Linux vs Windows

[adrynalyne]

No one in this thread thinks that the majority of users use ubuntu or linux. When someone says that an "average" user can (and some do) use ubuntu, what they are obviously referring to is user-friendliness, not that most users use ubuntu...

 

You are being extremely pedantic, which I think is why people misunderstood you.

 

If you state something extremely obvious, then one might think you mean something else, because they assume that you wouldn't go around saying something so obvious xD.

 

 

...what?

 

How would anyone infer that? LOL.

[Som]

So, you're saying that before Windows the average person did not have a computer? This is what you're saying?

dunno why so aggressive, but ya before windows the average person probably thought a computer was something this, remember we're talking about the 80s , only enthusiasts or  rich people would have had computers then.... 

 

just outta curiosity what was your first os? mine was dos.  Over the years I've used nearly all of them at some point.  

 

All I was trying to say was in the history of modern computers, Windows vs Linux, windows wins because it brought computers to the mainstream.  Linux's popularity existed because people had windows computers and they could pop linux on it for free.  Over time linux has become more user friendly so if you where to compare Linux vs Windows in 2013 it would probably be a stalemate.   The reality is Windows, while it may not be free, the end user rarely pays for it as it comes with a new computer, the amount it costs the manufacturer is minimal and doesn't reflect the overall price of the computer. Either OS when working are great, both have plenty of free software too.  But I think what lets linux down overall is the end support.  Every error for Windows is catalogued and has resolution in some form while in Linux that usually isn't the case

 

Both are great! :)

[ViperAFK]

...what?

 

How would anyone infer that? LOL.

Because it is obvious, how would anyone infer anything different? You really think we're are deluded enough to think that most desktop users are using linux? You are being ridiculous.

[adrynalyne]

Because it is obvious

 

Not even remotely.

[sanctified Veteran]

dunno why so aggressive, but ya before windows the average person probably thought a computer was something this, remember we're talking about the 80s , only enthusiasts or  rich people would have had computers then.... 

 

just outta curiosity what was your first os? mine was dos.  Over the years I've used nearly all of them at some point.  

 

All I was trying to say was in the history of modern computers, Windows vs Linux, windows wins because it brought computers to the mainstream.  Linux's popularity existed because people had windows computers and they could pop linux on it for free.  Over time linux has become more user friendly so if you where to compare Linux vs Windows in 2013 it would probably be a stalemate.   The reality is Windows, while it may not be free, the end user rarely pays for it as it comes with a new computer, the amount it costs the manufacturer is minimal and doesn't reflect the overall price of the computer. Either OS when working are great, both have plenty of free software too.  But I think what lets linux down overall is the end support.  Every error for Windows is catalogued and has resolution in some form while in Linux that usually isn't the case

 

Both are great! :)

 

Somehow I suspect you never used a computer in the 80's. The image you have linked is a proof of that.

 

WAY before Windows we used CHEAP, SMALL and COMMON computers like the Commodore, the Lisa, the Atari, etc.

 

My first OS was the Atari gOS.

 

The idea that Windows brought computers to the mainstream is one of the most ridiculous, ignorant and annoying things I've ever heard. Go a read how many computers Commodore sold.

[Max Norris]

Yes, I deny that. MILLIONS of very average users were already using Commodore 64 -to this date the best selling computer of all time-.

Heh yea, there were a gazillion of those things back in the day. My neighbor would show his off to me and point out his "excellent" graphics (for the time) even had sound, meanwhile laughing at my poor text based Model 16. They sold a crazy number of them, especially considering the timeframe where the consensus was that you had to be a rocket scientist to use a computer.

[sanctified Veteran]

Heh yea, there were a gazillion of those things back in the day. My neighbor would show his off to me and point out his "excellent" graphics (for the time), meanwhile laughing at my poor text based Model 16. They sold a crazy number of them, especially considering the timeframe where the consensus was that you had to be a rocket scientist to use a computer.

 

Im sure your neighbor tricked you, small, affordable computers NEVER existed before Windows, didnt you know? ;)

[adrynalyne]

Yes, I deny that.

 

MILLIONS of very average users were already using Commodore 64 -to this date the best selling computer of all time-.

Fair enough.

 

I didn't start using computers until the early 90s.

[sanctified Veteran]

Fair enough.

 

I didn't start using computers until the early 90s.

 

Hence why I dont know what and why you're arguing so heatly and assuredly about something you never experienced.

[Max Norris]

Im sure your neighbor tricked you, small, affordable computers NEVER existed before Windows, didnt you know? ;)

Don't forget the Atari's too.. not quite as many buy still very popular. Not me though.. who's got two thumbs and spent $1100 on a 5MB hard drive the size of a small refrigerator? *this* guy. I should have waited a couple of years before getting into computers. Got really interesting in the 80's. The late 70's were expensive.

[sanctified Veteran]

Don't forget the Atari's too.. not quite as many buy still very popular. Not me though.. who's got two thumbs and spent $1100 on a 5MB hard drive the size of a small refrigerator? *this* guy. I should have waited a couple of years before getting into computers. Got really interesting in the 80's.

 

An Atari was my first computer. Long live the green desktop.

[adrynalyne]

Hence why I dont know what and why you're arguing so heatly and assuredly about something you never experienced.

I didn't.  I am not the one who made that original statement, but look overall on how many computers use Windows now, vs. how many commodores were sold, total.  It isn't even close and hasn't been for many years.

 

If nobody liked Windows, it wouldn't have moved into the monopolistic state it is in now.

[sanctified Veteran]

That wasn't my statement, big guy.

 

The first line wasnt directed at you. It was for the other fella who thinks we were using ENIACS in the 80s :)

[adrynalyne]

The first line wasnt directed at you. It was for the other fella who thinks we were using ENIACS in the 80s :)

Erm, you quoted me...

[Som]

would ya believe I did, but I was a late bloomer (my parents where broke).... you still completely missing my point and for some reason getting angrier.  I'm talking about the average user here, not you, not me and not most people on this forum, .... the average user, the facebook, iphone samsung galaxy sIII who use their computers to log on the internet and not much more.  For them  why would they even want a computer.  Most average people (and remember not you) starting using computers in the late 90s, when the internet took off, when computers became affordable and the OS was Windows, not because they chose it but because it was there.  Walk up to someone who knows nothing about a computer and ask them what linux is....

 

also if what I said is the most ridiculous ignorant things you've ever heard you've led a very sheltered life and I envy you..... :P

Somehow I suspect you never used a computer in the 80's. The image you have linked is a proof of that.

 

WAY before Windows we used CHEAP, SMALL and COMMON computers like the Commodore, the Lisa, the Atari, etc.

 

My first OS was the Atari gOS.

 

The idea that Windows brought computers to the mainstream is one of the most ridiculous, ignorant and annoying things I've ever heard. Go a read how many computers Commodore sold.

[sanctified Veteran]

I didn't.  I am not the one who made that original statement, but look overall on how many computers use Windows now, vs. how many commodores were sold, total.  It isn't even close and hasn't been for many years.

 

If nobody liked Windows, it wouldn't have moved into the monopolistic state it is in now.

 

You cant compare numbers as the users that have a computer now is very different as in the 80s.

 

The growth of Windows has never been a matter of public predilection.

 

Microsoft strong armed the computer industry in the late 80s and all of the 90s to use their software. There were other and better options with just as good hardware support, like IBM's O/S2 (The system that Microsoft stole to make Windows NT).

 

Allow me to explain how this strong arming operated:

 

- In the 80s MS refused to give support to computers who wanted to include an alternative dev environment along BASIC. Nobody ever asked them to support the alternative, just to respect their support for BASIC. MS never yielded.

 

- In the 80s Gates plainly stole code from Gary Kildall's CP/M to make DOS, fragmenting an already stable base platform.

 

- In the 90s Gates used the money gained by this steal to close anti-competitive deals with many hardware companies that forbade them to support the installation of other operative system or even alternative shells for Windows 3.1

 

- In the 90s MS actively threatened companies that they will stop licensing Windows to them if they installed or offered means to install software that directly competed with MS's. Specially Netscape.

 

- In the 90s happened the IS Server fiasco. MS offered this server software for a low price to companies. The caveat was that no client software not named windows, outlook and internet explorer could interface with it. No other server software do this. Cutting up the competition.

 

By the time the US reacted and tried to sue and control MS it was too late. The industry dependency of MS was too strong to go back.

Erm, you quoted me...

 

Yeah, if you look again you'll see I'm talking to someone else in that first line.

also if what I said is the most ridiculous ignorant things you've ever heard you've led a very sheltered life and I envy you..... :p

 

It was a knee jerk reaction on my part, I agree and apologize. However this is a serious topic for me since part of my work relates to software ethics. It kinda get on my nerves that MS can dictate the history since they won it... with dirty tactics. Take a look at my previous post to a very summarized events log of what happened.

[Growled Member]

In this particular conversation, average can be replaced with the word typical.  Typical is going to be what the norm is.  The norm is windows-based PCs.  That is because of a near monopoly, true.  However, I was never discussing the cause of it.  I certainly never mentioned user friendliness anywhere.

Yes, it seems some problems are being caused by semantics. I'd say the majority of users are Windows users myself. Saying average and typical seems to present problems since we all have our own definitions of average and typical.

[Kryspy]

One word..... registry..... HUH...... Seriously what year is it?

 

Kryspy

[+Red King Subscriber²]

One word..... registry..... HUH...... Seriously what year is it?

 

Kryspy

Good point, one of the best Windows features.

Linux still doesn't have something like it.

[Growled Member]

Good point, one of the best Windows features.

Linux still doesn't have something like it.

And one of Windows bad points as well. I prefer the Linux way myself.

[Yogurtmaster]

I am not going to compare Linux to Windows.  It's not a fair comparison to both.

 

Instead I am going to offer some ideas that I think that can make a distro of Linux better.  I would never spend money on this because it's not my passion, my passion is mobile/data MVNO type stuff and video games.

 

1) Find some UI guys for the OS. The UI for almost every distro of Linux is like living in the 1990's.  It either tries to be too Windows 95ish or MacOSish.  Yeah, there is Unity and also Gnome 3, but they are either too cumbersome or too complex.

2) Stop trying to do everything from the command line.  In a modern OS a command line should be optional.  If you want to run scripts you can use a beautiful 21st century IDE with full debugging abilities and quick type functions so you get work done faster. :) wooo hooo!

3) Improve the UI and Applications, maybe even instead of using a dumb windows application layer like Wine (which is silly) maybe have an emulation layer that runs Android apps.

4) Include state-of-the-art touch abilities, sensor abilities, voice recognition abilities, face recognition, text-to-speech and speech-to-text abilities (with easy to use API's) and I mean quality here.

5) Focus on real 21st century multimedia apps with real good API support from scratch

6) Introduce really quality fonts.  Imagine being able to read articles in a nice eye pleasing font, it makes all of the difference in the world.

 

You don't have to try to make Linux look and feel like Windows or Macos, but you should try to evolve the platform.  I think Linux is great if you want to run some sort of server for Apache/PHP/MySQL and also for Asterisk/FreePBX stuff and also for protection while you are on the Internets ;-p , but to be honest Linux isn't really a good desktop, tablet, or smartphone OS.

 

My final words to Linux programmers is "Stop living in the 1990's and Start evolving towards modern computing."

 

If FOSS is going to be a thing, then evolve the concept of the code and UI and stop trying to re-invent the wheel every time

and do what you do best and not try to make a millionth distro because you learned how to compile code.

[Tuishimi]

People get so defensive about what operating system they use/prefer. 

[Mindovermaster Moderator]

Yogurt, all that you are talking about costs money, close to $1Million. Money is something they do not have in surplus, unlike MS or OSX. They just don't have the time, commitment, money nor the care.

 

If you think it smells like dog crap, go ahead, use Windows. We'll keep using Linux, because that is what we know and love.

[Yogurtmaster]

People get so defensive about what operating system they use/prefer. 

 

I don't really care about that.   I just have some reservations about this magic freedom that FOSS is all about.

 

There are a lot of assumptions made...

 

1) That you can even can or want to compile code

2) That you can add anything of value to the code

3) The code that you can add might have been done by someone else and you just re-invented the wheel

4) Without some checks and balances like code reviews things can break or be unsecure

5) A lot of people working on FOSS projects don't work together and form a goal, that is why there are so many distros and forks

6) A lot of people working on FOSS projects quit for one reason or the other, less time or arguments or whatever.

7) Paying people can a lot of times (not all of the times) with standards output better code (this may not be consistent, true, but it's more often true than not true).

 

   I used to love FOSS more than I do now.   However, working in an environment with standard coding tools and standard techniques I can now see that it's not the dream that a lot of people think it is.

I am not trying to be a Debbie downer here.  Trying to take unrealistic expectations and tame them. 

 

  I once wanted to buy a BBS (Bulletin Board System) for Atari computer (130XE) called Carina II.  This was in the old days before the Internet.  My plan was to use FOSS and give it away to make better stuff.

Of course someone out bid me and you can download it free today if you search the Internet.   However, I have changed a lot.

 

  So, to kind of make this short and sweet.  I still like FOSS and I think it can do some good things, but some people treat FOSS unrealistically.  Just because you have the freedom to use code, doesn't mean it's going to turn out the way that you think it will.

[Yogurtmaster]

Yogurt, all that you are talking about costs money, close to $1Million. Money is something they do not have in surplus, unlike MS or OSX. They just don't have the time, commitment, money nor the care.

 

If you think it smells like dog crap, go ahead, use Windows. We'll keep using Linux, because that is what we know and love.

 

  That is my point.  In a lot of cases (not all), you can make a better product with money.  Not only are you helping people feed themselves and their families, you are also building something that can be higher quality.  If you get someone that knows how to build the correct environment and testing environment and having "code reviews" for security.  Having resources + Proper coding procedures + Money = Win for everyone.

 

  Remember, that FOSS says that your code can be more secure because there are more eyes looking at the code, but unfortunately that is a myth.  The reason is that many people can look through code and not know either what they are looking for or they can miss something like you did.  They can find some things if it's obvious, but code a lot of times isn't easy to follow in the first place.