.
“Face it Windows XP is stable”
Compared to what? 98? Yes. BSD? No. Unstable molecules? Maybe.
“spyware is easly dealt with if you use Adaware or similar.”
And if I don’t want to install or pay for a utility to stop something the OS shouldn’t be allowing in the first place?
“Security not a problem if you use a firewall and mozilla/firefox”
Or if you remove all the floppy drives, CD drives, DVD drives; disable the USD, FireWire, COM, and Parallel ports; and unplug it from the internet.
You know, I find Windows to not be a problem at all IF one uses a Macinitosh instead.
So … you switched to Linux because your system *obviously* had hardware issues that futzed XP … and because your brother swore at your machine?
Solid.
Windows XP does… Face it Windows XP is stable, spy ware is easily dealt with if you use Ad-aware or similar. Security not a problem if you use a firewall and mozilla/firefox and lets face it the main problem with Windows XP is Internet Explorer (and I guess Windows Messenger which I removed with a registry command easily found on the Net anyway.)
Says it all jump through loops, have to work around loads of crap just to get a useable system.. Shows you how far windows has to go before it can even compare with linux. Face it linux beats windows as a desktop OS by miles.. Only thing it lacks is all of the applications windows users are used and probably < 10% of its users use. Would I recommend linux to everyone.. But no way in hell I would use it again.. Its a joke. The fact that the browser has to be replaced.. any program supplied by Microsoft have to be circumvented speaks volumes about Microsoft and security thats all any Linux user has to say..
Leave a windows box connected to the internet for five minutes and watch it just randomly crash.. oh yeah its just gotten one of many worms.. Enjoy the clean up..
Windows out of the box is this insecure.. doesn’t that speak volumes ?
XP on my machine is better than many other people report on their systems. I had no trouble once I learned what not to do. Rebooting the system every two to four days was annoying, but not overly so. Hardware is ALWAYS a problem for any OS with PCs – there’s just too much hardware for anyone to support it all perfectly. Linux happens to be more stable with my specific system than current Windows. No biggy. I’m sure Windows will eventually improve support for AMD64 systems. I can deal with it.
I switched because you shouldn’t HAVE to deal with it. Microsoft asks “Where do you want to go today?” However, their response to your answer is invariably “Sorry, that isn’t on my route, but you can get off a block away.” Walking a block is no big deal, so people just live with it. My brother is one of those that doesn’t want to live with it, and to get along better I installed something that drops us off almost in front of the building.
It took some work. Fedora Core 2 from the install probably drops you off TWO blocks away. However, you can then tailor it to however close you wish to be. I’ve got it to two doors down. It’s closer than I could get XP.
I didn’t get rid of XP. I triple-boot my system (Fedora Core 2 / XP / XP64). I still occasionally boot into Windows. I find the amount of time between boots into Windows increasing as I get FC2 closer to what I want.