Top 8 Linux Myths Debunked

H

HardOCP News

[H] News
Joined
Dec 31, 1969
Messages
0
PCWorld has posted a list of the top eight Linux myths debunked. Most of this stuff is common knowledge but it would be a good list to pass around to the not so Linux-savvy folks out there.

Either way, installation has become extremely simple over the years, particularly on distributions such as Ubuntu, Fedora, Linux Mint and openSUSE. Most include a step-by-step wizard and very easy-to-understand graphical tools; they also typically offer a way to automate the process. A full installation will probably take no more than 30 minutes, including basic apps.
Click to expand...
 
Without looking I knew this list would be worthless pro-nix propaganda. And I was right. Hell they couldn't even come up with 8 good myths to "debunk." 6 and 7 are pretty much the exact opposite of what everyone actually says about Linux. 3 is a total WTF/facepalm, 2 and 5 are rather disingenuous, and most of the other points contain snippets that are wrong, misleading, or highly debatable.

M-M-M-MONSTERRRR FAILLLLL!!!
 
Sigh. I don't know where to begin.

"Run your business apps under wine." RIGHT. God luck calling support on that one.
"Now, server usage is a different story--just as it is under Windows, for example" - Windows server UI's are very similar to the Desktop ones. Ever use one?

"It's Free, So It Must Be Pirated" - I have never heard anyone ever say this.
"There's No Support" - RTFM NOOB /NERD RAGE, except for paid support.
"It's Not Compatible" - actually diver compatbility is still a big issue.
"It's Less Secure" - I have never heard anyone ever say this.
"It's Not Reliable" - I have never heard anyone ever say this.
"Its TCO Is Higher" - debatable. Finding *nix experts is harder and more expensive then Windows ones, although Windows Enterprise software is usually much more expensive.
 
Eh, the article's inconsistent. The opening statement talks about using Linux in businesses, and the first point was talking about the ease of installing it. I'm going to go with: if an IT department doesn't know how to install Linux in the first place or allows employees to install operating systems, then it's time for the company to find a new IT person.
 
As much as I would like to believe that all of these myths are debunked, I really can't say I can consider "dedicated forums" a proper support outlet. There is a reason why support people are trained to ask "is your computer plugged in?" and I don't imagine there are many dedicated forum moderators who are keen to answer the questions that have the answer of "hit the power button"
 
There are also countless comparable and Linux-friendly alternatives that can be easily installed, including all basic productivity packages.
Click to expand...
I wouldn't call OpenOffice "comparable" to Microsoft Office. For what it is, it's pretty capable, but it isn't quite on the same level as Office (or even iWork).

If you're using a Mac or Windows, it goes without saying that you are intimately familiar with crashes and downtime.
Click to expand...
Not really, no. Perhaps over a long-enough timeline, the average Linux distribution will fare better with respect to stability of uptime, but it's not as if Windows and OS X are exactly crashfests. In fact, the number one source of system crashes in Windows XP is reportedly the audio hardware abstraction layer which has since been removed.

While I consider myself a Linux fan, this article reads too positively. It has shortcomings compared to Windows and OS X, and those shortcomings are generally not severe for the average user, but it's just not on the quite same level as either of the major commercial OSes and, depending on the circumstances, not the correct choice in the business computing realm. Then again, both Windows and OS X have a high cost of entry compared to Linux (typically), but you'd really have to evaluate the comparative TCO on a case-by-case basis, though. Sometimes Linux may 'win'; other times it may 'lose'.
 
Monkey God said:
"There's No Support" - RTFM NOOB /NERD RAGE, except for paid support.
Click to expand...

THIS. This, more than anything else, I'm convinced, is the #1 thing holding Linux back. There are problems in everything, but how you handle them is important. Me, I'm a very patient guy when it comes to support - hell, I'd have to be, considering how much trouble I usually have understanding the foreigners most companies outsource to - but after a year and a half of trying Linux, I got sick of "USE T3H GUGGLEEEE!!!!11" and "well WHY DON'T YOU fix it?" and went back to Windows.
 
Monkey God said:
Sigh. I don't know where to begin.

"Run your business apps under wine." RIGHT. God luck calling support on that one.
"Now, server usage is a different story--just as it is under Windows, for example" - Windows server UI's are very similar to the Desktop ones. Ever use one?

"It's Free, So It Must Be Pirated" - I have never heard anyone ever say this.
"There's No Support" - RTFM NOOB /NERD RAGE, except for paid support.
"It's Not Compatible" - actually diver compatbility is still a big issue.
"It's Less Secure" - I have never heard anyone ever say this.
"It's Not Reliable" - I have never heard anyone ever say this.
"Its TCO Is Higher" - debatable. Finding *nix experts is harder and more expensive then Windows ones, although Windows Enterprise software is usually much more expensive.
Click to expand...

actually I have had quite a few experiences with that. you would be amazed of how many users do not understand the concept of open source software. many people do simply assume its not legit. but except for that and your last part I have to agree with you.
 
^ I'm talking about my experience in Linux forums, of course, not on the phone with anybody.
 
This is so beyond dumb, I don't agree with anything on that list. Not to mention he just made all that shit up............
 
phide said:
I wouldn't call OpenOffice "comparable" to Microsoft Office. For what it is, it's pretty capable, but it isn't quite on the same level as Office (or even iWork).


Not really, no. Perhaps over a long-enough timeline, the average Linux distribution will fare better with respect to stability of uptime, but it's not as if Windows and OS X are exactly crashfests. In fact, the number one source of system crashes in Windows XP is reportedly the audio hardware abstraction layer which has since been removed.

While I consider myself a Linux fan, this article reads too positively. It has shortcomings compared to Windows and OS X, and those shortcomings are generally not severe for the average user, but it's just not on the quite same level as either of the major commercial OSes and, depending on the circumstances, not the correct choice in the business computing realm. Then again, both Windows and OS X have a high cost of entry compared to Linux (typically), but you'd really have to evaluate the comparative TCO on a case-by-case basis, though. Sometimes Linux may 'win'; other times it may 'lose'.
Click to expand...

Yeah that amused me as well - them saying Windows users are intimately familiar with crashes. Sounds like someone needs to write them a myth-debunking article about Windows. No experience with Macs here though.

As for the TCO, did they seriously use the government as an example of an institution saving money by using Linux? The government?! Saving money?!
 
Shorehn said:
THIS. This, more than anything else, I'm convinced, is the #1 thing holding Linux back. There are problems in everything, but how you handle them is important. Me, I'm a very patient guy when it comes to support - hell, I'd have to be, considering how much trouble I usually have understanding the foreigners most companies outsource to - but after a year and a half of trying Linux, I got sick of "USE T3H GUGGLEEEE!!!!11" and "well WHY DON'T YOU fix it?" and went back to Windows.
Click to expand...

To be fair on this point - if you go to a lot of Linux support forums with very little Linux experience, the people posting often don't give a shit. If you don't know how to do something in Linux, it isn't worth their time to tell you how.
 
It would be much easier to make a much more factual "Windows Myths" list, especially considering that some people are ignorant about Win7 and try to act like XP is still current.
 
How did this make it into the HardOCP new feed.. It is opinion at best and at worst a copy and past top X list...

Drivers are no-longer a problem, most peripherals work? Please list more than one common retail home multi-function scanner printer that completely works under linux.

Does iTunes fully function under linux? can I use my (current gen) iPhone, iPod, or iPad?
 
Shorehn said:
THIS. This, more than anything else, I'm convinced, is the #1 thing holding Linux back. There are problems in everything, but how you handle them is important. Me, I'm a very patient guy when it comes to support - hell, I'd have to be, considering how much trouble I usually have understanding the foreigners most companies outsource to - but after a year and a half of trying Linux, I got sick of "USE T3H GUGGLEEEE!!!!11" and "well WHY DON'T YOU fix it?" and went back to Windows.
Click to expand...

So pay for support from the multitude of companies that provide it, just like you have to if you actually want useful support for Windows? I am sick of hearing this rhetoric to be honest. Windows support forums are no better than the Windows ones (often far more useless IME), and figuring things out on your own is far more difficult than it is on Linux.

I mean the article is pretty much bullshit, none of these things are cut-and-dried things and you need to consider your situation. The bullshit from both sides gets tiresome.

As for the TCO, did they seriously use the government as an example of an institution saving money by using Linux? The government?! Saving money?!
Click to expand...
Yeah, lots of it. Or if you want to put it in right-wing rah rah government spends too much money terms, they wasted less of it. And it's happening all over the world. Government is one place where open-source makes a shitload of sense. Though if the best you can do is rag on his example, there are plenty of others. But as ever, it's situation-specific which is the better choice.

"It's Not Compatible" - actually diver compatbility is still a big issue.
Click to expand...
Not really, outside niche hardware. Especially for the business case, which he seems to be talking about.
 
chinesepiratefood said:
To be fair on this point - if you go to a lot of Linux support forums with very little Linux experience, the people posting often don't give a shit. If you don't know how to do something in Linux, it isn't worth their time to tell you how.
Click to expand...

I wasn't going around asking anyone to hold my hand. I went out one day, bought a book on Ubuntu, and walked myself through the basics. After that, I experimented with a bunch of different distros - Mandriva, OpenSUSE, and a lengthy stint with Arch - before finally coming back to Ubuntu for its relative simplicity.

When I asked a question, it was because I had exhausted my resources and honestly didn't know what else to do. The reward for exercising my due diligence, in many cases, was people trying to pin the problem on me rather than the software.
 
phide said:
I wouldn't call OpenOffice "comparable" to Microsoft Office. For what it is, it's pretty capable, but it isn't quite on the same level as Office (or even iWork).
Click to expand...

Agree with your post but Open Office isn't even on the same planet as Microsoft Office 2010 particularly in the business world. MS Office 2010 isn't just an application suite, its an application platform especially when you throw in SharePoint. Nothing comes close to this level of functionality in the business world and practically every business app has support for MS Office. I used to work with Open Office a lot but its practically useless in the business world.
 
If only they had done something like "this is how linux works today" and then "this is how windows/mac works today" etc etc etc, and concluded with something like, "in the end, it's all about user preference" the article would have achieved it's goal nicely... instead, it was the same fanboy-talk repeated all over AGAIN.
 
This article is the same old tired crap the Linux community has been spouting for over a decade and if half of it were true then desktop Linux would be on more desktops its that simple.
 
Monkey God said:
"There's No Support" - RTFM NOOB /NERD RAGE, except for paid support.
Click to expand...
Linux support consists of having a problem, asking forums about it, and then getting flamed for not knowing what the hell you're talking about. The linux outlets for support have been nothing but a nightmare in my learning journey IMO.

"It's Not Compatible" - actually diver compatbility is still a big issue.
Click to expand...
Agreed

"It's Not Reliable" - I have never heard anyone ever say this.
Click to expand...
Let me be the first one to say that then because neither my laptop nor my htpc has been reliable. Linux has been nothing but a nightmare as far as reliability is concerned.

IMHO the community needs to get off their soap boxes and drop their attitudes if they want the OS to grow.
 
Linux is just not a viable option for most businesses. 99.9% of the software that a business will use is written for Windows only. A lot of that software integrates directly with MS Office, so Open Office is not an acceptable alternative. I would love to convince my boss to switch over to Linux and other open source software that is free, but there is just no way that it can be done.

For home use Linux has come a long way over the past couple of years, and outside of gaming it can do everything that most home users would need. In the business world it just can't touch Windows until the software vendors support it. Maybe if cloud computing takes off we will see the day when Linux can rule the business desktop world. As long as there is a need to install programs, Windows will rule the business desktop world.
 
You know, I have nothing against any of the OSs out there, and I believe that each serves their purpose quite well. Windows is the mainstream, Mac tends to get a lot of artists (both graphical and musical), Linux gets thoughs that want to tinker and/or customize. But Jesus Fucking Christ I am sick to death of the "(Enter OS Here) is more secure" argument. Give a quality hacker/cracker enough time and they will find a hole that can be exploited. Period. And to even say that AV software isn't necessary is just plain stupid. You hear all the time from Mac fans (First large-scale virus,1981, Elk Cloner, Apple II). Fact is all computers can get viruses, Windows get the majority because the majority of computers run Windows. If I write a virus and want it to spread as fast as possible to as many computers as possible, I will write it for Windows, not because of ease, but because of exposure. I wish someone with half a brain would write one of these kind of articles instead of some fanboy trying to mislead people to jump on their bandwagon.
 
keenan said:
So pay for support from the multitude of companies that provide it, just like you have to if you actually want useful support for Windows? I am sick of hearing this rhetoric to be honest. Windows support forums are no better than the Windows ones (often far more useless IME), and figuring things out on your own is far more difficult than it is on Linux.
Click to expand...

You can buy an upgrade copy of Windows 7 Home Premium for $110 from Newegg right now and Microsoft will give you support through the medium of your choice: e-mail, online, or phone. If you go with Ubuntu, Canonical's 'Ubuntu desktop support' program is limited to online help only, with a maximum response time of two days, and costs ~$135 per year.

One of the first questions I always received when trying to introduce Linux to everyday users was 'can you call the company if something goes wrong?' They want phone support from the manufacturer. Since you can't call Canonical and the support is on ongoing cost which adds up to more than the cost of just buying Windows, paying for Linux, with its inherent flaws (like limited gaming support) just doesn't make sense.
 
I am surprised how many anti linux guys are here... or better yet how many MS fans there are (must be post Win 95/ME days comp users - xbox 360 generation?).

Windows 7 is an excellent OS IMHO BTW.

There is only one reason I do not use linux at home: the new games (specifically steam). I have found it much more stable over time, much faster (less OS rot). And virtually immune to viruses... yes this could be argued that because of the small user base there is no enticement for the virus/malware creators...

As for the usability: I have "reconditioned" many old systems (30+ in the last 2 years): installed Ubuntu and put them in the wild with NOOB farmvillers and found them to be much less of a hassle to keep up.

As for the office; It would be interesting to see how many people in business actually use sharepoint. Windows & MS Office are the standard; that is just a fact.

Linux has it's place... and would work fine for a large portion of the populace (much more than what is using it now IMHO) partially due to the internet and the fact that everything is getting "clouded" ("webbed"?)... but so does Windows as well.

The Apple imposed hardware limitations are OSX's bane. and will be for awhile... Apple has castrated the OS (but limited hardware problems) by controlling the OS and hardware with an iron fist. OSX is pretty (but Windows 7 is close)... that is all I have to say.

Yes the guy is to positive about linux... but MS and Apple are much more arrogant in IMHO.
 
XeenSD said:
I have found it much more stable over time, much faster (less OS rot). And virtually immune to viruses... yes this could be argued that because of the small user base there is no enticement for the virus/malware creators...

Linux has it's place... and would work fine for a large portion of the populace (much more than what is using it now IMHO) partially due to the internet and the fact that everything is getting "clouded" ("webbed"?)... but so does Windows as well.
Click to expand...

+1

I'm thinking the android OS forthcoming could be a serious competitor to Windows. I think there is a place for Linux too, but I don't know that it's the business world. Windows works, and works well especially with 7. Linux always seemed to be close to me but took no cigar. It was just too hard to configure something I thought should be easy. That may have changed as I haven't run any Linux in a while. But I am also tired of the MS monopoly. I'd really like actual competition for desktop space. If I asked 10 people what brand of toothpaste they use, I could get a good number of responses. Same with almost anything out there. Ask them what they have on their desktop and 8 or 9 of them will answer Windows.
 
Shotglass01 said:
I'm thinking the android OS forthcoming could be a serious competitor to Windows.
Click to expand...

While Android can easily compete against Windows on slates I don't see it doing well on laptops and desktops. Of course there's Chrome but I don't see nearly the interest in it as I do Android. At this point I think that the world has conceded the traditional PC space to Microsoft Google and Apple are into phones and slates trying to beat Microsoft at a different game because that's were they see growth and no 800 pound Microsoft gorilla. And of course Google wants all your data and apps hosted of course on their cloud and Apple is big into micro-transactions.

Microsoft's domination in the PC world has been both good and bad. Bad in that there's not a lot of competition and new ideas but good in that it's easier to develop software for one platform than many and provide support.
 
Shotglass01 said:
I'm thinking the android OS forthcoming could be a serious competitor to Windows.
Click to expand...
If you're referring to Chrome OS, only in the netbook sector, which is where Google intends to target it. Initially, you'll only be able to buy netbooks preloaded with Chrome OS and Google won't be providing support for other configurations. That may change depending upon how successful Chrome OS ends up being.

I think Chrome OS stands to do well on netbooks and tablets, potentially, but I think its potential applications beyond that are few.
 
This article is pure tard sauce. Who the hell actually pays these people to do these articles?
 
Yes, sorry, Chrome OS.

The reason why I think it could be large is because of it's simplicity. You can plug in, get your docs, and whatever else Google has (I don't use it so I don't know the apps they have). Get the apps you want. It's OS "light."

They would have to have printer drivers, but think about what is MOSTLY done with a great number of PC's out there. They get e-mail, they get web, they get Farmville and they get resumes. Chrome OS should be able to take care of all that easily. Heck they have that on the phones now.
 
heatlesssun said:
This article is the same old tired crap the Linux community has been spouting for over a decade and if half of it were true then desktop Linux would be on more desktops its that simple.
Click to expand...

The 'Linux community' hates articles like this as much as you do, because it encourages people like you to dismiss the tiny grains of validity buried in the sensationalist crap.

You can buy an upgrade copy of Windows 7 Home Premium for $110 from Newegg right now and Microsoft will give you support through the medium of your choice: e-mail, online, or phone.
Click to expand...
News to me. You get access to their community-based support for free (ie. a forum). If you want to actually talk to someone, it's paid-per-incident. Do they include some free 'incidents' with the purchase or something?

One of the first questions I always received when trying to introduce Linux to everyday users was 'can you call the company if something goes wrong?' They want phone support from the manufacturer.
Click to expand...
I have never, ever heard anyone say this. Nor have I ever heard of any of my friends, colleagues or clients calling the OS vendor directly for support. They either figure it out themselves or call their 'computer guy' for help.
 
It's PCWorld, folks, that's as far as you needed to read into Steve's post - in other words, the first word alone should have been the clue - to decide "ok, time to go to the next thread..." :D
 
keenan said:
The 'Linux community' hates articles like this as much as you do, because it encourages people like you to dismiss the tiny grains of validity buried in the sensationalist crap.
Click to expand...

I never said there wasn't some truth here. Linux has been easy to install for over a decade. And I'm not trying to indict all Linux users when I say Linux community but clearly these are talking points that the Linux community has used for YEARS. Ten years ago this type of article wouldn't have been so sensational because this is what yes, the Linux community was saying and promised ten years ago.

Today however it just looks foolish.
 
keenan said:
News to me. You get access to their community-based support for free (ie. a forum). If you want to actually talk to someone, it's paid-per-incident. Do they include some free 'incidents' with the purchase or something?
Click to expand...
It looks as if you get e-mail support for free with a claimed response time of one day. Phone support? Can't find any details about that. They certainly don't list any support numbers that I can find.
 
XeenSD said:
As for the office; It would be interesting to see how many people in business actually use sharepoint. Windows & MS Office are the standard; that is just a fact.
Click to expand...

3rd largest semiconductor company in the world here and we use it EXTENSIVELY....I don't think ppl here use it right (ppl just make all kinds of random folders, different sites use different layouts), but we use it for every thing none the less.

Its pretty neat I suppose, but not overly intuitive from how I've seen it used.
 
BTW, other then trying to get a licence key unlocked, who on this board actually calls Microsoft or Apple for support? I thought Google search was my suppport :)
 
i stop when I read this

Ever wonder why you've never heard of the Linux equivalent of Microsoft's "Patch Tuesday"? That's because there isn't one--it's not necessary. Neither is antivirus software. Strange but true.
Click to expand...
 
I mean, we can twiddle about whether these are really the top 8 myths about Linux, but most posts show that it takes a lot more work to debunk MS's FUDs... Hey, folks, get your act together!

So, OK: Linux forums don't provide enterprise grade support, but whoever said they would? You can get enterprise grade support, and at very affordable prices, from Red Hat, Ubuntu, and Novell, at the very least. It's professional, 24/7 (if you need it), and not free, but neither is any other phone support - and it's much cheaper than Windows support.

Sure: it helps to have knowledgeable IT people for a Linux shop, but, guess what, Linux is very much *nix compliant, so it takes no time at all for any reasonably prepared sysadmin to get up to speed. If your sysadmin can't get out of Windows, you are wasting his/her salary anyway (much of the web runs on Linux, you know)

No, Linux is not as unstable as Windows. If it was, maybe Google, Amazon, and so on would not run on it. There are plenty of objective reasons why it is. And, no, Linux is not perfect, but it is more stable. If you are really paranoid, BSD is even more stable - but you are out of your mind if you believe that you'd be better off with Windows.

And, now, let me ask: why in the world would businesses that really need 100% uptime (did I mention Google and Amazon?) run on Linux?

Yes, Linux has vulnerabilities - heck, any OS has some: this is very complex stuff. The point is that you have zillions of people checking that out, and rushing patches if any vulnerability is spotted - no need to wait for Tuesday, or whatever: whenever a patch is needed, it gets shipped, and your installation will let you know right away.

And, no, Linux is not hard to use - in fact it is easier than Windows, since, when something goes wrong, you have a fighting chance to fix it, as opposed to the moronic "help" I get when I try to troubleshoot the innumerable glitches my wife runs into with her lame Vista laptop. Installation is trivial, and, you know, if you know how to use a keyboard, you can use the CLI, even if 99.99% of the time you don't have to (of course, I wish I had a useful CLI - the one that ships is ridiculous - when Windows goes beserk, but, hey, that's why I don't use it, personally)

And, guess what, even though there are indeed obtuse hardware manufacturer who make sure their stuff does not run on Linux, they are a vanishing minority. Most hardware runs out of the box. Depending on your distribution, you might have to click on a couple of links to fix the odd item out, but most of the time that's not even necessary. And, things are improving by the day (Broadcom just opened up their WiFi drivers, for example).

Which gets us to the Office thing. Well, I am in academia, not industry, but from what I can see, if you people in suits need MS Office it is because you were told you had to. Get over it, and your slide shows will be just as boring if you produced them with Open Office, as with PowerPoint. In academic projects it is not even a race: the versatility, flexibility, scope and vastness of possibilities available under Linux make it a no-brainer. Of course, that does not prevent many colleagues to stick to Windows, because they don't even know what is available out there. But there is no way I could produce the stuff I write if I was using Windows - not to mention the mind-boggling licensing costs I would have to pay to get a fraction of the capabilities.

OK, I could go on, but it's getting boring. Again, Linux i not perfect (are you trying to tell me Windows is?),, but it beats the competition by miles
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top