2 Years With Linux


Recommended Posts

T3X4S

Cost can be the impetus initially. Both of upgrading of hardware and the cost of a Windows licence. It certainly was for me. However, once people see how flexible, powerful, and trouble free it is, they appreciate it more than costly, limited, and bloated proprietary OS' like Windows. Just look at the installation footprint on Windows 7/8. 20GB just for the OS. That's ridiculous.

 

It's not just disk performance though. And even it were, Linux is still faster. My Arch Linux Systemd/XFCE box takes 4 seconds from grub to fully loaded and working desktop. Windows 8 can't even touch that. 13 seconds before it gets to the desktop, but it's still not fully loaded at that point.

CPU and memory is where Windows is truly bloated though. Especially when you factor in security software like antiviruses, firewalls, etc.

 

There is no debate. There isn't even a competition. Anybody who has seriously used GNU/Linux will tell you that.

Uhhh....  maybe 13 seconds on your "mid range" computer -- but on my Carbon X1, and T430 - it takes longer for me to type in my 4 digit PIN  - I'd say 4-5 seconds from POST, I think others can attest to that as well.   13 seconds ?  c'mon man.  Enough with the untrue comparisons

 

Link to post
Share on other sites
ichi

Nutter, Im glad you posted this.  In every Windows v Linux thread (and Windows v OSX) the Linux people will say "I dont know what you're talking about - I never have problems..."  

 

Indeed, anecdotal experience is anecdotal. Same also works for the "I dont' know what you're talking about - I run Windows without antivirus and never had a virus".

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
gohpep

good that someone brings up filesystems. i recently read that opensuse will have btrfs as it's default file system replacing ext4. anyone using btrfs and is it worth a switch? i read about a bit online and it seems to have more options while performing slightly worse. never had any issue with ext4 myself but still ....

I use btrfs on Fedora 21. I like it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
T3X4S
....

 

Linux is ready. It just needs more public support.

 

HUH ?!?  :huh:   For who ?  the public ?  Maybe in 10 years.  You need to consider that 50% of the public dont know the difference between Windows and Office.  Can't tell you how much drive space they have left, dont know how to download and run an .exe and click and pay for the fake AV on the web...  No its not ready ... not for the public--they need to be spoonfed    Go to ANY linux support forum and look @ the answers to any given question....its a CLI answer - you think the public is ready for that ?  c'mon mastercoms, you normally have some good posts, but you're just being biased now

Link to post
Share on other sites
Haggis

I have removed al the rubbish from the thread

 

Let keep it civil and not resort to a my OS is better than your OS ok?

Link to post
Share on other sites
simplezz

Uhhh....  maybe 13 seconds on your "mid range" computer

Core i5 3570K @3.4ghz (3.8 with performance p_state), 8GB GSkill 1600mhz ram, R9 270X GPU, 128 GB Vertex 4 SSD. Admittedly not the best machine, but I wouldn't call it midrange.

-- but on my Carbon X1, and T430 - it takes longer for me to type in my 4 digit PIN  - I'd say 4-5 seconds from POST

That's called a cached kernel, not a full boot. Try cold booting it from grub or after a kernel update.

I think others can attest to that as well.   13 seconds ?  c'mon man.  Enough with the untrue comparisons

It is a true comparison. I have even disabled most of the non-essential Windows services, prefetch, indexing, startup programs, enabled noatime equivilent, etc. It's still significantly slower getting to a working desktop from a full boot.
Link to post
Share on other sites
adrynalyne

Core i5 3570K @3.4ghz (3.8 with performance p_state), 8GB GSkill 1600mhz ram, R9 270X GPU, 128 GB Vertex 4 SSD. Admittedly not the best machine, but I wouldn't call it midrange.

That's called a cached kernel, not a full boot. Try cold booting it from grub or after a kernel update.

It is a true comparison. I have even disabled most of the non-essential Windows services, prefetch, indexing, startup programs, enabled noatime equivilent, etc. It's still significantly slower getting to a working desktop from a full boot.

Thats only true on Windows 8 or higher and it only makes a couple seconds difference.

 

It is silly to compare a fullblown OS to a minimal distro anyway.

 

If you go minimal enough with any OS, its going to boot faster.  

 

 

That is nice, but considering my work doesn't get done measuring boot time, its a non-issue. Solution?  Don't reboot.

 

Its like most benchmarks.  Amusing, but mostly irrelevant in real world settings.

 

When I can make money with booting my computer constantly, I will go your route.

  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
KeeperOfThePizza

Depends all on what kind of user you are. Sounds like Linux just works for you. I dont mind Linux either. I used it for quite a while.

Link to post
Share on other sites
gohpep

HUH ?!?  huh.png   For who ?  the public ?  Maybe in 10 years.  You need to consider that 50% of the public dont know the difference between Windows and Office.  Can't tell you how much drive space they have left, dont know how to download and run an .exe and click and pay for the fake AV on the web...  No its not ready ... not for the public--they need to be spoonfed    Go to ANY linux support forum and look @ the answers to any given question....its a CLI answer - you think the public is ready for that ?  c'mon mastercoms, you normally have some good posts, but you're just being biased now

Ok, yeah, I guess I wasn't considering those people. Most things in GNU/Linux can be done in a GUI, enough for moderately advanced users. Support forums are outdated, and I do agree GNU/Linux needs better documentation on the GUI.

I really just meant that things can be done in a GUI contrary to the Linux stereotype that everything is a CLI. Those who can learn an alternative GUI to Windows will be able to use Linux. I do agree with you that people who are a bit less experienced will have trouble adapting to the new UI.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
SpeedyTheSnail

Just tossing this out there, and don't quote me as I don't use Netflix anymore, but could have swore I read somewhere that they're switching from Silverlight to HTML5.

They have yet to do so, but I very much do look forward to it, as Netflix is the first biggest reason for me :P. Nevermind my xBox or however you are supposed to capitalize it.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Unobscured Vision

I agree with Haggis on this, folks. Let's keep things diplomatic. We're all Techies, we all love our devices of choice, we love our operating systems of choice.

 

I think we can all agree that no single operating system is perfect. There have been instances recently when GNU/Linux has failed to live up to my needs.

 

Let me repeat that. FAILED MISERABLY AND UTTERLY when it was required to function offline. And this was two different iterations of Ubuntu 14.04 (Ubuntu proper and Xubuntu, in this case) and Linux Mint 17. All three installations were provided all of the packages that were required (3gb+ worth), including apt-offline (and all needed dependencies) and all updates ahead of time, and I am well-versed in how to apply updates in offline mode as well as the usage of apt-offline, Synaptic, Aptitude, Gdebi, etc. And they all FAILED to cooperate. Identical installations successfully completed the update/installion processes IF and ONLY if networking was enabled. Those installs never needed to actually download anything. It was a personal test of apt-offline.

 

There are also cases when Windows has failed me too. Malware, etc. We've all been there. Good security practices and good computing habits can eliminate 97% of what ails Windows. A good Script Blocker and Ad Blocking with top-level websites whitelisted (like Neowin, for example) so that your favorite websites can still generate revenue.. A good AntiVirus and AntiMalware Suite will keep your computer clean for the most part. Windows Updates are automatic, don't shut them off, etc. Don't visit Porn sites, because NONE of them are safe, yada yada. Healthy computing practices will keep Windows happy.

 

In my humble opinion, the argument that "Windows is for those who don't know any better" (and yes, I've heard that one a lot) is invalid. I use Windows because I choose to. Just as I use GNU/Linux because I choose to. Same goes for everyone else. Use what you choose to use. One is not better than the other. It's whatever works best for your needs. Use both, if you so desire.

 

Thank you. :)

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
simplezz

I do agree with you that people who are a bit less experienced will have trouble adapting to the new UI.

Not half as much trouble as adapting to Windows 8's tiled Metro UI. Compared to that, Linux's desktop is much more familiar.
  • Like 2
Link to post
Share on other sites
adrynalyne

Not half as much trouble as adapting to Windows 8's tiled Metro UI. Compared to that, Linux's desktop is much more familiar.

Not necessarily, unless KDE.

Link to post
Share on other sites
Max Norris

Not half as much trouble as adapting to Windows 8's tiled Metro UI. Compared to that, Linux's desktop is much more familiar.

Opinion of course, but depends on the desktop -- with 8 it literally takes a couple of seconds to get back to a familiar setup, never mind the next version making it a bit more traditional again without taking 10 steps backwards, and still keeping the functionality for the devices it was actually suited for to begin with. Some Linux desktops are just as bad, if not worse.. Gnome is no better suited for a desktop, and Unity just made so many bad design choices that actually makes it less productive. Changeable somewhat sure, but then you're in the same boat as 8.x. And that's assuming people know each and every Linux desktop to begin with, most first timers wouldn't have a clue.

Not necessarily, unless KDE.

Ditto that, probably the only one that would actually feel somewhat familiar, maybe Cinnamon, but again we're talking people who are having trouble navigating a big giant button, probably would never even have heard of it either.
Link to post
Share on other sites
simplezz

Don't visit Porn sites, because NONE of them are safe, yada yada.

Dude, we need our pr0n :shiftyninja:

 

In all seriousness, the answer is not to stop visiting websites. If one can't browse the web on a Windows machine without getting infected with malware (often the case with IE), then it's time to ditch that OS. Let alone doing banking and other sensitive work. At a minimum, run a Linux VM and do your browsing there. Ideally though, replacing it with a proper GNU/Linux installation is the long term solution. 

 

No matter how much care and attention we give to security, on Windows, you're eventually going to run into some kind of malware, whether it's a virus, botnet, rootkit, scareware, or a keylogger. No antivirus covers all the bases. With all the zero day attacks hitting Windows and IE, I always advise my friends and family to exclusively use a Linux distro, along with ABP.

 

In my humble opinion, the argument that "Windows is for those who don't know any better" (and yes, I've heard that one a lot) is invalid.

I view Windows as an extension of the argument: "The only people that use IE are those that don't know what a webbrowser is". Once someone knows how much better and critically, how much 'safer', Firefox and Chrome are, then they never ever go back to IE. That's why IE's market share is on a permanent downward trajectory. As more people become computer literate, the less "I don't know what a browser is so I'll take what Microsoft spoon feeds me" there are. Thus it follows that the technically literate are the most attracted to GNU/Linux. They know what an OS is and what alternatives are available. Once someone seriously tries Linux, they start to see how limited, lifeless, and insecure the Windows environment is.

 

I use Windows because I choose to. Just as I use GNU/Linux because I choose to. Same goes for everyone else. Use what you choose to use. One is not better than the other. It's whatever works best for your needs. Use both, if you so desire.

I agree. We all have our opinions on the matter, but in the end it comes down to user choice. I just wish that choice was reflected more at the OEM and computer store level rather than the monotone, sea of Windows only devices we see in the desktop market. Android and Chromebooks are helping, but I'd still like to see an option to have an GNU/Linux OS installed on the same hardware along with a discount for not taking the Windows licence option. Competition is good after all.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Krome

Just dont give it more than 20GB of your SSD - otherwise its a waste of a good SSD.

I ran mint on an SSD, but it was fast on a traditional HDD...then again - everything is fast if you have a nice, clean system.

Thanks for the tip... That is an assurance that Linux don't require much but I kinda have my mind set that I will need at the very least 128GB to install other apps.  But I hear believe ya...

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Max Norris

No matter how much care and attention we give to security, on Windows, you're eventually going to run into some kind of malware, whether it's a virus, botnet, rootkit, scareware, or a keylogger.

FUD, plain and simple. If that were really true then everybody would have malware, and that's certainly not the case. And sorry, but that sort of stuff is totally feasible on Linux too... it's already happened, the only reason why it's not a big deal on the Linux desktop is because the guys who write this crap is after money, and targeting the 1% isn't it. Botnets? Rootkits? Linux has had them in recent history. OSX has had instances in the past, they've got more users. Android's gotten it quite a bit, they've got a lot of users, and it runs Linux. Security through obscurity is nothing more than a fuzzy blanket.

Thus it follows that the technically literate are the most attracted to GNU/Linux. They know what an OS is and what alternatives are available. Once someone seriously tries Linux, they start to see how limited, lifeless, and insecure the Windows environment is.

"Only smart people use Linux?" Sorry, but been using both operating systems since day one of their initial releases. Some of us don't keep blinders on and picks what works best for their needs, and technically literate people can really see how unlimited and secure the Windows environment really is if they bother to actually look or make the effort.

I don't care for these insipid this-vs-that arguments myself and usually try to stay out of them, but when misinformation keeps getting tossed around as fact, well then it's time to chime in. There is no one OS for everybody.. you constantly go on about choice but you try your damnedest to make sure there is no choice.. it's Linux or nothing.

  • Like 3
Link to post
Share on other sites
Haggis

Agree with Max here

 

I have will have been using Linux for 3 years 100% in March 2015

 

Before that i used windows 99% of the time

 

I cant remember the last time i had a virus/malware on Windows it was so many mnay years ago, 

 

I also just cold booted my laptop, (so cold that its around 5 degree C in here just now lol) it went from nothing to Linux Mint desktop in around 8/9 seconds

 

 

Once again i will say keep the thread Civil and dont resort to name calling and OS wars or the thread will be cleaned and i will hand out warnings.

Link to post
Share on other sites
simonlang

There are also cases when Windows has failed me too. Malware, etc. We've all been there. Good security practices and good computing habits can eliminate 97% of what ails Windows. A good Script Blocker and Ad Blocking with top-level websites whitelisted (like Neowin, for example) so that your favorite websites can still generate revenue.. A good AntiVirus and AntiMalware Suite will keep your computer clean for the most part. Windows Updates are automatic, don't shut them off, etc. Don't visit Porn sites, because NONE of them are safe, yada yada. Healthy computing practices will keep Windows happy.

In my humble opinion, the argument that "Windows is for those who don't know any better" (and yes, I've heard that one a lot) is invalid. I use Windows because I choose to. Just as I use GNU/Linux because I choose to. Same goes for everyone else. Use what you choose to use. One is not better than the other. It's whatever works best for your needs. Use both, if you so desire.

Thank you. :)

i think it's true, the more advanced the user is, the less likely he will catch malware and viruses. i think there are a few people on neowin who knows that if you have downloaded or get mailed an .exe file of unknown or dubious source, you better avoid opening it.

but many don't and nearly every day i read threads in the windows section proving me so.

my view is: an OS should be designed secure per default, and while the nsa affair has shown that only a completely offline (internet and power) system is 100% save, still it's a fact that the security architecture of linux and also unix based mac os x win over windows here. many say it's because they both together are on only about 7 or 8% of desktops worldwide, but i think that's only a part of the deal. nearly any server runs linux and most smartphones run android which is linux based as well. not much problems there.

i have worked for years selling pcs, hardware and also half a year selling mac and apple stuff only. with the few exceptions when users need a specialy configurated and designed system for their jobs, many just want a webbrowser, maybe a nice screen resolution, doing some office stuff, that's it.

i say: give them an ubunut installation with the office and firefox icon on the desktop and they would not care if this is linux or windows. but with one advantage: on linux, even after years, they won't have their firefox toolbar filled up with these ad-sponsored search and toolbars because the software they install via the central app store is free of such "addons".

they won't catch a virus or cry for help because the free anti virus you have installed has an invalid license after a year, etc. etc.

sadly this advantage is rarely seen or felt because most notebooks and pcs come with a windows installed.

Not half as much trouble as adapting to Windows 8's tiled Metro UI. Compared to that, Linux's desktop is much more familiar.

they are also far more innovative imho. no fan of unity myself, but i often give it a try and seen it has improved and i see where it could head it has a lot of potential same with gnome 3, i think on a very fast pc with ssd that search functions really flow and lead to impressive speed.

also impressed with cinnamon and mate, xfce and i ran lxde on lubuntu quite some time. personally i like kde the most, given a solid hardware it really works nice and the options to configure it are endless.

most impressive thing: so many good desktop interfaces given they are all free. before i started with linux i did not really know what a desktop interface was. well ofc. i knew that it meant per definition but now thanks to trying out different ones i know what it does and what it changes and so on.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Aergan

my view is: an OS should be designed secure per default, and while the nsa affair has shown that only a completely offline (internet and power) system is 100% save, still it's a fact that the security architecture of linux and also unix based mac os x win over windows here.

 

 

Unfortunately, the OpenSSL ("Heartbleed") and more specifically BASH ("Shell-shock)" vulnerabilities have nullified claims that *NIX is a completely secure platform at the moment. Very much a "don't throw stones in glass houses" situation at this time.

 

The shell-shock one has had us patching and testing servers & Linux thinclients vigorously.

Link to post
Share on other sites
simonlang

Unfortunately, the OpenSSL ("Heartbleed") and more specifically BASH ("Shell-shock)" vulnerabilities have nullified claims that *NIX is a completely secure platform at the moment. Very much a "don't throw stones in glass houses" situation at this time.

 

The shell-shock one has had us patching and testing servers & Linux thinclients vigorously.

 

it has also proven that the linux community has an awesome pace in fixing bugs. the patch for the systems was out there the same or next day afair while in the lastest hack from russian hackers to NATO windows systems (read here) it was again waiting for super patch tuesday to get anything done.

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
Aergan

it has also proven that the linux community has an awesome pace in fixing bugs. the patch for the systems was out there the same or next day afair while in the lastest hack from russian hackers to NATO windows systems (read here) it was again waiting for super patch tuesday to get anything done.

 

The BASH one has existed since September 1989. That's pretty damning.

 

It's also very easy to exploit if you have any form of local network access (As we've found).

Link to post
Share on other sites
HawkMan

it has also proven that the linux community has an awesome pace in fixing bugs. the patch for the systems was out there the same or next day afair while in the lastest hack from russian hackers to NATO windows systems (read here) it was again waiting for super patch tuesday to get anything done.

 

More BS again. you do know that in the list of discovery to patch readyness, windows is above linux in speed ? 

 

and more so if a flaw is discovered that can cause serious harm and is know to be in the wild and exploited or can easily be exploited and thus affect a lot of users, MS will patch out of cycle, they have done it in the past with certain flaws and will probably do it again. and important client (and some priates who requests it through their support system) will get patches earlier than the cycle as well. 

 

 

so stop spreading BS FUD, you've been caught doing it repeatedly. it's not helping you. 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
+xrobwx71

also never understood the hate for the Konsole or terminal. i never could work faster or more productive, especially ubuntu has a BIG wiki

 

 

 

Not that I disagree with everything you said but tell the above to my 65 year old parents.

 

  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
simplezz

Unfortunately, the OpenSSL ("Heartbleed") and more specifically BASH ("Shell-shock)" vulnerabilities have nullified claims that *NIX is a completely secure platform at the moment. Very much a "don't throw stones in glass houses" situation at this time.

Every system has vulnerabilities, the question is how many real world zero day exploits are attacking them. There hasn't been a single reported compromised system due to those vulnerabilities you mentioned. That includes routers, servers, desktops, and many other devices. For the Bash vulnerability to be exploited for instance, a command needs to be executed though it. That's not a reliable method on every system.

The shell-shock one has had us patching and testing servers & Linux thinclients vigorously.

I would hope so. It's unlikely to ever be successfully exploited though. It needs very specific software to be installed that has an open internet facing service that most people don't even have. Webservers are certainly the most at risk, but that's always been the case because of the all the internet facing services they provide. Desktops on the other hand are unlikely to be at risk.

The good thing about GNU/Linux of course is that package managers update all software on a system. That means unlike Windows, there won't be out-of-date and vulnerable software left to rot.

Not that I disagree with everything you said but tell the above to my 65 year old parents.

If you're that age, I doubt productivity is a top priority anyway. However, for most people it is.
  • Like 1
Link to post
Share on other sites
This topic is now closed to further replies.
  • Recently Browsing   0 members

    No registered users viewing this page.