What is special about linux

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

Because your original post was full of piss and vinigar. Asking a question with the same attitude you displayed in that post is the fastest way to get people's backs up.

And chances are quite high that I have seen some of your posts on various linux boards/mailing lists.

well assume what you want if it makes you feel better.

I'm sure you haven't seen my posts. Again with the assumptions.

I'll stop posting though.. cause this is getting stupid...

back to the thread.

fiddling with linux is a good way to learn about how OSes work.

 

[ThreeDee]

my personal work box is linux ..I'd run it at home all the time if it had the game support that windows does...

I tried running Suse10 and Fedora 5 at home ... everything was easy to use and worked great ..except for gaming. Quake4 ran ok ..not as good as in windows tho. I couldnt get wine to work and didnt want to pay for cedega so I could play CS:S (of which if I could have gotten it to run half way decent , I would have stuck with linux)

I run Smoothwall Express 2.0 governing over or various networks here on campus .. playing with Endian at home right now and looking at switching many of our smoothie boxes over to it.

I think linux is great and fun ... and is easier to use if you don't know spit about windows.

 

[Stellar]

Regardless of that, nearly every piece of hardware you can think of is supported in one way or another under linux.

Far from an accurate statement.

In my home office alone, things that do not work under Linux:

X-Fi
A8R-MVP (no debian distro will boot or install on it)
Canon ip3000
WD NetCenter
Docking Station for my 600M

For Windows, driver support comes directly from the manuf. when the product is released. For Linux, driver support typically comes from other developers a few months to more than a year (X-Fi?) after the hardware is released. Then however long it takes to be put into the next Kernel version.

 

[Stellar]

Wow. I never realized that the value of an OS was judged on its ability to work with consumer electronics.

Why wouldn't it be? The job of the operating system is to make your hardware useful to you. If none of your peripherals work, well, your computer is effectively useless.

 

[drizzt81]

For Windows, driver support comes directly from the manuf. when the product is released. For Linux, driver support typically comes from other developers a few months to more than a year (X-Fi?) after the hardware is released. Then however long it takes to be put into the next Kernel version.

The lack of Linux' market penetration is to blame for this in most cases. Manufacturers see no "added value" in providing linux drivers. Writing drivers costs money, so there is a simple P&L calculations that just doesn't work out in Linux' favor.

nonetheless, thanks for sharing your experience

 

[Stellar]

Oh I know it boils down to 80/20 economics. But bottom line it is a deal breaker for many.

For the record I have Xubuntu running on my 600M and absolutely love it. But I'm extremely frustrated that I can't install it on my desktop rig, nor use it on my docking station, nor access my Netcenter or print to my printer that is connected to the Netcenter.

I had Suse 10 running on my desktop for a time, but after having the grub files become somehow corrupted, twice, locking me out of my Windows install, I wiped that partition and haven't messed with it since.

 

[Deleted member 65081]

Far from an accurate statement.

In my home office alone, things that do not work under Linux:

X-Fi
A8R-MVP (no debian distro will boot or install on it)
Canon ip3000
WD NetCenter
Docking Station for my 600M

For Windows, driver support comes directly from the manuf. when the product is released. For Linux, driver support typically comes from other developers a few months to more than a year (X-Fi?) after the hardware is released. Then however long it takes to be put into the next Kernel version.

Not that I want to get into any of this... but I just want to correct this one thing.

I think the poster meant to imply hardware support in general across the board. Not each and every peice of desktop pc hardware. Meaning, s/he likely was referring to linux' ability to install on consoles, desktop pcs, laptops, enterprise servers, cell phones, pda's, wrist watches, military smart bombs, etc. Linux works and is a good solutions in a wide array of situations.

The fact that there are a few components for desktop pc use that linux can't support could be considered a fault, sure. Being a linux user for years though, I wouldn't buy a peice of hardware that is not compatible. I really don't even notice anymore that I check, I just do.

For the X-Fi specific comment, that is not a problem with linux. Creative wont provide any reference material to linux developers to create free drivers for the X-Fi. It takes a long time to probe such advanced hardware to be able to provide a usable driver, who knows if there will ever be one. Either way, this is probably the only reason I don't own an X-Fi (I use an Audigy 2 ZS in my main linux workstation).

Anyhow... this topic is covered quite extensively on the internet and nothing knew has become of it. A modern linux distro is a good solid usable peice of free software for a lot of people in a lot of situations. On the same note, Windows is a good user friendly operating system that has great game and commercial software support. After all, where would computing be with out it?

 

[Stellar]

For the X-Fi specific comment, that is not a problem with linux. Creative wont provide any reference material to linux developers to create free drivers for the X-Fi. It takes a long time to probe such advanced hardware to be able to provide a usable driver, who knows if there will ever be one. Either way, this is probably the only reason I don't own an X-Fi (I use an Audigy 2 ZS in my main linux workstation).

Right, I realize that but my point was that it is a problem regardless of who's "fault" it is.

I spent nearly $200 on the X-Fi Platinum for my desktop rig and there simply isn't a Linux friendly competitor to it.

- can't get a different AMD crossfire mainboard
- can't get a different D-bay
- could get a different NAS but it would cost me a lot more
- could get a different printer but the refills would cost more and photo quality would suffer

Now that I mention it I haven't even tried to see if my XM4U card reader works under Linux, but IIRC it didn't.

I *LIKE* Linux (or Debian, at least) but all of these things will keep me from using it as my main OS on my machines at home.

Unfortunately all the virtues of stability, security, and power user friendliness it can and will ever offer go right out the window until it actually works with my hardware.

 

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

oh yeah... linux also broke my friend CD-ROM drive..

i don't know if any of you remember.. a bug with mandrake.. it would fry LG CD-rom drives...

saw it with my own eyes lol..

 

[Tawnos]

I use linux for my main home OS. The only times I boot into windows are when some game I want to play comes out. Last time that was true and I had the time... HL2E1.

On both windows and linux I tend to use the same programs:
Firefox, Eclipse, Open Office, Xchat, GAIM, GIMP....
On linux I'm using KDE. With that, Ktorrent, KOrganizer, Tea Timer, DigiKam, Konqueror, K3B.
Other programs I use include Dia, GnuCash, Mplayer... the list goes on.

So what do I like about using the OS as a desktop platform?
For one, simple things like being able to control window positioning. I can set individual windows to always on top, always on bottom, fullscreen (no window border), no window border (not fullscreen), which virtual desktop windows appear on, et cetera. When I'm using 2 widescreen monitors and an average day has 20 active windows (and 5-10 inactive)... this control becomes very important to me.
Second, keeping this plethora of programs up to date is much...much...much easier on linux than windows. Trying to keep all of those programs up to date in windows is... a pain, to say the least.

 

[Gatticus]

Plus, Linux is generally smaller and not at bloated as Windows.

I'll have to disagree with that. XP is more efficient than running Gnome. A tweaked up XP box runs very well here. I'm posting this from Linux though, just so you know I'm not talking out of my arse.

 

[Gatticus]

(except you cant game)

Sure you can. Install Dosbox on Linux and enjoy all those great old dos games we used to play. Just yesterday I was playing Masters of Magic and Lords of the Realm in Linux, with sound.

http://www.abandonia.com/index2.php

http://dosbox.sourceforge.net/news.php?show_news=1

 

[jimmyb]

II installed a new graphics driver under Vista and didn't even have to reboot. Is this possible under Linux?

Yes.

Sorry for reviving this dying thread.

 

[Buckus]

In one of my CS classes, my teacher posed to us the question of whether it's ethical to download songs for free off the Internet.

I know this doesn't sound like it's related to the topic at hand, but it really is.

My classmate tried to convince me that's it perfectly ethical to download music for free off the Internet.

Since he is in CS too, I asked him how he would feel if a program he was working on got stolen and distributed for free on the Internet. He replied that it would be fine by him.

Now, I don't know about you other guys, but I'm in the CS program to make money when I graduate, not to work some other job and write programs for free in my spare time.

Which brings us around to Linux (I love it when a plan comes together.) Linux is free. Linux programs are, for the most part, free. This means that companies, and by extension skilled software developers, are not going to devote a great deal of time to developing Linux or Linux programs. True, there are SOME paid Linux developers, but I can assure you that developers for Windows platforms outnumber them by something like a gazillion to 1. My math may be off.

While free is nice, free isn't always better. Until you throw money at something or figure out how to make money off something, there will not be much incentive for skilled developers and software companies. Linux is free, thus the previous statement applies.

 

[HyperSlacker]

I dont really want to get into the discussion as I feel both are useful for differnt purposes but I will add one thing...

 

[Stellar]

Yes.

Sorry for reviving this dying thread.

In what distro is that possible?

Shut down X server
Edit xorg.conf
Reboot X server

..and if you update your kernel, you have to repeat the process.

 

[tacticus]

In one of my CS classes, my teacher posed to us the question of whether it's ethical to download songs for free off the Internet.

I know this doesn't sound like it's related to the topic at hand, but it really is.

My classmate tried to convince me that's it perfectly ethical to download music for free off the Internet.

Since he is in CS too, I asked him how he would feel if a program he was working on got stolen and distributed for free on the Internet. He replied that it would be fine by him.

Now, I don't know about you other guys, but I'm in the CS program to make money when I graduate, not to work some other job and write programs for free in my spare time.

Which brings us around to Linux (I love it when a plan comes together.) Linux is free. Linux programs are, for the most part, free. This means that companies, and by extension skilled software developers, are not going to devote a great deal of time to developing Linux or Linux programs. True, there are SOME paid Linux developers, but I can assure you that developers for Windows platforms outnumber them by something like a gazillion to 1. My math may be off.

While free is nice, free isn't always better. Until you throw money at something or figure out how to make money off something, there will not be much incentive for skilled developers and software companies. Linux is free, thus the previous statement applies.

i think you need to remember linux is free in 2 ways

free as in speech and free as in beer

but ways you can charge for linux is the physical cost of producing and delievering it (allowed under the gpl)

or support

i know a lot of companies that supply support for linux\*nix boxes

strangly the most compelling part of linux and the FOSS movement is not that its free(beer) but that its FREE (speech) and that in 5 years the db server your running out the back is not going to go eol because someone at microsoft wants you to upgrade to the newer versino of the software when you can make your own security patches for it

when you can customise a windows box to do anything you need\want it to and can verify the security of every component on it then without paying through the nose

for example i have a windows box at home for gaming does the job i need it to
windows box at work as a client

but for anything that needs to be up 24/7 or just needs to run without the shiny stuff its mostly linux boxes

though i must admit i quite like the wsus server
and outlook\exchange is also great

 

[As I Lay Dying]

for the graphics thing I believe its.......

CTRL+ALT+F1
then

sudo /etc/init.d/gdm stop
make changes .
sudo /etc/init.d/gdm start

if I update the driver or make changes to xorg.conf, then I can just hit ctrl alt F1 and do this.
sudo /etc/init.d/gdm restart

I dont think restarting your x server or session means your are restarting linux.

_________________________

As per the topic at hand, I use Ubuntu Linux as my main desktop, I dual boot windows xp. My secondary box is running xubuntu, and windows xp. I have used windows, linux and OSX(not much experience here, but hopefully getting a macbook pro will change that). I my self prefer linux. The community around it, is amazing......

I have been a long time windows user, at first I found linux very, cumbersome, but thats because I have used it for a good 10+ years, I think ThreeDee got it right, the less you know about windows the easier linux is to use.

As per the comparisons, between the two if photoshop were ported, to linux, and games as well, I wouldst use windows on my primary box. I find gnu/linux to be more secure, faster and generally much better at reconfigurability. I however wouldn't ditch windows all together. Windows is great for out of the box hardware, for example the latest hardware might need the latest kernel to work. At least when you get a brand new motherboard it comes with a driver disk, so you can pop in a windows disc and have it up and running. Thats not really the linux distros fault mostly hardware vendors not providing support for it.

As for eyecandy, I give that to linux, XGL/AIGLX coupled with beryl or compiz (mostly beryl) more or less destroy what vista or osx provide.

 

[XOR != OR]

Which brings us around to Linux (I love it when a plan comes together.) Linux is free. Linux programs are, for the most part, free. This means that companies, and by extension skilled software developers, are not going to devote a great deal of time to developing Linux or Linux programs. True, there are SOME paid Linux developers, but I can assure you that developers for Windows platforms outnumber them by something like a gazillion to 1. My math may be off.

But the real question is how many developers there are for linux? Now how many are there for windows?

Granted, you tend to get a far greater range of quality from OSS ( that's a nice way of saying there are more crap applications for OSS than there are for win32 ), but you do tend to get some perls that don't have a direct translation. Asterisk comes to mind. dd, find and a slew of others too.

Which is a good point: Asterisk is a freely available software package that is making it's developers a ton of money.

While free is nice, free isn't always better.

Reasonable statement, I don't think anybody could argue that.

Until you throw money at something or figure out how to make money off something, there will not be much incentive for skilled developers and software companies. Linux is free, thus the previous statement applies.

Sorta. It's easy to make money off of OSS. I do it all the time; I setup and support a few different businesses. What's better, I can bid low and still take home more than the other contracters because my solution is primarily time; Theirs will include license fees.

In fact, I routinely develop software for clients. Custom solution of limited application, but the fact is I can do this rather easily given the open nature of the software. OSS allows for more possibilities that simple don't exist in proprietary software.

Not that I'm saying linux would fit in all situations ( or that any software would ); I'm a firm believer in the right tool for the job. If that's windows, by all means use it.

 

[hokatichenci]

Which brings us around to Linux (I love it when a plan comes together.) Linux is free. Linux programs are, for the most part, free. This means that companies, and by extension skilled software developers, are not going to devote a great deal of time to developing Linux or Linux programs. True, there are SOME paid Linux developers, but I can assure you that developers for Windows platforms outnumber them by something like a gazillion to 1. My math may be off.

I fail to see the connection you try to make, there is plenty of free software for Windows that you probably use. Ever ran Winamp? I doubt many people here ever paid for it. Microsoft Windows, for the longest time has even included BSD licensed free software in it. FTP I believe is one of the most popular tools involved in this scheme.

Proofage, hexedit c:\winnt\system32\ftp.exe on my w2k pro box, lil ways down I hit this gem:

00005A10   40 28 23 29  20 43 6F 70  79 72 69 67  68 74 20 28  @(#) Copyright (
00005A20   63 29 20 31  39 38 33 20  54 68 65 20  52 65 67 65  c) 1983 The Rege
00005A30   6E 74 73 20  6F 66 20 74  68 65 20 55  6E 69 76 65  nts of the Unive
00005A40   72 73 69 74  79 20 6F 66  20 43 61 6C  69 66 6F 72  rsity of Califor
00005A50   6E 69 61 2E  0A 20 41 6C  6C 20 72 69  67 68 74 73  nia.. All rights
00005A60   20 72 65 73  65 72 76 65  64 2E 0A 00  00 00 00 00   reserved.......
00005A70   48 12 00 01  90 12 00 01  01 00 00 00  00 00 00 00  H...............

The free software was so good, Microsoft used it. I think that some free software out there is much better than competing software by leaps and bounds. Mplayer is a shining example, which supports bloody everything (hoorah w32 codecs), all sorts of audio and video filters at the touch of a button, and can be happily wrapped around. No phone-home nonsense, no whining that you didn't pay for some dvd codec, it just works. It seems the closest alternative is VLC, which is guess what? Open source.

When the only thing you have is the quality of your software, you tend to want to make it as best as can be. And the big perk of having the source code and the licensing scheme to modify it is complete flexibility. I think a lot of innovation has spawned out of open source, particularly in the security sector. Windows has been notoriously insecure, ranging from e-mail, to web serving, to even the code for USB devices. And don't even get me started on integrating Internet Explorer into the operating system, cataclysm ahoy! Open source has also of course had plenty of exploits, though due to the enforced multiuser design you usually have to break a service or user account and then find a root exploit (not always that hard), which puts an extra step between you and them. Not to mention open source has three excellent ways at dealing with security: prevention, containment, and auditing. Preventing ranges from static analysis tools to look for exploits to proactive defense mechanisms such as stack smashing, heap overflow protection, and even all sorts of randomization techniques (PaX). Containment is I think where Linux in particular really shines: SELinux. Mandatory access control is a nice mathematical way of limiting users, services, and doing all sorts of other shenanigans. You won't find that in Windows, probably ever, even though its a fantastic (albeit challenging) way to enforce heavy security restrictions. Then there is of course, the auditing process. OpenBSD has truly revolutionized this area, because they've done line by line auditing, and they go over old code again whenever new attack types are found. As a result of this and other measures, they have an excellent security track record. Hopefully other projects pick up this mentality.

Open source is not an end all solution, sometimes it isn't even good competition. But completely dismissing Linux, *BSD, or any real open source project is just sheer ignorance. I'm not sure what year of CS you are, but hopefully you'll learn the importance of having full access to the system you are working on. In the research group I work for I doubt we'd be able to do half the stuff we do without open source. Our distributed OpenGL system is based on Linux, our high resolution tiled software runs on OS X (BSD based), our distributed memory system is based on apr, and our multiplatform distributed system is python/OpenSSL based. Hopefully all of this will eventually become open source software in itself, though sometimes thats hard to sell to the professors running the show.

 

[OC_LeGeND]

1st off linux is free, and 2cd of all it gives you more freedom then windows

 

[ameoba]

Now, I don't know about you other guys, but I'm in the CS program to make money when I graduate, not to work some other job and write programs for free in my spare time.

You're looking at the wrong aspects of business - a large percentage of money made with software is not the sale of shrink-wrapped boxes at Walmart. Odds are, when you graduate, you're not going to be writing code for anything your parents will ever use.

The place I'm at now (community college, about 25k students) spends about $100k a year for 'support' on SCT Banner (college ERP system), and we still have 3 DBAs and 8 programmers to handle it on our end (plus network guys & unix administrators). On top of that we get licenses and support contracts with Oracle and Redhat Linux that are in the same ballpark. Whatever we paid for the original instalation of this software is insignificant compared to long-term maintenance fees - we've been running Oracle and SCT for 17-18 years, we just moved over to Redhat this year but, before that, we had support contracts with Sun.

There's a lot of money in custom applications (developed in house or contracted out). There's a lot of money in support and maintenance. There's a lot of money in custom configurations and providing enterprise-level support. There's a lot of money in providing services & infrastructure. In short, there's a lot of people that make money -doing- things with computers rather than selling software as product - these are the people that make open-source work.


Really, the same holds for music - most artists make most of their money off live shows.

 

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

1st off linux is free, and 2cd of all it gives you more freedom then windows

and more headache...

 

[Farva]

and more headache...

blah blah blah. go troll somewhere else

linux is not for the timid, but for those who want to learn and explore

 

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

blah blah blah. go troll somewhere else

linux is not for the timid, but for those who want to learn and explore

I've used linux.. i'm gald i have knowledge with linux..

i'm just saying.. some of you guys make it sound like linux is easy compared to windows.. it's a headache.. how is that not true?? i'm not trolling..

it's like hardcore Llinux guys hate it when someone say's linux is a headache.. well the truth hurts...

i mean it's an awesome learning tool.. and there's cool stuff you can do wit hit.. but the truth is.. it's a headache to do things.. i mean can you really deny that?

give linux to someone who has only used windows... I bet they would get annoyed.. how is my comment trolling??

I use linux a little, so i'm not just talking out of my ass here

one of the main reasons i don't use linux too much.. is cause i'm so busy.. because you seriously need hours of time to be able to learn how to do stuff in linux..

 

[ameoba]

give linux to someone who has only used windows... I bet they would get annoyed.. how is my comment trolling??

Give windows to somebody who hasn't used it before and you'll have the same results.

"The only 'intuitive' interface is the nipple. After that it's all learned"

 

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

Give windows to somebody who hasn't used it before and you'll have the same results.

"The only 'intuitive' interface is the nipple. After that it's all learned"

they'll pick up windows way faster though... for example.. getting a wireless card to work in windows.. plug it in.. and most of the time.. it will work (after it automatically installs drivers and stuff)

I could never get a wireless card to work with my laptop in linux.. (things have probably changed since then)

but there are tons of situation where you need to spend horus just to something that can be done in minutes on windows.. come on.. don't lie to yourself..

 

[Tetrahedron]

they'll pick up windows way faster though... for example.. getting a wireless card to work in windows.. plug it in.. and most of the time.. it will work (after it automatically installs drivers and stuff)

I could never get a wireless card to work with my laptop in linux.. (things have probably changed since then)

but there are tons of situation where you need to spend horus just to something that can be done in minutes on windows.. come on.. don't lie to yourself..

and thats the problem with the world, to much instant gradification, to much... dont care how it works, as long as it works. to much ignorance in the world.... it makes me sad to see people who dont want to learn and explore and understand how things work, it just make them lazy morons imho. I think no matter what one uses in life, one should have at least (which is being nice) the basic understanding of said thing one is using. People should know how the internal combustion engine works, how brake systems and electrical systems work in automobiles, how refridgerators keep things cool, how computer hardware works, how OSes work, etc.. etc..

but hey that is just me, I know I am asking to much... anyways linux is special because the user can control as little or as much as possible without restrictions and its free.

 

[duby229]

I'll make a bet against someone.... Anyone :!

Hows this.... I'll bet that if you built a new box todya. Install Linux on one partition, then install windows on another. I'll bet that Linux has BETTER out of the box hardare support then windows. I'm talking about out of the box support, not third party. Just with the hardware drivers that come native with the OS.

Anybody want to take up that bet?

 

[As I Lay Dying]

I'll make a bet against someone.... Anyone :!

Hows this.... I'll bet that if you built a new box todya. Install Linux on one partition, then install windows on another. I'll bet that Linux has BETTER out of the box hardare support then windows. I'm talking about out of the box support, not third party. Just with the hardware drivers that come native with the OS.

Anybody want to take up that bet?

edit never mind I just read the last part of the statement and you are pretty much right.

unless if anyone knows if the windows native drivers support the JMicron pata controller on asus motherboards, cause I know linux needs the 2.6.18 kernel.

 

[Farva]

they'll pick up windows way faster though... for example.. getting a wireless card to work in windows.. plug it in.. and most of the time.. it will work (after it automatically installs drivers and stuff)

I could never get a wireless card to work with my laptop in linux.. (things have probably changed since then)

but there are tons of situation where you need to spend horus just to something that can be done in minutes on windows.. come on.. don't lie to yourself..

so basically, "if something isnt easy, quit"? - homer simpson
for some people computers in general are hard to understand. have you ever encountered a person that well you tell them to hit any key, they say there isnt any "any" key? yes i know that certain things are hard to understand in linux, but it doesnt mean that we should just not use it. if ignorance was part of the IT field, i would start taking network admins out to a field and shooting them just to put them out of misery.

if you've ever played an instrument, were you able to play your favorite song perfectly the first time or the 100th time? probability would state no. no one understands things immediately. do you know how long it took linus torvalds to even create the first "linux"? learning anything takes time, some people take longer than others. i am by no means saying im an expert in linux, but im not afraid of it either. its no dinosaur that is going to eat me but rather a pet dog that you train to do what you want it to.

for some people, yes, linux is hard. that is why ubuntu was developed. to make linux more user friendly. i think there are some other linux flavors that are easier to use, but at the moment, i cannot think of them. you could even go so far as getting MS linux. thats right, microsoft created a windows-like linux (but you also have to purchase it).

 

[Farva]

linux being easy is like saying security should be easy. you still need to know what the (excuse my french here) hell you are doing. otherwise how easy would it be to break into the network? operating systems are the same way, there is a learning curve no matter what you use.

 

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

and thats the problem with the world, to much instant gradification, to much... dont care how it works, as long as it works. to much ignorance in the world.... it makes me sad to see people who dont want to learn and explore and understand how things work, it just make them lazy morons imho. I think no matter what one uses in life, one should have at least (which is being nice) the basic understanding of said thing one is using. People should know how the internal combustion engine works, how brake systems and electrical systems work in automobiles, how refridgerators keep things cool, how computer hardware works, how OSes work, etc.. etc..

but hey that is just me, I know I am asking to much... anyways linux is special because the user can control as little or as much as possible without restrictions and its free.

you're not getting the point...

seriously.. if you're a business person.. what the hell do you care about using linux, if you can get it done faster in windows?? why waste money and resources training all your employees to use linux???

I USE LINUX, not a lot.. but i do.. i run a dual boot with linux.. so i'm not talking about myself here.. i like to dabble with linux.. you learn a lot about computers fiddling with linux.. however.. for the average person.. it's just not practical.. it has nothing to do with being lazy.. that's what you linux people never get.. you just don't get it...

the thing is.. you guys just don't get why is it that the average person doesn't use linux.... it's not about being lazy.. or being a quitter.. it's about getting the job done.. and most people can get a job done faster with windows.. period.. no two ways about it...

you need to remember everyone is not into computers.. computers are just tools for most people, it's not a hobby like it is to us.. why would you pick a tool that will make you waste more time, beucase you have to read for hours, and post on forums just to solve a simple problem (linux)??.. when you have another tool that you can finish the job with faster becasue you don't have to go thorugh a misson to get simple things working even if it's not a ssecure or stable(windows)?.. now don't get all crazy with "you can do things faster in linux than you can in windows" well of course you can.. otherwise people woudln't use linux.. all i'm saying is.. for the average person.. linux is no good.. it has nothing to do with being lazy or being a quitter.. that's the same excuse you linux guys always use to put down windows people (I'm not a window !!!!!! or anything.. like i said.. i use linux too.. just not much).. it's just amazing how you guys only see it one way.. and this breeds the arrogance i talked about in my previous posts... IMO anyway

news flash.. most people don't give a damn about how computers work.. as long as they can do what they want (write documents, get on the internet, play games) they're good.. windows can fulfill that relativly easily. windows XP isn't that bad of an OS.. it's all about what your use for a computer is.. and in most cases i think windows wins out..

as far as learning curve goes.. the curve in linux is far greater.. and i say thing from experience.. i'm not talking out of my ass here.. i've used linux quite a bit, just for the heck of it..

 

[nameless_centurian]

the utility of linux has diminished to some degree since windows has finally caught up with being relatively stable since about win 2000, and especially since XP has made it to the home market.

prior to windows being built on the NT kernel, it was quite easy to make a system become unstable. the operating system didn't do a whole lot in the way of protecting processes from each other. if a user wrote some bad code (intentinally or otherwise), the operating system might not always care.

additionally, dynamic memory became an issue because if the programmer forgot to free memory he/she had allocated, the operating system might not have re-claimed it.

linux was better in these instances because when a program violates its boundaries, the OS crashes the program rather than letting the program crash other programs. as far as dynamic memory, if a program closes without reclaiming memory, the OS relclaims it for use later.

some can argue "linux has this" or "windows has that." i'm here to tell you that linux isn't any better than windows. in many espects, it's much worse...

but currently for me, linux is a much better system for development. this comes down to price. there are many things i can get for linux that it would cost me hundreds to get for windows. i just don't have that money, yet.

a prime example is electric fence .

linux also offers many good solutions for server situations, if you're willing to fight with it. many non-profits use linux for a cheap way to host needed services.

linux is NOT, despite what anybody says, a good desktop OS yet. although it fits a certain set of requirements for some people, it is not there yet for the masses. even ubuntu isn't close to this.

on the servers, though, linux shines.... as long as you have people who can configure it!

 

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

linux is NOT, despite what anybody says, a good desktop OS yet. although it fits a certain set of requirements for some people, it is not there yet for the masses. even ubuntu isn't close to this.

that is all i was trying to get at..

your whole post was well put..

 

[digital_exhaust]

^^I agree.

I use linux, and I like linux. And I understand linux.

My wife doesn't. My parents don't. Lots of people don't. And I really can't see this changing anytime soon for reasons that have all been stated in this thread already.
Does the average user want to go out and buy a PC at Best Buy and run linux on it? No.
Haven't heard anyone raving about "Linspire" lately.

There are many distro's of Linux that are excellent operating systems. Most people really do want an os that "just works", the thing is, most people don't want to know why it just works, as long as it doos. The fact is, if you don't know how Linux works, your not going to have a very pleasant experience trying to use it.

 

[Stellar]

blah blah blah. go troll somewhere else

linux is not for the timid, but for those who want to learn and explore

It's not trolling, he's absolutely right. The headaches you get with Windows are from malicious software written with that purpose in mind.. those are manageable. The headaches you get with Linux are setup or design related.

Example
This is a headache
This is a another headache

An even bigger headache is that I have to physically open my case and disconnect my internal card reader any time I want to boot into my Kubuntu install otherwise I run into headache #1.

If in your "learning and exploring" perhaps you've found the quick and magical fix for this, I'm all ears.

 

[Farva]

news flash.. most people don't give a damn about how computers work.. as long as they can do what they want (write documents, get on the internet, play games) they're good.. windows can fulfill that relativly easily. windows XP isn't that bad of an OS.. it's all about what your use for a computer is.. and in most cases i think windows wins out..

without this turning into a flame war, which seems like it is getting pretty close, i shall respond.

you can pretty much do all of that (except for playing games) pretty easy in linux.

and as far as training and forums go, there are a ton of questions asked about windows too. no OS is extremely intuitive to the noobie. it comes down to a matter of preference. no linux guy will ever say, "come to our side because windows is evil," even though they think it is evil, they don't come out and say it. aside from that fact, you know what linux is capable of doing and its limitations, just like what windows can and cannot do.

i have read several stories of people switching family members over because all they do is write documents and surf the internet. they dont need their pc to do anything more than that.

i have also read where large companies run their critical applications on linux, hell, even the phone you carry is linux. lots of mobile devices run linux. scary huh? all this time people thought they could trust their lives with microsoft, good ol' trusty microsoft, and yet it doesnt even run all that much compared to all the devices in the world.

 

[nameless_centurian]

People should know how the internal combustion engine works, how brake systems and electrical systems work in automobiles, how refridgerators keep things cool, how computer hardware works, how OSes work, etc.. etc...

okay, tell me how the modern internal combustion engine works. i want to know the exact manner in which the electronic fuel systems compute the amount of fuel and air mixed to produce the ideal combustion. please also tell me the exact method the computer uses to calculate compression inside the compression chambers. tell me the exact method the comptuer uses to retard other chambers from firing if a premature explosion occurs in another cylinder. please tell me the exact algorithm that the computer uses to detect a premature explosion.

additonally, please explain EXACTLY how the computer calculates the grade of fuel being pushed into the compression chambers in order to know when to spark. please also indicate the process which the computer goes through to send a spark, including what checks must take place beforehand and how those checks are conducted as well.


automobiles aside now...
please hand-draw a diagram showing the exact implementation of the ALU in the processor which you are using. i would also like you to report to me exactly how the ALU processes instructions once they have been decoded.

and i want you to tell me how every single part of linux works. tell me what makes the scheduler work, and the memory manager. tell me exactly what i need to do to port it to your cellular phone, which you should be able to do because in order to be qualified to use linux and the cellular phone, you must know how both of them work in painful detail.



now, all that junk aside, you're being very dishonest and i think your life would be a lot mre painful without the layers of abstraction you just take for granted in may aspects of technology.

 

[RancidWAnnaRIot]

without this turning into a flame war, which seems like it is getting pretty close, i shall respond.

you can pretty much do all of that (except for playing games) pretty easy in linux.

and as far as training and forums go, there are a ton of questions asked about windows too. no OS is extremely intuitive to the noobie. it comes down to a matter of preference. no linux guy will ever say, "come to our side because windows is evil," even though they think it is evil, they don't come out and say it. aside from that fact, you know what linux is capable of doing and its limitations, just like what windows can and cannot do.

i have read several stories of people switching family members over because all they do is write documents and surf the internet. they dont need their pc to do anything more than that.

i have also read where large companies run their critical applications on linux, hell, even the phone you carry is linux. lots of mobile devices run linux. scary huh? all this time people thought they could trust their lives with microsoft, good ol' trusty microsoft, and yet it doesnt even run all that much compared to all the devices in the world.

i know you can do all that in linux.. but generally you can do it faster in windows...

i'm nto syaing you can't make documents in linux.. i'm just saying.. windows is easier for