Why Linux ?

2,006 · October 13, 2003

im not gonna go so far as to say linux sucks, but i wouldn't use it.

i used mandrake 8. sure it was nice to get away from windows, but all the ui's suck, most of the programs are not worth the time it takes to download, etc etc.

October 13, 2003

what I don't understand is why so many people say Slackware is not user friendly and is hard to set up....it was BY FAR the easiest one to install, while retaining full customizability. It detected all my hardware (even PCI wireless card) properly. I really don't see why people say it's so hard. It was really the easiest. When I was testing it out, and re-installing it often, it would take about 20 minutes to install it and customize it the way I wanted, this is a very insignificant amount of time, and the interface was ubber easy.

It's more difficult to get setup and customized than it is with Red Hat or Mandrake. Many newcomers don't know how to manually config X, create/edit startup files, compile/patch kernels, setup partitions, and such without gui tools.

12,816 · October 13, 2003

It's more difficult to get setup and customized than it is with Red Hat or Mandrake. Many newcomers don't know how to manually config X, create/edit startup files, compile/patch kernels, setup partitions, and such without gui tools.

In the latest realease you don't even really have to configure X...you can have the startup files automatically created for you (havn't had it go wrong yet), I do agree about the kernel tho, that is the trickies bit about linux, but IMHO RedHat is the ultimate evil when doing it, partitions, well, if you've ever used dos fdisk then you should be able to figure it out

13,447 · October 14, 2003

why linux? because you can spend like 4 times the time to setup your desktop

and btw, im using windows since version 3.11 and never had a single virus

I love the stability of xp pro, period

October 14, 2003

why linux? because you can spend like 4 times the time to setup your desktop

and the wait is worth the reward.

-0

12,816 · October 14, 2003

why linux? because you can spend like 4 times the time to setup your desktop
and btw, im using windows since version 3.11 and never had a single virus

I love the stability of xp pro, period

wow great arguments :rolleyes:

xp pro is stable huh? well, it is more stable than 95-ME, but that's about it. 3.11 was more stable IMHO than any other version of windows. I know oyu cna add the fact that directx, and many other features were added, but seriously, linux has about as much added to it as xp does, and it's far more stable.

4times the amount of time? ya, it CAN, depending on what distro you use, hell, gentoo can take 20 times the amount of time, BUT you will have a faster running, highly stable system custom tuned to be exactly what you want it to be. If you take into account all the time oyu would take "tweaking" windows and deleting all the stuff you don't need for it, then it would take far longer than just installing it with exactly what you want and need in the first place.

1,803 · October 14, 2003

Linux sux do not use it :rolleyes:

Just about the stupidest comment in this entire thread. Could you please provide a reason as to why you have such a blatantly retarded opinion?

October 14, 2003

First, you can successfully get a Linux virus even without being the root, just there are not so many people bothering to write viruses for Linux (It is so boring to write viruses when you don't have to use try-and-attempt technique and can find holes by just looking at the source). Most desktops are Windows so that is the reason why most virus programmers use Windows and most viruses use Windows. However you can see that most Linux distros get 0.5-2 erratas a day while the last Windows critical update was released week ago (at least for Windows 98SE).

And about stability: My Windows 98SE is quite stable - much more stable than Mandrake or Peanut Linux I tryed. RedHat is almost as stable as my Windows. Of course my Windows stability has benefited from me only using legal software (when I tried illegal (years ago - when I did not yet know that it was illegal to share programs and most games were on floppys), I had many more stability problems, so I quit - I suggest you do the same). My computer only crashes when I write some really stupid program (which is not frequent! meaning it is very rare) and run it without debugger.

And those horrible Linux error messages: Segmentation fault (frequent), kernel panicing (less frequent), something called SIGEGV and crashed (even less frequent); are really hard to understand (compare: access violation(frequent), programm A caused an error in module B(less frequent), stack overflow(only with some older games)).

And it is really difficult to get support - I have run into many problems with RedHat, that are common with any architecture and Linux OS, that have not been solved (I googled and dogpiled these).

If you REALLY want to learn Linux or spend more time configuring your desktop, then Linux is for you, otherways I suggest sticking with Windows. Don't know about XPs stability though (I've seen many problems with it - they are trying to make Windows more Linux-like).

October 14, 2003

siim04 is right. I'm going to switch back to Windows.

Can any one lend me 150 pound please?

12,816 · October 14, 2003

siim04, for one I DO NOT use pirated software, 2, I haven't had ANY of those errors you are talking about since the days of Red Hat 5! 3, it's a GOOD thing that Linux gets those reported erratas, it means people aren't sleeping and they will get fixed. Microsoft really DOESN'T CARE if your computer dies, they will ALWAYS blame it on the user.

October 14, 2003

Cons IMO of linux over windows as a desktop:

- Slower, more clogged up (by default) GUI's.

- No native game/win32 support, instead requiring WineX/other which can be glitchy/lower the performance majorly.

- Nice collection of open source apps, but most do not live up to their windows clones. Eg. You may find a program that does what you want for whatever, but itll be missing one or more of the nice features the windows clone has.

- Hardware support. Yes most hardware can run/be used on linux. But its normally nowhere near optimised/lacking alot of the features Windows gives.

- Security. Yes, I know this is what most people class as a Windows problem. But really, Linux has more exploits/vulnerabilitys found than Windows does. Windows is just more at threat/more of a fuss is made about it because its widely used.

- Everything working in together. While Linux has this to some extent, Windows is alot better at it. Its hard to explain. Just the way applications/the OS works in with each other.

It tends to feel like you're running everything seperate. That probably doesn't make sense.

Of course it isnt as bad these days with all the package managers/gentoo emerge etc. but the compiling still takes alot of time.

- Stability. Now im not going to say its "less stable than Windows XP/above". But its stability is overrated. Windows PROGRAMS may crash a fair bit. But actual OS crashes barely happen these days (forget Win9x). And you cant tell me Linux programs never crash.

- Setup and configuration. Now installing Linux may be alot faster than Windows to begin with, but to get it working just how you want it it can take forever. While Windows only takes a few hours. I wont get into that much.. but anyone whos tried it will know what I mean.

- Ease of use. Don't even need to give a reasoning for that statement.

- Virii. Thought id add this to reply to some others. AFAIK Linux would be fairly virus susceptible, but as the Windows user base is much higher and less 'professional', virus writers tend to target Windows systems. By professional I'm trying to say alot of Windows users barely know what they're doing and the warning signs. While Linux users tend to be people who know computing/warning signs well.

Windows does have good virus protection programs available though. And from what I hear longhorn will have some built in.

Thats all I can think of for now. Alot of it may be invalid, as I havn't used Linux as a desktop OS for a few years. Sorry to the pro-linux as a desktop people if any of that's wrong.

EDIT: Added virii.

EDIT: sim04 already said the virii thing. Oh well. Ignore the parts other people have brought up.. didn't read the thread before posting :blush:

Edited October 14, 2003 by DaNIsH

October 14, 2003

DaNIsH could not be more wrong.

The plural of virus is neither viri nor virii, nor even vira nor virora. It is quite simply viruses, irrespective of context. Here's why.

Linux gives people more choicii. For DaNIii it is not thier first choice.

October 14, 2003

DaNIsH could not be more wrong.
The plural of virus is neither viri nor virii, nor even vira nor virora. It is quite simply viruses, irrespective of context. Here's why.

Linux gives people more choicii. For DaNIii it is not thier first choice.

I expected a flame reply. But not for that :blink:

I thought id try to look more respectable by using what I thought was the proper word. :blush:

Sorry for destroying your night/day by naming something incorrectly.

But back on topic. How about actually replying to my points and giving reasoning why I "could not be more wrong".

Choice doesn't make up for the bad points.

3,070 · October 14, 2003

siim04, your post doesn't seem to have much ground to it at all.

First of all, I've never had a kernel panic or any form of crash in Linux since I started using it a month ago. I had some initial difficulties getting my winmodem to work but I know have my Conexant winmodem running smoothly. Everything else has been a breeze, primarily because of the incredible level of support from Linux users and from official support. Perhaps you were getting your support from the wrong place?

I also fail to see how you could say that Microsoft is trying to make Windows XP more Linux-like. How on earth are they? In terms of the GUI, they are definitely taking some ideas from Mac OSX (poorly, I might add), but I cannot think of anything which at all resembles something that may be inspired by Linux.

Windows 98SE was a fine OS of it's time but I have found that it still suffers from most of the problems that plague 9x OS', that being instability. 98SE crashes the least of the 9x line, but is still using an archaic kernel, and therefore will never surpass Windows 2000/XP, in my opinion. XP is reasonably stable on my machine, with a few issues here and there.

And by the way, I'm not sure what games you play but I haven't played a game from a floppy in over 6 years. I've certainly never seen a piece of retail software (application or game) for 98SE that came in diskettes.

Lastly, I don't understand how pirated software would cause general stability problems (especially if it's software so primitive that it comes on a floppy). Having improper functionality within a pirated piece of software is normal and understandable, but the pirated piece of software causing an entire system to become unstable? By the way, I'm in no way supporting piracy, I'm just making a comment.

Don't interpret this post as flame towards you, as that's certainly not my intent.

6,532 · October 14, 2003

i agree with Danish, and as for patch-rustem, your just a dumbass

13,447 · October 14, 2003

why linux? because you can spend like 4 times the time to setup your desktop
and btw, im using windows since version 3.11 and never had a single virus

I love the stability of xp pro, period

wow great arguments :rolleyes:

xp pro is stable huh? well, it is more stable than 95-ME, but that's about it. 3.11 was more stable IMHO than any other version of windows. I know oyu cna add the fact that directx, and many other features were added, but seriously, linux has about as much added to it as xp does, and it's far more stable.

4times the amount of time? ya, it CAN, depending on what distro you use, hell, gentoo can take 20 times the amount of time, BUT you will have a faster running, highly stable system custom tuned to be exactly what you want it to be. If you take into account all the time oyu would take "tweaking" windows and deleting all the stuff you don't need for it, then it would take far longer than just installing it with exactly what you want and need in the first place.

xp takes around 10 mins to setup here on my dual cpu

I install only what I need/want

I can run the app I WANT, matlab, maple 6, all chemical eng. apps.

linux? nah

and oh, XP has NEVER crashed on me, neither blue screen that I have never seen here

if ppl like to f**k with linux, then its their time and what they want to. I'll stick with XP which is ALL I need.

October 14, 2003

Since you instist

- Slower, more clogged up (by default) GUI's.

Then use a light weight GUI. I like Enlightement

- No native game/win32 support, instead requiring WineX/other which can be glitchy/lower the performance majorly.

There are native games lookhere on linuxgames.com

- Nice collection of open source apps, but most do not live up to their windows clones.

What apps do you want? We'll can discuss each one.

- Hardware support. Yes most hardware can run/be used on linux. But its normally nowhere near optimised/lacking alot of the features Windows gives.

My DVB Nova-T card sucked under Windows. I wanted BBC3 but all I got was a tiny window of nowt. Under Linux it's now my main TV and the drivers are included in the 2.6 kernel. You should always check that drivers are avaliable before you invest in new hardware.

- Security. Yes, I know this is what most people class as a Windows problem. But really, Linux has more exploits/vulnerabilitys found than Windows does. Windows is just more at threat/more of a fuss is made about it because its widely used.

The Microsoft monoploy monoculture is in itself the biggest problem. Would you leave your favourite dick in the same bucket as a million fools?

It's your choice.

October 14, 2003

i agree with Danish, and as for patch-rustem, your just a dumbass

Your is the possessive pronoun.

You?re is a contraction of you are.

October 14, 2003

Man, leave your windows!!! :happy:

October 14, 2003

Since you instist
Then use a light weight GUI. I like Enlightement

There are native games lookhere on linuxgames.com

What apps do you want? We'll can discuss each one.

My DVB Nova-T card sucked under Windows. I wanted BBC3 but all I got was a tiny window of nowt. Under Linux it's now my main TV and the drivers are included in the 2.6 kernel. You should always check that drivers are avaliable before you invest in new hardware.

The Microsoft monoploy monoculture is in itself the biggest problem. Would you leave your favourite dick in the same bucket as a million fools?

It's your choice.

1. Still doesn't run as fast and as smoothly as Windows.

2. Yes, I realise that (forgot to bring it up), but only some games are ported. More these days.. but people still need to run WineX/whatever alot of the time to play the games they WANT to play.

3. Too much trouble. But i'm sticking to what I said, and i'm sure would still prove to be true.

4. One piece of hardware doesn't make up for the others. I didn't mean every single piece of hardware lacks the support/features windows gives.. but alot.

5. If you know what you're doing it doesn't effect you in the slightest.

I was just pointing out the "security issues" normally arn't an issue for people who know what they're doing and keep up to date. And saying that Linux has alot, if not more of its own exploits/bugs.. they just arn't as covered as Windows because of the user base.

October 14, 2003

Your is the possessive pronoun.
You?re is a contraction of you are.

Are spelling/grammar errors the only thing you comment on?

3,663 · October 14, 2003

I can run the app I WANT, matlab, maple 6, all chemical eng. apps.
linux? nah

Actually, I've had Matlab running fine on my Linux box... and I have Maple 6 running fine on here now. I can't imagine there are too many chemical engineering apps which won't run on linux...

3,070 · October 14, 2003

3. Too much trouble. But i'm sticking to what I said, and i'm sure would still prove to be true.

You are sure this would prove to be true, even though you can't go to the trouble and say why you think Linux open-source range to be inferior? You're walking on shaky ground argumentatively.. :no:

True, there's a smaller retail range for Linux, but I certaintly don't feel this means an inferior range overall. Of course it's a matter of opinion (not fact), but I prefer the range Linux offers.

1,803 · October 14, 2003

Your is the possessive pronoun.
You?re is a contraction of you are.

Are spelling/grammar errors the only thing you comment on?

He is just pointing out the irony of someone who doesn't know their pronouns calling him a dumbass. I saw pwned! ;)

October 14, 2003

why linux?

well its nice apart from the following. Installation of drivers is a COMPLETE PAIN IN THE ARSE.

Esspecially nforce sound + spdif

Sign In

Why Linux ?

Recommended Posts

isus

Link to comment

Share on other sites

snocked

Link to comment

Share on other sites

MR_Candyman

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pink Floyd Veteran

Link to comment

Share on other sites

negative_zero

Link to comment

Share on other sites

MR_Candyman

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Iguana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

siim04

Link to comment

Share on other sites

patch-rustem

Link to comment

Share on other sites

MR_Candyman

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DaNIsH

Link to comment

Share on other sites

patch-rustem

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DaNIsH

Link to comment

Share on other sites

BananaMan

Link to comment

Share on other sites

AcdShdw

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Pink Floyd Veteran

Link to comment

Share on other sites

patch-rustem

Link to comment

Share on other sites

patch-rustem

Link to comment

Share on other sites

abaxion

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DaNIsH

Link to comment

Share on other sites

DaNIsH

Link to comment

Share on other sites

rezza Veteran

Link to comment

Share on other sites

BananaMan

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Iguana

Link to comment

Share on other sites

StuRReaL

Link to comment

Share on other sites

Recently Browsing 0 members