Windows: Linux Can't Touch This

[kac77]

Printers and smart phones can also be an issue. Same with other things like mp3 players.

MP3 Players? Aside from the Zune, there are few that it can't read. As for printers stick with HP (they have linux support for most of their printers, or Epson, most Canons, and I doubt there will be much a problem. The linux support for printers is identical to Mac support for the most part.

Other issues exist like some websites still don't work right on linux. My dad has this problem. I have his system running ubuntu and it just flat out doesn't work with some various sites he uses for looking up parts.

wouldn't that be a firefox issue? Also you can install and run IE 5 through 7 on Linux. I do for work to test websites.

Linux also has an issue with apps. Sure you can do pretty much anything you can in windows but that doesn't mean the software to do it is as good. You have better cd burning apps, map software, games, etc. Some of it will work fine in wine, some will not. Good example is that newsbin works fine in wine(I have yet to find a better usenet software), on the other hand alldata does not(dad uses it).

That can apply to all OS's. There's some things each has over the other. Although K3B is pretty damn complete and does things that nero will never do.

 

[acidic]

imo, linux is just not there yet. I been using linux for years and even sometimes I have trouble figuring out obscure hardware compatibility problems. Its a great OS, but the average customer expects ease of use above anything else and windows provides that. Ubuntu is a great distro and is moving forward in the ease of use department... Maybe in 10 years

 

[ianken]

It's all about the apps, Linux doesn;t have 'em. Open Office is like the app that time forgot. Most folks don't even know what Linux IS and if they do and and try it out the first thing that happens when they ask for help from the linux comunity is get an ear full of "LOL n00b, lern 2 code!"

Then they go back to Windows.

 

[ianken]

MP3 Players? Aside from the Zune, there are few that it can't read. As for printers stick with HP (they have linux support for most of their printers, or Epson, most Canons, and I doubt there will be much a problem. The linux support for printers is identical to Mac support for the most part. .

So you're telling people to drop what they know, constrain their choices, just to run Linux? If I have to do that I'll get a Mac and know it's backed by a real entity, not some dudes on the internet who may or may not abuse me when I ask for help.

That sort of marketing does not work. Free does not always mean better.

 

[burnin8r]

Yup. Linux sucks ass when it comes to desktops, always will until people do it right -- like the people at Apple.

i lol'd!

really, if you re going to say zOMG LINUX SI TEH SUX0R at least back it up with your experience or something intelligent. From what I have seen, the ubuntu and LinuxMint communities are not elitists like the mac / windows standard bearers want you to believe.

 

[Zellio2009]

Linux will never become big until the Linux cult gets their heads out of their ass and helps new people.

Until that happens, Linux will stay a cult.

 

[kac77]

So you're telling people to drop what they know, constrain their choices, just to run Linux? If I have to do that I'll get a Mac and know it's backed by a real entity, not some dudes on the internet who may or may not abuse me when I ask for help.

That sort of marketing does not work. Free does not always mean better.

Where do I say people should constrain their choices? I don't do I?

Linux isn't for everyone. I will never say it can be all things to all people. As for the free comment, paying money doesn't always mean it's better either.

 

[kac77]

Linux will never become big until the Linux cult gets their heads out of their ass and helps new people.

Until that happens, Linux will stay a cult.

That's funny cause ubuntuforums is one of the biggest, if not THE biggest software online help communities out there. I've helped people there and here without jumping down their throats, there's no benefit to doing that.

 

[kac77]

My Wireless chipset is a Broadcom 802.11b/g WLAN... I really can't find anymore detailed info than that. I blame it on my lack of sleep.

However, I think the problem with Linux is just that; I really haven't seen any machines built purely for Linux that are mass marketed and sold(Though, I remember Dell does that.) From what I've noticed, most Linux machines are either built for compatibility from scratch, or just the ones that don't have hardware restrictions. Im not going to make a $2,000 gaming rig and put Linux on it. I'm going to be the one that buys a laptop made in 2004 just for websurfing when I'm not working on a desktop.

Then again, I could just be completely oblivious to anything that is moving the Linux cause forward.. So correct me if I'm wrong, because I did not know

Hmm try the live cd of 8.10 and see if you fair better. You don't have to install anything just check to see if wireless support is there for the card. As for spending $2,000 for linux, I wouldn't do that either. For that amount of money, i'm probably doing some development work, maybe a couple VM's and a few other things for that price.

 

[jubalskeiki]

"Easier to install drivers"? In ubuntu you click and check box that says "Use official drivers" and you are done. I don't think it is actually possible to make it any easier.

Not only that. I recently switched computers and rather than reinstall linux I was curious how my install would handle a whole new computer. I plugged the HD in to the new computer and it said "Umm I don't know what this hardware is, hang on..." went searching, found the drivers and booted up in less than 5 minutes. I didn't have to go into the device manager and uninstall my motherboard and reset everything, linux seamlessly did whatever voodoo it did and it just worked. I have moved HD like that on windows machines, and it usually means I have to at least repair windows, if not totally reinstall it.

 

[Ramp8g]

It's all about the apps, Linux doesn;t have 'em. Open Office is like the app that time forgot. Most folks don't even know what Linux IS and if they do and and try it out the first thing that happens when they ask for help from the linux comunity is get an ear full of "LOL n00b, lern 2 code!"

Then they go back to Windows.

Linux has nearly 20 thousand apps. I'm seeing the same old uninformed arguments by windows sheep. I am so glad I freed myself of the albatross that is windows. If you prefer windows, great. But don't go on about how great it is, because it isn't. Linux has made huge gains in the last few years. A lot more then Windows has in the same amount of time. If you want to bitch about drivers. Talk to the hardware companies. There the ones that wont release driver code so it can be ported to Linux. There are tons of games available for Linux. ID/Blizzard ports all there games to Linux. And Steam will now be available on Linux. It still has some ways to go, but theres no way I'd ever go back to windows.

 

[hl3395]

Windows does everything!! No other OS can do as much! It can even let in sunlight!
Even though Linux is making great progress, I don't think it'll over take MS in the forseeable future. MS is just too well funded, and I don't think they employ a bunch of idiots. It's kind of like AMD vs Intel. Deep pockets can do miracles.

 

[Kil4Thril]

It's all about the apps, Linux doesn;t have 'em. Open Office is like the app that time forgot. Most folks don't even know what Linux IS and if they do and and try it out the first thing that happens when they ask for help from the linux comunity is get an ear full of "LOL n00b, lern 2 code!"

Then they go back to Windows.

Linux will never become big until the Linux cult gets their heads out of their ass and helps new people.

Until that happens, Linux will stay a cult.

What do you mean you don't understand command line? You simply type a string of unintuitive characters into the old DOS-style prompt and hope like hell it does what that obscure reference on Google says it might. Then you join a forum of cultists who will make fun of you because you don't know all the commands. Then, you will resolve to finally learn it all, and begin making fun of teh newb who doesn't know command line. It's the circle of life.

 

[Jakalwarrior]

ive started dual booting kubuntu (very pretty imo) and the only big problem ive run in to is software instalation. cant tether without syncce, cant install syncce without direct internet on that pc! odd case i know but still annoying. it needs a painless offline install method.

 

[kac77]

What do you mean you don't understand command line? You simply type a string of unintuitive characters into the old DOS-style prompt and hope like hell it does what that obscure reference on Google says it might. Then you join a forum of cultists who will make fun of you because you don't know all the commands. Then, you will resolve to finally learn it all, and begin making fun of teh newb who doesn't know command line. It's the circle of life.

People are often sent command line instructions because:
a) you usually get meaningful error messages if something goes wrong versus something ambiguous as "Runtime Error -42" or just "Error".It's the same reason most IT admins use command line often.

b) GUI's are exactly what they are GUI's which are built ontop of functions and strings. If you have an error with a GUI and that's all you know, you're pretty much screwed. Not so much with a command line.

c) Terminal is Terminal therefore the commands, depending on the used package manager, are universal. If I give you a command for the most part it's universal to everyone. How many times have you told someone you were giving support to that clicking on an icon in one location would be faster only to find out that their version of windows doesn't have that icon, or it may be in a different location? Command line gets around this problem.

 

[Jakalwarrior]

oh one more thing to add. during the last hurricanes i setup a ton of computers for volunteers. a lot of the donated ones had trashed xp installs. a puppy linux live cd saved the day. light, fast, worked on all, and best part was the computer illiterates never knew the difference once you started the web browser.

 

[Shadow2531]

Ubuntu and Kubuntu still have the nasty keyboard data loss bug. I'm not sure what other distros it affects, but I will not rely on linux while this bug is still around.

They both make it a pain in the ass to do things GUI-wise on small screens when a window doesn't fit. You can grab a window and drag it out-of-view most of the way so that you can see the part you want. However, there are bugs all over the place with this aspect where some parts of the gui are just not accessible unless the whole thing fits in view. It seems this is worse with Ubuntu than Kubuntu.

The worst thing though is I *still* have to dick with xorg.conf to get more than 800x600@60Hz. Detection of Graphic card and monitor capabilities is still shit (even after you enable the right restricted drivers). These things should just work by default. Then, if you want to have fun and play with xorg.conf etc. go ahead, but make it work correctly by default.

Also, last time I checked, on a new install, sound on the audigy is muted because the digital out is enabled by default. You have to go into alsamixer and uncheck it. Horrible default. This is even worse in Kubuntu because Kmix (by default) resets it on you all the time.

Suprisingly though, most other stuff in linux works great including wine.

I've spent over a year just using linux. You can get things done, but it's hard to take it seriously when basic things are just broken. I can overlook everything though except the keyboard data loss bug. That's unacceptable.

Probably just need to fine a better distro, but WinXP isn't so bad, so...

 

[kllrnohj]

I think I can prove that the guy is right by pointing out that people have been saying the same thing for over 10 years now.
So basically in all this time of free linux, it hasn't managed to get a foothold in certain core Windows markets. It is as unlikely that linux will succeed there in 2009 as it was all the years before it. Linux has already proved that it failed in those areas, as far as I'm concerned, given how long they've been trying, and how little progress they've made.
Even the argument that people don't know about linux no longer holds. That may have been true 10 years ago, but you can't fall back on that forever. There's plenty of 'noise' surrounding linux on the internet, the secret is already out.

This just shows how completely off base you are. The Linux developers don't give two shits if they have a larger market share than windows or not. Linux developers develop *FOR LINUX DEVELOPERS*. This isn't a war at all. When Windows users try Linux and proclaim "it isn't ready yet" (as you are), what they really wanted in the first place was a free Windows clone and then wondered why everything wasn't the same.

Linux is not Windows, and it isn't trying to be. Linux on the desktop is awesome, if it is what you want.

I think you, and all those proclaiming that "Linux isn't ready for the desktop", should give this a good read: http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

 

[J32P]

This just shows how completely off base you are. The Linux developers don't give two shits if they have a larger market share than windows or not. Linux developers develop *FOR LINUX DEVELOPERS*. This isn't a war at all. When Windows users try Linux and proclaim "it isn't ready yet" (as you are), what they really wanted in the first place was a free Windows clone and then wondered why everything wasn't the same.

Linux is not Windows, and it isn't trying to be. Linux on the desktop is awesome, if it is what you want.

I think you, and all those proclaiming that "Linux isn't ready for the desktop", should give this a good read: http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

I agree.

I feel like Linux is for working(more geek), Windows is for playing(less geek). Two entirely different types of OS's for different types of day to day operations. And they both have bugs

 

[Zellio2009]

This just shows how completely off base you are. The Linux developers don't give two shits if they have a larger market share than windows or not. Linux developers develop *FOR LINUX DEVELOPERS*. This isn't a war at all. When Windows users try Linux and proclaim "it isn't ready yet" (as you are), what they really wanted in the first place was a free Windows clone and then wondered why everything wasn't the same.

Linux is not Windows, and it isn't trying to be. Linux on the desktop is awesome, if it is what you want.

I think you, and all those proclaiming that "Linux isn't ready for the desktop", should give this a good read: http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

How exactly does being easy to use=Windows?

Because Mac OSX is easier to use.

That excuse is just BS to mask the reality that Linux devs are too stuck up their own OS to think.

 

[Zellio2009]

Not only that, but Mac OSX uses Unix, a Linux derivative.

Theirs no excuse. Linux developers only make Linux for people who think like them: Elitist snobs.

 

[S-B]

Unix is a Linux derivative?

 

[Zellio2009]

Linux was based on Unix, so err, the other way around.

Mac OSX was also based on Unix.

 

[Zellio2009]

To be honest, Linux is way to fragile for me.

You can brag about your security all you want, but your security doesn't help when basic OS functions are horribly broken and can fall apart as easily as changing wireless Usb devices or changing video cards.

 

[Kil4Thril]

People are often sent command line instructions because:
a) you usually get meaningful error messages if something goes wrong versus something ambiguous as "Runtime Error -42" or just "Error".It's the same reason most IT admins use command line often.

b) GUI's are exactly what they are GUI's which are built ontop of functions and strings. If you have an error with a GUI and that's all you know, you're pretty much screwed. Not so much with a command line.

c) Terminal is Terminal therefore the commands, depending on the used package manager, are universal. If I give you a command for the most part it's universal to everyone. How many times have you told someone you were giving support to that clicking on an icon in one location would be faster only to find out that their version of windows doesn't have that icon, or it may be in a different location? Command line gets around this problem.

True, and while I agree, I was being facetious. You don't seem to represent the majority (or maybe it's just the loudest) of the *NIX community. You actually seem helpful.

 

[Xipher]

Windows, the various Linux distros, *BSDs, and Mac OS all have their uses. They also all have their users and it is just a matter of personal preference. I prefer Linux myself in some cases, OpenBSD in others, and Windows when I have to use it. That does not make Windows a bad operating system.

I find in many applications Windows is restrictive for the cost such as limiting the number of remote desktop connections and having to pay per seat licensing for terminal services. I'm also a not a fan of doing all of the configuration from the GUI, and will make use of command line tools when ever possible. The registry is counter intuitive and unwieldy in my opinion, and is often a source of problems for the average user so they won't touch it. I personally think the registry is worse then editing straight text files in the various *nix like systems. The event log is also a pain to work with, and I can't exactly pull out grep and start looking for what I really want, I have to just poke around and see if I can find any thing relevant to the issue I'm looking at.

I want less and my ability to just search for arbitrary strings while still paging around in the file as I see fit.

I have to deal with Windows and CentOS/RHEL servers at work (managed dedicated hosting company) and in most any case I would highly prefer CentOS to Windows, but that's just me and the rest of the techs.

 

[Zellio2009]

Linux has a use, as a server OS due to servers being wired and not changing video cards too often.

As a home OS, Linux fails until Linux developers get their heads out of their ass once again, and realize that their 'God OS' falls apart if you look at it wrong.

 

[kac77]

Ubuntu and Kubuntu still have the nasty keyboard data loss bug. I'm not sure what other distros it affects, but I will not rely on linux while this bug is still around.

Data loss bug?? LMAO.. First that bug is still open..... in Gusty and Feisty. Here in 2009 we run 8.10. Nice over reaction. I've seen that bug before but I haven't seen it in a long time.And the bug is that keys repeat themselves. You don't lose data.

They both make it a pain in the ass to do things GUI-wise on small screens when a window doesn't fit. You can grab a window and drag it out-of-view most of the way so that you can see the part you want. However, there are bugs all over the place with this aspect where some parts of the gui are just not accessible unless the whole thing fits in view. It seems this is worse with Ubuntu than Kubuntu.

And that doesn't happen in Windows XP???!! Give me a break. Open Display Properties in 640X480 or anything lower and you'll struggle just like anyone would on any OS. That's why in 2009 we can run large resolutions so we can see more.

The worst thing though is I *still* have to dick with xorg.conf to get more than 800x600@60Hz. Detection of Graphic card and monitor capabilities is still shit (even after you enable the right restricted drivers). These things should just work by default. Then, if you want to have fun and play with xorg.conf etc. go ahead, but make it work correctly by default.

Maybe before 8.04, but sorry there's a text GUI in recovery mode that will pretty much set any resolution you want. If the nvidia drivers are installed correctly it manually adds whatever resolution you set to xorg.

Also, last time I checked, on a new install, sound on the audigy is muted because the digital out is enabled by default. You have to go into alsamixer and uncheck it. Horrible default. This is even worse in Kubuntu because Kmix (by default) resets it on you all the time.

That bug has existed for Live and Audigy cards in Windows XP for quite some time as well. If it's checked.... uncheck it.

Suprisingly though, most other stuff in linux works great including wine.

I've spent over a year just using linux. You can get things done, but it's hard to take it seriously when basic things are just broken. I can overlook everything though except the keyboard data loss bug. That's unacceptable.

Probably just need to fine a better distro, but WinXP isn't so bad, so...

It looks like you have used Ubuntu before as the issues you've listed did in fact exist but most of them if not all have been resolved or occur far less frequently than you make them out to be. Its nice to list problems, but overreacting like Ubuntu was conspiring to blow up your machine isn't very accurate.

 

[Zellio2009]

And that doesn't happen in Windows XP???!! Give me a break. Open Display Properties in 640X480 or anything lower and you'll struggle just like anyone would on any OS. That's why in 2009 we can run large resolutions so we can see more.

The problem here is, Windows realizes your resolution and doesn't run anything you can run.

Try running Ubuntu on an old monitor that can only do 800x600.

Can't run it because the boot screen is higher res then your monitor.

Try it, problem still exists.

 

[Zellio2009]

I think another problem I can add here is the whole 'developers making Linux for Linux users'.

No, they make it for themselves. If you use non standard components, esp. certain kinds of wireless usb devices, or ati x1000 series cards, stuff they don't use, you may as well give up.

 

[Xipher]

Linux was based on Unix, so err, the other way around.

Mac OSX was also based on Unix.

Incorrect
Linus wanted to make a unix like os, Linux and GNU are entirely independent of the Unix family. Linux was inspired by Minix but I don't believe it shared any code from Minix and is an independent entity.
Mac OS X did use code from FreeBSD which was based upon BSD 4.4 lite and can be traced back to the old AT&T/Bell Labs Unix code base.

You can look at a simplified family tree of sorts here
http://www.netneurotic.net/mac/unix/timeline.html

http://www.levenez.com/unix/ is a bit more comprehensive timeline.

 

[Zellio2009]

Incorrect
Linus wanted to make a unix like os, Linux and GNU are entirely independent of the Unix family. Linux was inspired by Minix but I don't believe it shared any code from Minix and is an independent entity.
Mac OS X did use code from FreeBSD which was based upon BSD 4.4 lite and can be traced back to the old AT&T/Bell Labs Unix code base.

You can look at a simplified family tree of sorts here
http://www.netneurotic.net/mac/unix/timeline.html

http://www.levenez.com/unix/ is a bit more comprehensive timeline.

We don't know if it shared code.

Still, it's most obviously based off Unix. From my last knowledge of OSX and Linux, both still use Sudo based command line executions.

 

[Zellio2009]

* This is only to my last knowledge of OSX. It may very well be that Jobs got rid of command line in OSX, I wouldn't be surprised.

 

[Xipher]

We don't know if it shared code.

Still, it's most obviously based off Unix. From my last knowledge of OSX and Linux, both still use Sudo based command line executions.

There is a VERY big difference then being the basis and inspiration. sharing a command means nothing, and only accounts for inspiration. Windows has a bsd licensed version of telnet included does that make it "based" on unix to? Winsock is designed to be near identical in usage to the BSD sockets API does that also suggest its based on unix? I would say it is not and that telnet was just used since they didn't want to code up their own version, and BSD sockets are the defacto standard in network programming so it made porting code simpler back in the day when Windows was just adding a real network stack.

 

[Zellio2009]

One final thing, because I'm going to bed.

I said that above because it seems to me Jobs is turning OSX into a simplstic OSX. I wouldn't be surprised of command line was destroyed in favor of a highly unsecure version like Xp, where anyone can have admin.

Linux is excellent for servers, due to security. But home users put their pcs thru alot more abuse then servers, and change stuff alot more. It's just not ready.

And btw, don't give me the excuse that Linux can't be infected with malware. Any pc can be infected, it takes the user to infect it.

You can say you want about windows easily getting malware, but it still takes idiots to visit bad sites and download bad things, which both are basically the idiot user installing the malware.

I realize sites can be hacked, but most of the time it's fools doing foolish crap. Or even better, fools who think they don't need antivirus software.

The difference here is that the Linux crowd also isn't as dumb as the average windows user.

 

[kac77]

The problem here is, Windows realizes your resolution and doesn't run anything you can run.

Try running Ubuntu on an old monitor that can only do 800x600.

Can't run it because the boot screen is higher res then your monitor.

Try it, problem still exists.

No Windows doesn't. I'll help you do it.

1. Open Display Properties at a high resolution.
2. Set resolution to something absurdly low, actually go as low as allowed. If it won't let you there, you can do it in both the Nvidia Control Panel or ATI. Then click on OK
3. Struggle with your Tab or Alt key to reset the resolution or move the window.

I've run Ubuntu on 800x600. the boot splash screen is irrelevant because it will boot anyway regardless whether you can see it or not. If you are talking about the GDM, the default GDM is centered so you will always be able to login. Once you are in on the desktop you can still get around using Alt+F7 or Alt+F8 if need be. There's another shortcut that actually moves the whole screen as well in case a window ends up off screen.

 

[Zellio2009]

There is a VERY big difference then being the basis and inspiration. sharing a command means nothing, and only accounts for inspiration. Windows has a bsd licensed version of telnet included does that make it "based" on unix to? Winsock is designed to be near identical in usage to the BSD sockets API does that also suggest its based on unix? I would say it is not and that telnet was just used since they didn't want to code up their own version, and BSD sockets are the defacto standard in network programming so it made porting code simpler back in the day when Windows was just adding a real network stack.

Still, rather inspiration or based off of it, one group decided to be friendly to users (Apple), and one decided to make an OS only the devlopers can really use perfectly (Linux).

My point was that it could easily be made without these obvious holes, but Linux devs don't want that.

 

[Zellio2009]

No Windows doesn't. I'll help you do it.

1. Open Display Properties at a high resolution.
2. Set resolution to something absurdly low, actually go as low as allowed. If it won't let you there, you can do it in both the Nvidia Control Panel or ATI. Then click on OK
3. Struggle with your Tab or Alt key to reset the resolution or move the window.

I've run Ubuntu on 800x600. the boot splash screen is irrelevant because it will boot anyway regardless whether you can see it or not. If you are talking about the GDM, the default GDM is centered so you will always be able to login. Once you are in on the desktop you can still get around using Alt+F7 or Alt+F8 if need be. There's another shortcut that actually moves the whole screen as well in case a window ends up off screen.

If your an idiot, yes. You can do alot of dumb things to windows if you set your mind to it.

The difference is that windows doesn't make you do those dumb things.

If you can show me an example of someone who can't load windows due to wrong resolution, instead of something someone does to themselves, be my guest.

 

[Xipher]

Linux is excellent for servers, due to security. But home users put their pcs thru alot more abuse then servers, and change stuff alot more. It's just not ready.

Security isn't inherit to Linux, trust me an idiot can screw that over with Linux just as well as Windows or any other OS. Many of the sites distributing the infectious java script is from compromising user accounts to servers and dumping it into every text file found. Hell there was a Linux root kit going around for a while and it was because stupid people leave direct root access enabled with SSH and don't like to be bothered with securing their servers or personal computers. Security is a process, not a product.

Zellio, you bounce all over the place and make complete BS remarks with out any basis. Stop spouting off crap just because you think it's correct and claiming truth, either do the research or stop talking about things you don't understand.

 

[Zellio2009]

Security isn't inherit to Linux, trust me an idiot can screw that over with Linux just as well as Windows or any other OS. Many of the sites distributing the infectious java script is from compromising user accounts to servers and dumping it into every text file found. Hell there was a Linux root kit going around for a while and it was because stupid people leave direct root access enabled with SSH and don't like to be bothered with securing their servers or personal computers. Security is a process, not a product.

Zellio, you bounce all over the place and make complete BS remarks with out any basis. Stop spouting off crap just because you think it's correct and claiming truth, either do the research or stop talking about things you don't understand.

Why thank you Captain Obvious, I realize that. The reason Linux is alot more secure is due to the small amount of people who use it.