2 Years With Linux

[simplezz]

Doesn't always happen in a dual boot (I do that now just fine), and updates is hardly a daily thing.. a "long" boot is the exception, not the norm. Should be comparing day-to-day usage, not that one time where it'll be slow to prove a point.

It is a day-to-day usage for me. I have dual set ups on some machines, and Windows always does a full boot. So I'm comparing actual system performance, not some hypothetical artificially constructed situation that intentionally degrades boot speeds.

[simplezz]

But android isn't Linux, no one but Linux fans claim it is. At most you'll see the revs refer to it as linux based. It's no more Linux than OSX is Linux/BSD.

Err.. Yes it is Linux. Android employs the Linux kernel, thus it is Linux without question. Now it's not a traditional GNU/Linux distro that much is true. It's more like a distant cousin. Still, it's inarguably of the Linux family. Drivers and patches submitted to the kernel project make their way to Android, thus it's a shared major component of all Linux based OS'.

[Haggis Veteran]

Err.. Yes it is Linux. Android employs the Linux kernel, thus it is Linux without question. Now it's not a traditional GNU/Linux distro that much is true. It's more like a distant cousin. Still, it's inarguably of the Linux family. Drivers and patches submitted to the kernel project make their way to Android, thus it's a shared major component of all Linux based OS'.

 

 

could then say Android is like unix then since the linux kernel was based on the unix kernel

[simplezz]

could then say Android is like unix then since the linux kernel was based on the unix kernel

Well GNU/Linux is like unix as well, but it's not actually unix, and nor is Android. All *nix based OS' share similarities, like POSIX, common software, etc. However, Linux in a free open source independent implementation of the proprietary unix. So no, I wouldn't call it unix, any more than I'd call my Arch distro unix.

In actual fact, GNU/Linux has more in common with unix than Android does because it replicates all the unix shell utilities.

[HawkMan]

Err.. Yes it is Linux. Android employs the Linux kernel, thus it is Linux without question. Now it's not a traditional GNU/Linux distro that much is true. It's more like a distant cousin. Still, it's inarguably of the Linux family. Drivers and patches submitted to the kernel project make their way to Android, thus it's a shared major component of all Linux based OS'.

 

So you're saying OSX and iOS are BSD also then, and windows phone is windows ? since the kernel is all...

 

no? again, it's linux based, it's not linux. 

[Hussam Al-tayeb]

could then say Android is like unix then since the linux kernel was based on the unix kernel

 

That's not correct. The Linux kernel is not based on any unix kernel. It shares no code. The Android kernel however is a based on the Linux kernel.

 

1) Android uses a Linux kernel except for a big part of the code that is not in the mainline Linux kernel (I'm not sure if to add a "yet" here or not). The correct term here would be "Android is a Linux derivative or a fork of Linux".

2) Rooting is simply adding the su binary.

3) The userland in Android is very different than your home Linux distribution. However, reaching that level of changes is not exactly impossible.

4) Android's FSH is designed with factory resets in mind.

[simplezz]

So you're saying OSX and iOS are BSD also then

First of all, Apple's OS' are proprietary, so there is no lineage to speak of. It may share some minor similarities to BSD, Linux, and unix, but it's completely separate at this point.

 

and windows phone is windows ? since the kernel is all...

Windows Phone is definitely part of the Windows family of operating systems, yes. More so now than ever because it supposedly shares the same core (kernel) as desktop Windows. WP's relationship to Windows does have parallels to how Android relates to Linux.

Of course we're talking terms here, and some people may view things differently, but I'm of the opinion that Linux is an umbrella, under which multiple OS', including GNU/Linux distros, operate. It's a family of children, siblings and cousins. And the same concept applies to Windows, Windows Phone, and Xbox one.

To suggest that Android isn't Linux is manifestly untrue. At its core, it's Linux. It might have a different C library (Biotic) then GNU (glibc), a custom compositor, additional API abstractions, but it's still the same at its root. Updates from the mainline get merged with it. To me, it's the same.

 

no? again, it's linux based, it's not linux.

There is no such thing as just Linux. A kernel by itself isn't an operating system. An OS is a collection of programs and services, which includes a kernel at its heart. My Arch distro is Linux based, it's not Linux by itself. Without the userland GNU utilities, it would be quite useless. That's why we make the distinction of calling it GNU/Linux. And why we call Android 'Android'.

[tim_s]

Hi Everyone,

I was Linux only for a long time but I have integrated Windows and OSX back into my life and I will tell you why others should as well.

A lot of reasons existed to why Linux became my main OS and why no matter how the market changes, I will always have a Linux box.

I am the type of person who loves supporting the underdog, I really love a challenge and couple this with the fact I moved out of home and have always been a little cheap - Linux became more important.

I worked for a company who was partnered with Microsoft and no matter how hard they tried, they realized that open source technologies filled an important gap. The company wanted to hire within and a job placement needed to be filled and this is how my life became entirely Linux.

This worked out because I left the company and built one of my countries largest ecommerce platforms, of course all in open source but something changed from when I transitioned from the architect to managing the department. Linux was great for supporting the technical team but became a hindrance when talking with any other department. I fixed this gap mainly with OSX, which was fantastic for a long time until the cost of existing within this ecosystem catches up with you.

I left the company to start my own venture in 3D environments and the cost of using pre-built machines did not make sense in the early days and a lot of the software within Windows was superior and filled the gaps created within the universities teaching VR.

At home I have two desktops dedicated to both Linux (Gentoo) and Windows 7, at work I have a Windows 8 machine virtualizing Linux (Ubuntu), and servers being a combination of RHEL and Centos.

Life changes and we all need to remain flexible and semi well rounded. I love that people are taking Linux full on and I beleive it is knowledge you can make an excellent living on but it is impractical to tackle everything with 1 toolset.

[simonlang]

i am happy i made the switch back in 2009. honestly, at the end, in windows i did no more than still having regulary reinstall the OS, clicking on a few exe or msi files and looking for the latest and best antivirus program. stuff like this might be fascinating and interesting and worth learning at the beginning of your pc career, but it just loses it's fascination over the years.

with linux, and many people will confirm this, there is a deeper learning curve. as my first distro ubuntu was very well suited, yet soon i was deep into the system and loved tweaking compitz options and so on.

over the years i tried many distros, even arch once, and there is no way that i would ever have started simply python programs or sed scripts had i stayed with windows.

i once had an imac for a few months and while it looked awesome and impressive the system, while working fine, felt somehow castrated, especially when i compare it to kde 4.

 

linux gives me the freedom back i was so long looking for in windows. endless tweaking options, full control of the system itself, and i keep learning stuff. feels also good to be on the open source side, no worries with legality and the community is just great, especially ubuntu germany and the kde guys on irc.

[adrynalyne]

No worries with legalities?

What?

[+E.Worm Jimmy Subscriber¹]

No worries with legalities?

What?

he does not pay for software, so open source is better then pirating windows software?    makes sense.

 

 

on topic:   i used linux for 4 years (early 2000), and i loved it.   customized it to hell to make the perfect desktop.

however, i am not likely to come back to it now.  relearning curve, and also i have lot the desire to spend time on customizing the OS.

 

so, android customization is as close to *nix system i am likely to be now.

however i recommend every young tech enthusiast, with time to spare, to use linux for a few years!  very good learning experience.  

[+Frank B. Subscriber²]

No worries with legalities?

What?

What he's implying is: 'I use open source software on Linux instead of warez on Windows.'

[adrynalyne]

What he's implying is: 'I use open source software on Linux instead of warez on Windows.'

Ah.

[tim_s]

Going in the typical direction for this type of conversations. As long as Linux keeps innovating, it will have its fans.

[simplezz]

Linux was great for supporting the technical team but became a hindrance when talking with any other department.

Perhaps you should have moved your entire org over to GNU/Linux. Then there's no proprietary barrier at all.

and a lot of the software within Windows was superior and filled the gaps created within the universities teaching VR.

Meaning you wanted off-the-shelf software. Which is fine, but don't call Windows software "superior" because it clearly isn't. I could write a piece of software matching anything Windows has to offer, and because it's FOSS, you won't be left high and dry when a vendor decides to stop producing it. Nor would you be at the mercy of a single vendor's inflating prices.

There's one big issue you haven't mentioned, and that's security software, which is a requirement in a Windows environment due to the millions of active and spreading viruses, malware, rootkits, keyloggers, and various other threats. Some of which could destroy your business. If you're happy playing that game of russian roulette, go right ahead.

[tim_s]

Hi Simplezz,

 

You are right in a lot of ways but I thought I would take a moment to provide some feedback.

 

I do think you mistaken my "be flexible, use the right tool instead of using 1 tool for all" attitude as anti-open source, which I can assure you is not the case.

 

It is important to note that most operating systems active today have all benefited from each other.

 

Perhaps you should have moved your entire org over to GNU/Linux. Then there's no proprietary barrier at all.

 

Most of the industry standard software brought in from our partners is not ported to Linux.

 

Meaning you wanted off-the-shelf software. Which is fine, but don't call Windows software "superior" because it clearly isn't. I could write a piece of software matching anything Windows has to offer, and because it's FOSS, you won't be left high and dry when a vendor decides to stop producing it. Nor would you be at the mercy of a single vendor's inflating prices.

 

I made a grammatical error, which lead you to miss-understand the comment.  The company in-which the above is quoted to represent, produces VR worlds which then is merged into a larger product.  Right now the closest Linux based project has compatibly issues. 

 

 

There's one big issue you haven't mentioned, and that's security software, which is a requirement in a Windows environment due to the millions of active and spreading viruses, malware, rootkits, keyloggers, and various other threats. Some of which could destroy your business. If you're happy playing that game of russian roulette, go right ahead.

 

I am very "pro" open source and have released many open source projects myself for the 3D community.  The above makes sense and I have a Gentoo laptop sitting right next to me that I love and use daily.

[BobbyJobs]

Installing Windows takes far less than linux just download an upto date ISO for windows and put it on USB stick. Just like you download an upto date linux already :D 

Takes like 10mins or less on a SSD and works with no configuration needed. 

Windows also has more open source stuff than linux does and better paid programs.. As for the price Windows 8 was what ?15 when it came out? You can buy a key for under ?30 and download an iso legally these days. If a student you get free copied of windows also so worth asking a student friend. 

Just don't get why people would gimp themselves and lock themselves out of many many programs and games for something as inferior as linux. If it was truly that good everyone would be using it. But it's not that good at al really. Enthusiast OS or work OS only really. 

[Mindovermaster Moderator]

Installing Windows takes far less than linux just download an upto date ISO for windows and put it on USB stick. Just like you download an upto date linux already :D 

Takes like 10mins or less on a SSD and works with no configuration needed. 

Windows also has more open source stuff than linux does and better paid programs.. As for the price Windows 8 was what ?15 when it came out? You can buy a key for under ?30 and download an iso legally these days. If a student you get free copied of windows also so worth asking a student friend. 

Just don't get why people would gimp themselves and lock themselves out of many many programs and games for something as inferior as linux. If it was truly that good everyone would be using it. But it's not that good at al really. Enthusiast OS or work OS only really. 

 

Just... No... I won't try fighting the points, but no...

[tim_s]

OK, this conversation is not productive lol

[Mindovermaster Moderator]

Was it ever? :P

 

Down and gritty, if you like Linux, use it or don't. Ultimately, it is a choice. It's not in the bible.

 

If you want to fight Windows, keep out of here.

[tim_s]

It's true

[adrynalyne]

Meaning you wanted off-the-shelf software. Which is fine, but don't call Windows software "superior" because it clearly isn't. 

Whether he says it or you disagree, they are "clearly" both opinions.

[simplezz]

Installing Windows takes far less than linux just download an upto date ISO for windows and put it on USB stick. Just like you download an upto date linux already :D

Er.. No.

1) On average, a full GNU/Linux distro image will be 700mb or less, and many are much smaller. A Windows image is orders of magnitude larger ( > 4GB).

2) Creating a bootable usb Windows image is a PITA. You have to download MS' proprietary tool and ensure that the ISO is formatted correctly.

With Linux I can do a simple block copy:

dd if=image.iso of=/dev/sdd bs=1M

Good luck trying to do that with a Windows ISO.

3. Installation time is far longer and more laborious than Linux, requiring multiple reboots, and offering no net boot/install option that negates the need for post installation updates.

4. Post OS installation downloading/installation of essential drivers and programs. Many Linux distros come bundled with essential apps that are conspicuously missing in Windows. All of this results in a lengthy and time consuming installation procedure for Windows.

5. Finding, installing, and updating applications is cumbersome, adhoc, error prone, and slow on Windows. GNU/Linux distros have built in package managers and software repositories that make the aforementioned a breeze.

 

Takes like 10mins or less on a SSD and works with no configuration needed.

Yeah right. I have a vertex 4 SSD and it takes nowhere near 10 minutes. Especially when you factor in updates, and finding and installing essential drivers and missing programs.

 

Windows also has more open source stuff than linux does and better paid programs

:omg:

 

Wow, just wow! An entire GNU/Linux OS is free open source software, as well as the thousands of readily available, precompiled or source based repository apps. Windows doesn't have any open source stuff. It's all proprietary. There are certain open source programs which can be downloaded for it, if you manage to find them and get the right architecture.

As for the price Windows 8 was what ?15 when it came out? You can buy a key for under ?30 and download an iso legally these days. If a student you get free copied of windows also so worth asking a student friend.

You couldn't pay me to use it. Why would I pay to get a poorer, less customisable, and more insecure experience? :laugh:

 

Just don't get why people would gimp themselves and lock themselves out of many many programs and games for something as inferior as linux. If it was truly that good everyone would be using it. But it's not that good at al really. Enthusiast OS or work OS only really.

There's little point debating you because you clearly know nothing about GNU/Linux to begin with.

[Max Norris]

1) On average, a full GNU/Linux distro image will be 700mb or less, and many are much smaller. A Windows image is orders of magnitude larger ( > 4GB).

I've downloaded a fair number of distros that were easily pushing the 4GB mark. Just depends what you get out of the box. That aside, nowadays that's pretty much a non-argument unless you're somehow still on a dialup.

2) Creating a bootable usb Windows image is a PITA. You have to download MS' proprietary tool and ensure that the ISO is formatted correctly.

Using the wrong tools then, there's a few out there that are literally click click done. Some even GPL'd.

3. Installation time is far longer and more laborious than Linux, requiring multiple reboots, and offering no net boot/install option that negates the need for post installation updates.

Actually there is, but it's not for the casual user. (And yea, not a plus as far as this argument goes, just tossing it out there.)

5. Finding, installing, and updating applications is cumbersome, adhoc, error prone, and slow on Windows. GNU/Linux distros have built in package managers and software repositories that make the aforementioned a breeze.

Depending on the distro. I've on a number of occasions had to help people out who've run into dependency hell situations, then that breeze goes out the window.. Windows hasn't had to deal with that in a long time now thanks to SxS. Typically in my particular "help me" situations it was RPM based distros, but I've had a couple people run into problems with .deb based systems too.. not often, but it does come up.

 

Yeah right. I have a vertex 4 SSD and it takes nowhere near 10 minutes. Especially when you factor in updates, and finding and installing essential drivers and missing programs.

No argument -- a bare nekkid install does take a while.. but if you're smart you'd mirror the thing after it's updated so you'd never have to do it again. Once and done then it's a non-issue.

 

Windows doesn't have any open source stuff. It's all proprietary. There are certain open source programs which can be downloaded for it, if you manage to find them and get the right architecture.

Have to call extreme BS on that one. There's a ton of open source software available for Windows.. an awful lot of which is equally available on *Nix. Desktop apps, servers/services, games, hell even the Gnu tools. "Windows doesn't have any open source stuff" is beyond absurd.

[simonlang]

If you want to fight Windows, keep out of here.

 

well said. this is one of the rather few linux threads on neowin and i wondered from day 1 why the windows brigade had to join in and start an useless debate?

the best thing is now someone claims windows has more open source programs than linux, while before everyones argument was that because of ms office and adobe photoshop they kinda "have to" use windows. :rofl:

 

10 mins for an install on a ssd. migth be fine, still you will have to download all the updates and that's so annoying on windows, because of it's endless time, and countless reboots.

 

modified iso file? i think that's semi-illegal already because afaik you are not allowed to modify the windows installation thing.