Thinking About Windows 10 Alternatives

You can't run everything full time and you can't be aware of everything everyone so the argument is generalized by nature from both sides. However, there are things I use in MS Office and have for some time that just there in LibreOffice and big thing for me is lack of touch and ink support. I don't use that stuff all of the time outside of OneNote but yeah, I look at documents all of the time on tablet using touch. And sure you can say that it's not a big deal until one day someone may want such capabilities and the number of devices with those capabilities is increasing. As for Microsoft's resources in Office, yeah, there's a lot there. Office might be more important to them today than Windows and they have like a client for every major platform, sans Linux. They might one day build one for Linux but yeah it would make Linux as desktop a lot more viable for people but at the same time so many Linux folks are anti-Microsoft it's hard to know if it be worth the effort, at least right now.

For a home user sure a web client will probably work. If you're crunching larger documents the performance won't be there.

Ok Windows 10 has serious problems. To me desktop Linux has more serious problems because it fails to do the things I want and need. If Linux can be less problematic for people than Windows then they should be all means us it. But there's no silver bullet here. With Linux some people will be better, some maybe worse and the rest will simply trade on set of problem for another.

Ok again I call BS on your insistence again that Linux doesn't support touch. Which is just wrong. Perhaps you can't get it to work in a VM that isn't the same thing at all... if you have been testing touch in a VM, yes my friend it isn't going to work. If you run Windows 10 in a Linux VM touch isn't going to work either. I have installed plenty of Linux systems on machines with touch screens and things work just like they do in Windows... not sure where your getting that bit of misinformation from. Just like Windows the newer the version the better the support for new things. If your insisting on running a version of Linux that is running a 3+ year old kernel sure perhaps you will have to mess around (you won't on anything current)... just like if you where to remove say Win 10 and install Win 7 you'll have to go get the right drivers. Touch isn't the new tech it was 2-3 years back support for 99% of the touch screens on the market is rolled into the newest kernels.

Claiming Linux can't handle large Document files is one of the most silly things I have ever heard. Not that it matters as others have said if Office really really matters to you so much it all runs in the cloud these days. (and most of those resources you are talking about MS spending on Office the last few years has been going toward that end, not making it run better in windows. MS isn't completely stupid they know they need to support people using Chrome books android and iOS) The web client handles large files just as well as the native version (better depending on your machines specs). Which is why we will never ever need a version of Office for Linux... if you must have it runs in the cloud. Which is what MS wants.

As for Windows VS Linux for you... hey if your all down for Windows that's cool man good on you. Don't assume your use case is = to the average person though and Linux is terrible for whatever reasons your inventing.

The only bit of hardware you have mentioned that you use that I would consider yes windows required is VR. Yes the locked in market VR guys haven't really supported Linux yet (even if Valve will be adding support "soon"... we know they have Linux VR working but who knows when they release it). Having said that most people don't really care... Its not that we don't want VR. We simply are going to force them to an open standard. I'm sorry but all 2-3 of the current VR standards are never going to be massive mass market sales hits. There are to many people like me that aren't stupid anymore... I'll buy into VR when there is a widely supported OPEN standard. That isn't just a Linux guys view in this case, plenty of people feel the same way. The masses aren't buying into $500+ systems that may be the wrong format in a year. The average consumer have been burned by to many Format Wars HD-DVD / Mini Disks / DVD audio / SACDs / UMD ect ect ect.
Until the industry realizes they have to settle on format the vast majority of people simply don't care.
 
As for Windows VS Linux for you... hey if your all down for Windows that's cool man good on you. Don't assume your use case is = to the average person though and Linux is terrible for whatever reasons your inventing.

It's his generic argument for everything, Heatlesssun needs Windows so the whole computing community needs Windows.

Linux hasn't changed in 20 years according to Heatlesssun.

Lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
This is all opinion. But there's also a lot of history on this particular subject that spans two decades now. And it's always been pretty much the same debate from a desktop perspective. From pro-Linux people the argument is Linux is free, more secure, more configurable and customizable and there's no mega corp that owns and controls it. From pro-Windows people, those are good points but where's the support for the things I need and want? In two sentences that's what this has all been about for 20 years.

That was the argument for the first few of Linuxs years.

For the last few years the simple fact is... Linux has magnitudes more development money spent on it then MS OS, or Apples OS or any other OS.

Every major company in the world tinkers with and adds lines of code to the Linux kernel. The days where guys like me in our basements where adding the majority of the code to the kernel are long gone. Yes companies like Intel / AMD / ARM and the like are adding code for their latest greatest to the kernel before the hardware ships. The delay where the newest stuff hits the market and it isn't quite in the kernel yet is all about the process of adding and updating code for the kernel. (the kernel is updated every 4-6 weeks and sometimes new code from say Intel doesn't make it into the shipping version of the kernel before new hardware ships... but its rare that hardware won't run anyway even before the updated code hits the live kernel)

In the long run MS can't compete with the pace of Linux kernel development. They know it to... its only a matter of time before MS adopts the kernel. They have been softly easing people into the idea, with linux subsystems and official linux support of all sorts of things. Sure they will build their own closed source desktop on top of it no doubt. On the core kernel though at some point they will have to cave. They can't outspend Linux. Companies like Intel / AMD / ARM / IBM / Google / TI all spend almost as much as MS does... put them all together at work on the same project and the order of magnitude they are spending more then MS every year is impressive. The Linux kernel is already superior to the Windows kernel and that isn't really something anyone can debate... we can debate desktop environments, ease of use and all the other things that make a consumer OS a consumer OS, the core of the system however MS has already lost.
Its a big part of why they have no chance to ever make a come back in the mobile space... the Windows desktop that everyone knew doesn't translate to mobile, and the new one MS came up with is saddled with a slower buggier less secure kernel.
 
Not in the desktop space.

The kernel is the kernel. Doesn't matter if its running in a phone a server or my laptop or desktop. The kernel is the kernel... and anything that runs it sees the benefit. Which is why MS dumping the windows kernel for the Linux kernel is just a matter of time. They can't spend enough money to keep up with the pace of Linux development at this point. The more time that passes the more that will compound. If MS doesn't already have an internal version of windows running on the Linux kernel I would be shocked. The main stumbling block of a switch would be the file system... MS would at last have to dump NTFS. It would make upgrading a pain. Still they are going to have to do that sooner or later anyway, they can't keep selling a "modern" OS with a 20+ year old horrid file system. Granted the rise of the SSD has masked some of its deepest flaws that require constant defragging... still its a sub standard file system and won't be missed.
 
Last edited:
The kernel is the kernel. Doesn't matter if its running in a phone a server or my laptop or desktop. The kernel is the kernel... and anything that runs it sees the benefit. Which is why MS dumping the windows kernel for the Linux kernel is just a matter of time.

So how have kernel improvements in Linux helped it in the desktop directly?

They can't spend enough money to keep up with the pace of Linux development at this point.

And what does this have to do with the money that 3rd parties have to invest in desktop Linux applications? The issue with Linux isn't the kernel, it's the lack of 3rd party application and hardware support. Where has any of this money gone into say game development for instance?
 
No it really wasn't... Adobe has had a pretty sizable exodus of pro users the last few years due to their own stupid choices.

Sure and they moved to Gimp. :rolleyes:

The kernel is the kernel. Doesn't matter if its running in a phone a server or my laptop or desktop. The kernel is the kernel... and anything that runs it sees the benefit. Which is why MS dumping the windows kernel for the Linux kernel is just a matter of time.

The Kernel doesn't impact that mess that is Linux on the desktop. It feels like a home school project in comparison to Windows.

Microsoft dumping Windows Kernel for Linux Kernel? That is just delusional.

I am not a Microsoft fan like Heatless, and I have a lot of issues with Window 8+.

But Windows 7 is in a completely different league when compared to Linux on the desktop.

I have been working in/experimenting in Linux at home and at work for 20+ years, and in all that time it has been woefully behind on the desktop, and we have had diehard Linux fans pretending it's not.
 
I am not a Microsoft fan like Heatless, and I have a lot of issues with Window 8+.

But Windows 7 is in a completely different league when compared to Linux on the desktop.

I have been working in/experimenting in Linux at home and at work for 20+ years, and in all that time it has been woefully behind on the desktop, and we have had diehard Linux fans pretending it's not.

I can certainly attest that you're not a Microsoft fan. But this subject is a matter of fandom. There's Linux folks around that are simply painting a picture in maturity of the Linux desktop that obviously a LOT of people aren't seeing. That application support in desktop Linux is just fine, that's only obscure stuff that few use that are problematic and the only reason people aren't using Linux is because they are forced or blind by Microsoft.

Yet every time someone mentions something like "What about games?" "What about VR?" "What about Photoshop?", pro-desktop Linux folks will say something like "GIMP is fine, no one cares about VR and all the games I like are Steam compatible." Of course that only leaves out the majority of games especially AAA titles but who cares.

It's a completely tone deaf attitude that places the OS above people, it's no better than Microsoft's listening capacity.
 
Yet every time someone mentions something like "What about games?" "What about VR?" "What about Photoshop?", pro-desktop Linux folks will say something like "GIMP is fine, no one cares about VR and all the games I like are Steam compatible." Of course that only leaves out the majority of games especially AAA titles but who cares.

It's a completely tone deaf attitude that places the OS above people, it's no better than Microsoft's listening capacity.

For some people, Linux works perfect. Every application they use has a Linux equivalent that they are open to using, the browser/email works fine, they are fine with the desktop manager, etc.. For others, it does some things just fine, but other stuff not at all (or requires more work to get it 99% compatible, etc..).

I always say the OS is a tool. Kind of like a launchpad. Use what you need. If Windows doesn't suit you and you don't like it, look for an alternative. If Linux works, great. If not, you can either make sacrifices with Linux not working 100% or make sacrifices with your Windows issues. Sometimes, there is no perfect solution.

I know some people that can do everything they need to do with a Mac. I certainly can't (and I know many here couldn't). Some people can do everything with an old Solaris box. For some, there is no alternative. Going from one OS to a completely different one just isn't going to work.

For others, it's a preference. Linux will work for me ~90% of the time for what I do. I just prefer Windows. Linux is great on the desktop for a lot of things. It's just not Windows. Just like with web servers - I prefer Linux over Windows.

You have options. You have needs. Pick the best option for your needs. The "Best" OS is the one that works the best for YOU. Not for me. If you have certain requirements, it may not be with Windows. It may not be with Linux. It might be that dumb OSX. :D Pros and cons with everything, too.
 
I always say the OS is a tool. Kind of like a launchpad. Use what you need. If Windows doesn't suit you and you don't like it, look for an alternative. If Linux works, great. If not, you can either make sacrifices with Linux not working 100% or make sacrifices with your Windows issues. Sometimes, there is no perfect solution.
.

Launchpad is a good analogy.

Ultimately the various OS's do the same basic functions. What ultimately really matters is the software they launch. That is the whole point. Not the OS itself, but the software they can run.

Without question Windows is the king of available desktop software. It isn't remotely close.

Choosing to abandon Windows, is choosing to eliminated the majority of software in just about every category, thus clearly choosing the less practical option.

Thus the motivation is usually something other than that most important function. Usually it is more about Microsoft/Windows hate, than practical reasons.
 
The kernel is the kernel. Doesn't matter if its running in a phone a server or my laptop or desktop. The kernel is the kernel... and anything that runs it sees the benefit. Which is why MS dumping the windows kernel for the Linux kernel is just a matter of time. They can't spend enough money to keep up with the pace of Linux development at this point. The more time that passes the more that will compound. If MS doesn't already have an internal version of windows running on the Linux kernel I would be shocked. The main stumbling block of a switch would be the file system... MS would at last have to dump NTFS. It would make upgrading a pain. Still they are going to have to do that sooner or later anyway, they can't keep selling a "modern" OS with a 20+ year old horrid file system. Granted the rise of the SSD has masked some of its deepest flaws that require constant defragging... still its a sub standard file system and won't be missed.
You're overthinking what most people want on the desktop:

1. They want the system to be easy to use
2. They want to run all the programs they need

The core could be a broken mess, but if it's stable, and fulfills those 2 needs, it's a good desktop OS. Linux still has a ways to go, particularly on #2. I'd love to leave Windows. The fact that I can't without giving up games I'm interested in and functionality in some misc. programs that doesn't exist Linux side means it's not a good desktop OS for me. If you just do basic office work and web browsing, then hey, Linux can be a great desktop OS. How well the kernel runs is honest irrelevant when it comes to desktop market penetration. Don't get caught in the trap of thinking that just because one piece of software is technically superior, it will be the one that wins out. Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn't. There's nothing INEVITABLE about Linux taking over the desktop whatsoever. I would love to see it happen, but it's a false assumption to assume something will win out the desktop market just because it runs better.
 
You're overthinking what most people want on the desktop:

1. They want the system to be easy to use
2. They want to run all the programs they need

The core could be a broken mess, but if it's stable, and fulfills those 2 needs, it's a good desktop OS. Linux still has a ways to go, particularly on #2. I'd love to leave Windows. The fact that I can't without giving up games I'm interested in and functionality in some misc. programs that doesn't exist Linux side means it's not a good desktop OS for me. If you just do basic office work and web browsing, then hey, Linux can be a great desktop OS. How well the kernel runs is honest irrelevant when it comes to desktop market penetration. Don't get caught in the trap of thinking that just because one piece of software is technically superior, it will be the one that wins out. Sometimes that happens, sometimes it doesn't. There's nothing INEVITABLE about Linux taking over the desktop whatsoever. I would love to see it happen, but it's a false assumption to assume something will win out the desktop market just because it runs better.

Agreed. In my experience also, it seems many people just don't like change one bit. If linux could do everything windows does in the same way from the observation of the user, it would start to take over. But until then, its niche in the desktop market, which is unfortunate as MS really needs serious competition to get motivated to do more things with windows.
 
Choosing to abandon Windows, is choosing to eliminated the majority of software in just about every category, thus clearly choosing the less practical option.

If your'e doing software dev it's not the less practical option.
 
If your'e doing software dev it's not the less practical option.

Depends on the platform for the development. There is for instance still a lot of development done for Windows clients, like games. The development tool stack for Windows is excellent, from desktop to mobile (outside iOS) to server to the cloud. But sure there's plenty of things in the server/cloud space that are Linux based that are better done on Linux.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
If your'e doing software dev it's not the less practical option.

You mean if you are doing Linux Software Dev.

If you are doing Windows software Dev, Linux would be a MUCH less practical option.

At one point in my career we were developing Unix software cross platform using Window because Visual Studio Dev tools were just so much better.
 
I can certainly attest that you're not a Microsoft fan. But this subject is a matter of fandom. There's Linux folks around that are simply painting a picture in maturity of the Linux desktop that obviously a LOT of people aren't seeing. That application support in desktop Linux is just fine, that's only obscure stuff that few use that are problematic and the only reason people aren't using Linux is because they are forced or blind by Microsoft.

Yet every time someone mentions something like "What about games?" "What about VR?" "What about Photoshop?", pro-desktop Linux folks will say something like "GIMP is fine, no one cares about VR and all the games I like are Steam compatible." Of course that only leaves out the majority of games especially AAA titles but who cares.

It's a completely tone deaf attitude that places the OS above people, it's no better than Microsoft's listening capacity.

And as I always say, you vastly exaggerate what the average PC user needs based around a minority of a minority represented in these forums - The average PC user could get by on Linux just fine, which is what this thread is about.

Very few people need Photoshop or even know what it is, even fewer people need VR, hell I see no evidence that it's even going to take off yet, and there's enough gaming titles under Linux that most will never play them all.

Furthermore, updates to the Linux kernel benefit desktop Linux the most as the server market is fairly fixed hardware wise, it's the desktop market where we see largely differing items of hardware and it's the kernel that has to support that hardware.

Who's tone deaf?! I show you figures of usage, you completely dismiss them out of hand for a statistic that suits your argument and we're tone deaf?
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
Agreed. In my experience also, it seems many people just don't like change one bit. If linux could do everything windows does in the same way from the observation of the user, it would start to take over. But until then, its niche in the desktop market, which is unfortunate as MS really needs serious competition to get motivated to do more things with windows.

Ohh no.

There is no way Linux needs to mimic Windows. Windows is Windows, Linux is Linux, OSX is OSX. Windows is not the benchmark by which other operating systems should behave - If you want a Windows clone than 100% stick to Windows, forget Linux.

As a Linux user, the last thing we need is a Windows clone.
 
You mean if you are doing Linux Software Dev.

If you are doing Windows software Dev, Linux would be a MUCH less practical option.

At one point in my career we were developing Unix software cross platform using Window because Visual Studio Dev tools were just so much better.

Linux and OS/X are the development platforms of choice for any company writing cross platform software. As per a survey of over 50k developers ( with a good spread of web desktop mobile server scientific) by Stack overflow... Windows is the main system used by 40% (Win 7/8/10) of developers.. OS/X accounts for just under 30%... and Linux 23% or so. In the past 4 years they have done the same survey Windows has dropped at least 5% every year. Linux has went up at least 2% every year and OSx spiked hard this year (2016). So sure the majority of developers are using Windows as their main driver... still it shrinks every year.

Plenty of Windows software is written on Linux machines. Pretty much anything cross platform (that isn't running in a game engine anyway) is for sure written on a Linux system.
Programs like VLC / Deluge / Mozilla / Chrome / Thunderbird / Opera / Blender / Libre office / Scribus / Filezilla / Apache / Audacity / Azurus / qtorrent / Deluge / Everything Written by Google (granted most are cloud based and not windows per say... but ya if you use anything cloud based chances are it wasn't written on windows hardware) Now granted some of those I just listed are open source and as such likely have bits of code written on all 3 major OSs, still they are all compiled and have the majority of the work done on them performed by developers running Linux.

Anyway that is just a list of the top of my head... lots of Windows software is written in Linux environments and compiled for Windows. Lots of software plenty of windows folks use... not just odd stuff. I'm sure of the ones I just rattled off more then a handful of the windows users reading this are using.

There is a very good reason Microsoft open sourced .NET... it gets Developers running OSx and Linux possibly working on it. (yes there are .net development tools for both of the other OSs)
https://www.microsoft.com/net/core#linuxredhat
 
Last edited:
And as I always say, you vastly exaggerate what the average PC user needs based around a minority of a minority represented in these forums - The average PC user could get by on Linux just fine, which is what this thread is about.

I've said many times that people that just needed a PC for more basic stuff could be fine with Linux. Once you get beyond the basics it becomes much more difficult to make the assessment.

and there's enough gaming titles under Linux that most will never play them all.

No one will play all of the games for ANY platform but there are ones that get the attention. Like yesterday, Resident Evil 7. You can't tell someone that wants to play a RE 7 to play something else. That's not how it works.

Furthermore, updates to the Linux kernel benefit desktop Linux the most as the server market is fairly fixed hardware wise, it's the desktop market where we see largely differing items of hardware and it's the kernel that has to support that hardware.

So specifically what kernel improvements have been made to Linux such that it supports desktop client hardware that isn't supported by Windows?

Who's tone deaf?! I show you figures of usage, you completely dismiss them out of hand for a statistic that suits your argument and we're tone deaf?

Yeah, but only ones that make your point. Linux desktop share declined last month in on popular survey that a number of Windows 10 haters promoted heavily because that survey showed Windows 7 growing at twice the rate of Windows 10. I'm not saying that desktop Linux use isn't growing overall. I doubt very much that it's growing much in certain areas like gaming. Gaming just sucks on Linux at this time. Yeah there's a lot of shovel ware, there's tons more of that for Windows, but there's just so little with titles like RE 7 and then months late.
 
Ohh no.

There is no way Linux needs to mimic Windows. Windows is Windows, Linux is Linux, OSX is OSX. Windows is not the benchmark by which other operating systems should behave - If you want a Windows clone than 100% stick to Windows, forget Linux.

As a Linux user, the last thing we need is a Windows clone.

Oh I agree, but this is also why its market penetration is what it is for the desktop users. It really is an interesting topic for why it hasn't taken over more than it has. People will switch from iphone to android or vice versa, causing a limitation on what they were 'used to'. But a similar switch on desktop just seems like too much. Also I think marketing has a lot to do with it as well. Linux is just known for what 'nerds' and servers run. The other side is microsoft, but it is no surprise their intent is to keep people on windows.
 
lots of Windows software is written in Linux environments and compiled for Windows.

Not the bulk of the stuff though that's at the center of the debate here otherwise the software would already be on Linux.
 
Linux and OS/X are the development platforms of choice for any company writing cross platform software. As per a survey of over 50k developers ( with a good spread of web desktop mobile server scientific) by Stack overflow... Windows is the main system used by 40% (Win 7/8/10) of developers.. OS/X accounts for just under 30%... and Linux 23% or so. In the past 4 years they have done the same survey Windows has dropped at least 5% every year. Linux has went up at least 2% every year and OSx spiked hard this year (2016). So sure the majority of developers are using Windows as their main driver... still it shrinks every year.

There is lot of Server software being developed, which is likely the main push for Linux, just as iOS is the main push for OS/X.


Plenty of Windows software is written on Linux machines. Pretty much anything cross platform (that isn't running in a game engine anyway) is for sure written on a Linux system.
Programs like VLC / Deluge / Mozilla / Chrome / Thunderbird / Opera / Blender / Libre office / Scribus / Filezilla / Apache / Audacity / Azurus / qtorrent / Deluge / Everything Written by Google (granted most are cloud based and not windows per say... but ya if you use anything cloud based chances are it wasn't written on windows hardware) Now granted some of those I just listed are open source and as such likely have bits of code written on all 3 major OSs, still they are all compiled and have the majority of the work done on them performed by developers running Linux.

This is mainly Linux software, that is packaged with some Linux/GNU for Windows Libraries to make it work on Windows, so not a huge surprise that this is done in Linux.
 
I've said many times that people that just needed a PC for more basic stuff could be fine with Linux. Once you get beyond the basics it becomes much more difficult to make the assessment.

You see, I see it the other way around. As I've stated in the past, Windows is very much the McDonalds of operating systems, designed to make the bulk of the population happy by being not the best OS or the worst OS, just the OS happy to sit in that meat on the bell curve. In comparison I see Linux as more suitable for an individual that wants more than just the basics, however it can also be configured for Mum and Dad type users quite easily.

No one will play all of the games for ANY platform but there are ones that get the attention. Like yesterday, Resident Evil 7. You can't tell someone that wants to play a RE 7 to play something else. That's not how it works.

Bah! RE7, I can do without it just fine and so can many other users. From what I read, like most AAA releases these days, it's a buggy full release beta that's buggy as hell anyway.

So specifically what kernel improvements have been made to Linux such that it supports desktop client hardware that isn't supported by Windows?

New hardware is being added to the Linux kernel all the time! Honestly, if you think Windows is in any way problem free when it comes to drivers than you need to get out of your corporate bubble and onto the real world a little more!

Yeah, but only ones that make your point. Linux desktop share declined last month in on popular survey that a number of Windows 10 haters promoted heavily because that survey showed Windows 7 growing at twice the rate of Windows 10. I'm not saying that desktop Linux use isn't growing overall. I doubt very much that it's growing much in certain areas like gaming. Gaming just sucks on Linux at this time. Yeah there's a lot of shovel ware, there's tons more of that for Windows, but there's just so little with titles like RE 7 and then months late.

And I'm saying that ~3.5% that we know of didn't materalize from nowhere - Your bias is so outlandishly intense that you just refuse to acknowledge it. You'd prefer to quote Steam figures, which are known to be so pathetically skewed and inaccurate it's just not funny. And even then you struggle to understand how Linux usage under Steam is growing due to a larger user base.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
Oh I agree, but this is also why its market penetration is what it is for the desktop users. It really is an interesting topic for why it hasn't taken over more than it has. People will switch from iphone to android or vice versa, causing a limitation on what they were 'used to'. But a similar switch on desktop just seems like too much. Also I think marketing has a lot to do with it as well. Linux is just known for what 'nerds' and servers run. The other side is microsoft, but it is no surprise their intent is to keep people on windows.

Not really.

Windows is popular only because it's installed on almost every brand name. boxed PC sold, and popularity by no means indicates superiority.

McDonalds is popular, but it's far from a quality restaurant.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
So specifically what kernel improvements have been made to Linux such that it supports desktop client hardware that isn't supported by Windows?
Microsoft supports ONE system architecture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux-supported_computer_architectures

Windows supports 3(4 for server) file systems... unless I'm forgetting something. Other then their server file system the rest are 20+ years old and dated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:File_systems_supported_by_the_Linux_kernel

Google is one of many comapnies contributing to the Kernel... here is one great example of the power of open source. What they change gets published to the kernel and all benifit.
https://www.linux.com/news/google-developer-kees-cook-details-linux-kernel-self-protection-project

I don't know if you will grok what this is all about but here is a change log for you. Just to give you an idea of the number of fixes and patches that get pushed to the kernel every month (aprox). Most distros don't always use the latest greatest kernel. If you didn't understand what it meant when someone said "rolling release" it means a distro that pushes every change through when there up... I guess sort of what MS is trying to emulate in a much slower less stable kinda way.
https://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/ChangeLog-4.9.5
 
Last edited:
Not the bulk of the stuff though that's at the center of the debate here otherwise the software would already be on Linux.

Right cause you don't use Chrome... Firefox.. or even Opera. Your one of the 5% of Windows users still using IE I guess. ;) The majority of windows users are using Linux coded software every single day... likely more then they are using anything coded (other then the OS) by MS.

This is mainly Linux software, that is packaged with some Linux/GNU for Windows Libraries to make it work on Windows, so not a huge surprise that this is done in Linux.

Again.... every major web browser in use today is coded and compiled on Linux machines. The programs I listed are all just as or more popular then any third party windows software with the same function.
 
Not really.

Windows is popular only because it's installed on almost every brand name. boxed PC sold, and popularity by no means indicates superiority.

McDonalds is popular, but it's far from a quality restaurant.

And people in general are fine with mcdonalds for an OS and barely have an idea of what they are missing out on and for the most part don't care. So what is the key to changing it? Vendors won't do it because people will just want windows installed if given a choice. If not given a choice they will buy from someone else who gives them windows. Game developers won't spend the resources to make games work for it when it has such a small market share. It's chicken and the egg and someone has to start by paying or losing money.
 
And people in general are fine with mcdonalds for an OS and barely have an idea of what they are missing out on and for the most part don't care. So what is the key to changing it? Vendors won't do it because people will just want windows installed if given a choice. If not given a choice they will buy from someone else who gives them windows. Game developers won't spend the resources to make games work for it when it has such a small market share. It's chicken and the egg and someone has to start by paying or losing money.

If AMD wern't around with their Athlon processor in the day running rings around the Pentium 4 and Netburst do you think the Core 2 series would really have happened or do you think Intel would have been happy to just drag Netburst out a little longer?

Choice = competition, competition = faster improvements and better products, not to mention more realistic pricing.
 
  • Like
Reactions: ChadD
like this
Microsoft supports ONE system architecture.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Linux-supported_computer_architectures

Windows supports 3(4 for server) file systems... unless I'm forgetting something. Other then their server file system the rest are 20+ years old and dated.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Distributed_file_systems_supported_by_the_Linux_kernel
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Category:Flash_file_systems_supported_by_the_Linux_kernel

Google is one of many comapnies contributing to the Kernel... here is one great example of the power of open source. What they change gets published to the kernel and all benifit.
https://www.linux.com/news/google-developer-kees-cook-details-linux-kernel-self-protection-project

I don't know if you will grok what this is all about but here is a change log for you. Just to give you an idea of the number of fixes and patches that get pushed to the kernel every month (aprox). Most distros don't always use the latest greatest kernel. If you didn't understand what it meant when someone said "rolling release" it means a distro that pushes every change through when there up... I guess sort of what MS is trying to emulate in a much slower less stable kinda way.
https://kernel.org/pub/linux/kernel/v4.x/ChangeLog-4.9.5

None of this makes for a better desktop on Linux. It's still a clunky mess lacking any real cohesion. It still lacks commercial software, it still lacks games.
 
Right cause you don't use Chrome... Firefox.. or even Opera. Your one of the 5% of Windows users still using IE I guess. ;) The majority of windows users are using Linux coded software every single day... likely more then they are using anything coded (other then the OS) by MS.


Again.... every major web browser in use today is coded and compiled on Linux machines. The programs I listed are all just as or more popular then any third party windows software with the same function.

Yay! Web Browsers. There are like a Million pieces of SW for Windows. Congratulations pointing out the cross platform pieces of software that gets used more.

Though of course, as with any big open source project, it has builds setup for all its targets, and no doubt contributors work on their platform of choice. But sure continue to pretend that web browsers are only developed in Linux.
 
And people in general are fine with mcdonalds for an OS and barely have an idea of what they are missing out on and for the most part don't care. So what is the key to changing it? Vendors won't do it because people will just want windows installed if given a choice. If not given a choice they will buy from someone else who gives them windows. Game developers won't spend the resources to make games work for it when it has such a small market share. It's chicken and the egg and someone has to start by paying or losing money.

Google.

Give them another couple years... and if there is a market for it. They will bring the masses chrome books with better features. Once Google decides to go after the high end laptop market... and adjusts their Desktop Linux accordingly (not saying their any better then MS). The consumers will gobble it up.

Think of all the people you know that don't even own desktops... or use them very rarely. I know more then a few... the last year or so I swear I have gotten more calls for help from friends and family in regards to windows then ever before. A lot of People have honestly forgotten how to do the Windows basics. Once google goes after MS surface sales hard I can't imagine things will go well from MS from there out.
 
Google.

Give them another couple years... and if there is a market for it. They will bring the masses chrome books with better features. Once Google decides to go after the high end laptop market... and adjusts their Desktop Linux accordingly (not saying their any better then MS). The consumers will gobble it up.

Think of all the people you know that don't even own desktops... or use them very rarely. I know more then a few... the last year or so I swear I have gotten more calls for help from friends and family in regards to windows then ever before. A lot of People have honestly forgotten how to do the Windows basics. Once google goes after MS surface sales hard I can't imagine things will go well from MS from there out.

That is who I also feel could actually pull it off. I think that would be good for windows (as it would give them competition) but would probably be terrible for linux. Because if there is anyone that could ruin linux it is google. It would be easy to use, friendly, big focus on software options and gaming, but the amount of data they would collect from it would tarnish it as they migrated away from open source. It would be nice though if there was some real competition so that when MS tries their crap they pulled with windows 10, they would back out of it quickly as they lose sales to someone else.

It would be interesting indeed to see though how it would actually play out.
 
That is who I also feel could actually pull it off. I think that would be good for windows (as it would give them competition) but would probably be terrible for linux. Because if there is anyone that could ruin linux it is google. It would be easy to use, friendly, big focus on software options and gaming, but the amount of data they would collect from it would tarnish it as they migrated away from open source. It would be nice though if there was some real competition so that when MS tries their crap they pulled with windows 10, they would back out of it quickly as they lose sales to someone else.

It would be interesting indeed to see though how it would actually play out.

Linux usage is growing, it's more than doubled in ~the last 12 months alone - And then you've got to consider all the Linux users that can't be counted due to the distribution nature of Linux.
 
None of this makes for a better desktop on Linux. It's still a clunky mess lacking any real cohesion. It still lacks commercial software, it still lacks games.

There is plenty of commercial software. I have commercial high end audio software I use all the time Bit Wig and Renoise. Plenty of 3d developers use Maya sure us Linux guys talk about blender all the time but $pro stuff is out there. Lightworks gets lots of use in the pro video industry (especially considering the falling out many have had with Adobe the last few years). Corel is still around making things like After Shot Pro.

As for Photoshop... I have replaced it completely with Krita Inkscape and Gimp which I feel all do specific things better then photoshop even if one doesn't do all of them better. Having said that if your really THAT hard core of a high end photoshop user your not on windows anyway your on OSx in which case you have other options like Affinity which gets just as much high end use these days.

Anyway my point it isn't lacking commercial software... that is just misinformation. Just because there are more great open source options with Linux doesn't mean you can't buy software if you prefer. Its just that in many cases the Open source software is better then anything else (including the windows competitors).

As for games I have been more then happy... been playing the heck out of Civ 5 and MOO for now, but I have 10 or 12 games or so that I haven't really played yet that I have bought during steam sales. Hmmm perhaps today I'll go and play the latest border lands now that am thinking about it I still haven't... but ya 80% of my steam library is Linux compatible. Saying Linux isn't windows = because it doesn't have every single console port day one isn't really a knock for most PC gamers. I'm sorry but games like Resident Evil... man buy them for your PS4 you'll be happier, cause goodness knows its going to run like crap on the PC for at least 6 months till they fix all the bugs. Or decided to pull the PC version and refund your money. (ok that was low but hey its not like there has only been one "AAA" PC title that has done that). Real PC games end up on both platforms... and believe it or not there are some really great Linux only Indy games.
 
Last edited:
That is who I also feel could actually pull it off. I think that would be good for windows (as it would give them competition) but would probably be terrible for linux. Because if there is anyone that could ruin linux it is google. It would be easy to use, friendly, big focus on software options and gaming, but the amount of data they would collect from it would tarnish it as they migrated away from open source. It would be nice though if there was some real competition so that when MS tries their crap they pulled with windows 10, they would back out of it quickly as they lose sales to someone else.

It would be interesting indeed to see though how it would actually play out.

I don't see it as a bad thing for Linux... although I know exactly what your saying. :)

I think it would be ok... because Android has been ok for us. Google has been contributing a large number of kernel patches the last few years... they have pushed though security patches and such that would have taken much longer if not for there $.

Ya the machines they sell won't be a full Linux desktop just like Android and Chrome machines aren't now... best we can hope for is that the hardware isn't hard locked and its still possible to install Linux on their drives. All we can do is hope there that google still believe the whole don't be evil crap. :)
 
There is plenty of commercial software. I have commercial high end audio software I use all the time Bit Wig and Renoise. Plenty of 3d developers use Maya sure us Linux guys talk about blender all the time but $pro stuff is out there. Lightworks gets lots of use in the pro video industry (especially considering the falling out many have had with Adobe the last few years). Corel is still around making things like After Shot Pro.

As for Photoshop... I have replaced it completely with Krita Inkscape and Gimp which I feel all do specific things better then photoshop even if one doesn't do all of them better. Having said that if your really THAT hard core of a high end photoshop user your not on windows anyway your on OSx in which case you have other options like Affinity which gets just as much high end use these days.

Anyway my point it isn't lacking commercial software... that is just misinformation. Just because there are more great open source options with Linux doesn't mean you can't buy software if you prefer. Its just that in many cases the Open source software is better then anything else (including the windows competitors).

As for games I have been more then happy... been playing the heck out of Civ 5 and MOO for now, but I have 10 or 12 games or so that I haven't really played yet that I have bought during steam sales. Hmmm perhaps today I'll go and play the latest border lands now that am thinking about it I still haven't... but ya 80% of my steam library is Linux compatible. Saying Linux isn't windows = because it doesn't have every single console port day one isn't really a knock for most PC gamers. I'm sorry but games like Resident Evil... man buy them for your PS4 you'll be happier, cause goodness knows its going to run like crap on the PC for at least 6 months till they fix all the bugs. Or decided to pull the PC version and refund your money. (ok that was low but hey its not like there has only been one "AAA" PC title that has done that). Real PC games end up on both platforms... and believe it or not there are some really great Linux only Indy games.

Saying it is lacking Games/Commercial software doesn't mean that none exist at all.

It means MUCH less exists. It's a relative term. There is likely 1/10th the commercial software available for Linux, if not less.

It impacts choices. You have a lot less of them on Linux. You lose your best choices in many categories, and maybe left with borderline unusable options in some.

It's OK for zealots who will make do with what's available on Linux, to avoid Windows.

But for people without a zealous desire to use Linux, that lack of choice is a real negative impact.

For games it isn't just about having enough random games to occupy your time, it is about having the exact games you want.

Imagine if Linux Only played 1/10th the music available. Would you say there is more music that you could ever listen to? Of course you wouldn't because a lot of your favorite bands would be excluded.

Games and music, are art and entertainment, you want maximum choice, so you can have exactly the games you want. This isn't a case of having the gaming equivalent of Muzak to pass your time in a elevator ride. With music you want want your favorite bands, with gaming your favorite games.
 
Last edited:
You see, I see it the other way around. As I've stated in the past, Windows is very much the McDonalds of operating systems, designed to make the bulk of the population happy by being not the best OS or the worst OS, just the OS happy to sit in that meat on the bell curve. In comparison I see Linux as more suitable for an individual that wants more than just the basics, however it can also be configured for Mum and Dad type users quite easily.

The McDonalds folks, the ones that just need or want a web browser or basic content creatation capailitites, these are the ones that would have a MUCH easier time moving to Linux than a gamer or someone that needs top commercial productivity software where the cost of the software is piss compared the value that software brings.

Bah! RE7, I can do without it just fine and so can many other users. From what I read, like most AAA releases these days, it's a buggy full release beta that's buggy as hell anyway.

Played 90 minutes of RE 7 last, even the Windows Store version, ran smooth as butter at 4k maxed out except ambient occlusion. And there it is again, here's a top game that's getting very good reviews, actually runs fine from what I've read from people who've actually played it and it just doesn't matter to you. That's fine. But you can't go around talking about how top games don't matter and talk about how wonderful Linux is for gaming because there's a bunch of shovelware out there for it, the same shovelware and a whole lot more is out there for Windows.

New hardware is being added to the Linux kernel all the time! Honestly, if you think Windows is in any way problem free when it comes to drivers than you need to get out of your corporate bubble and onto the real world a little more!

All I asked was name a specific thing that's been added to the Linux kernel that enhances its support for desktop hardware. Ironically either you or some other pro-Linux people mentioned this last year: http://www.techradar.com/news/mobil...touchscreen-will-soon-work-with-linux-1326229

And I'm saying that ~3.5% that we know of didn't materalize from nowhere - Your bias is so outlandishly intense that you just refuse to acknowledge it. You'd prefer to quote Steam figures, which are known to be so pathetically skewed and inaccurate it's just not funny. And even then you struggle to understand how Linux usage under Steam is growing due to a larger user base.

So your 3.5% number did materialize out of nothing but the Steam Hardware survey is junk. However the Steam Hardware Survey is calculated, Valve has completely accurate data on the platforms accessing Steam and the clients that get downloaded. You and some other pro-Linux fans were suggesting that people dual boot Linux and download and play games under Linux because only when running Linux would Linux get credit for the download. So how can you make that argument and then say the Steam figures are pathetically skewed and inaccurate? If that's the case then your suggestion of dual booting would be meaningless if Steam's data is that bad.
 
Games and music, are art and entertainment, you want maximum choice, so you can have exactly the games you want. This isn't a case of having the gaming equivalent of Muzak to pass your time in a elevator ride. With music you want want your favorite bands, with gaming your favorite games.

Using your logic... we should still be listing to music on Cassette tapes and watching movies on VHS.

When a better format comes along early adopters have less "choice"... yep sounds right.

Only this isn't launch day for the Compact Disc... where there where 2 discs to choose form. This is Linux year 26, there are over 2300 games in the steam store. Every major web program is Linux first. (yes the browsers everyone uses are rock solid in Linux cause the folks that write them are running Linux). Every major catagory of software has mulitple GOOD options... many are free... and that doesn't make them inferior. There are multiple high quality distros covering off pretty much every usage case you could imagine. The kernel and the OS overall has more support now then ever.

Nothing changes if you don't buy in. People are buying into Linux, no matter what windows boosters wanna believe. Saying Android don't count ect ect would be as silly as saying people back in the 80s saying vinyl would always rule because no one wants to use the same format at home they use with their walkmans.
 
Back
Top