What do you like the most about Linux.

[djgramma]

I chose open source because I think it applies to all of the rest of these points:

it's free, free is good. But cheap is better because you pay for the future of your favorite software and not a monopoly.

it's stable, which is always good. You can leave your computer on for days, come back to it and start up a cpu laboring program and the system won't break a sweat. Great for servers.

it's easy & cool, as most open source software is both easy as heck and hard as hell, this one ain't as hard or as easy. Windows Server 2000 ain't hard either and is easy as pie. The cool factor can't be beat tho.

There are lots of distros, which is both a good and bad thing. Good that you have so much to choose from for your specific needs. Bad because that's basically what's keeping it from breaking in the consumer market. Think of it like the DVD-R dilemma.

It's powerful, considering what's out there, something this free and this powerful should be banned, but it's not so geeks rejoice!

It's not bug-free, but if anything was, then what were to become of us geeks?

Less headaches, I wish. But, I would guess the headaches you get from linux are much less worse than with Windows, since Windows is supposed to work.

Non-microsoft, as I hate MS with a vengence, you really can't beat their products. Unfortunately... you can't beat their products. They are so bug filled that you really can do barely anything in them. On the other hand, they are so well built that I guess MS can just wave a magic wand and POOF! all fixed.

This maybe smoke coming out of my a$$ but that's what I think.

Cheers

[kongit]

the only thing I wish was that rpms went to hell. they suck.

[beardedwonder]

The fact that it's not on my pc...

[jkrupa128]

What I DON'T like is that my Linux stock keeps going down...wtf!!

[+virtorio MVC]

The only thing I like about it is that it isn't installed on my computer.

[MulletRobZ]

What?s best about Linux: It?s very powerful and stable.

What?s worst about Linux: It can be inconsistent.

But then again, inconsistencies make things more interesting for me sometime:) :)

[UKer]

As a server I like its availability, license (with regards to the number of concurrent connections you can have to services like databases especially), configurability, stability and for web applications LAMP is IMO the best combination of technologies.

[Si Veteran]

It's something new to learn (Y)

[kemical]

i like linux because it gets me laid. period.

[CaKeY]

i like linux because it gets me laid. period.

Are you drunk again? :D

[Suddenly_Dead]

Lol.

Anyways, I like how on many distros you can install stuff in a couple of clicks, and I've never run into issues with dependencies as they're all auto-detected properly in any modern distros I've tried. Only big problem I've had with updating/installing anything lately has been with Tribes 2, and the company that ported it is dead so that's unfair anyways.

[memNOC]

One of the inportant things for me as a reason why i like it is the resource usage. The fact that any given time, depending on whats installed you can have 40 processes running and your utilizing near only 10-15% of your RAM, and virtually no CPU unless your compiling, XP with 40+ processes is deadly....I have my XP down to 25-27 running processes and still it doesnt run as smoothly as nux. I also like tweaking out the dtops and functionality of the different WMs...which in order to do in WinXP you'd have to install 3,000 apps or crack a few hundred system files.

umm you do know XP keeps all system processes neatly stacked in svchost.exe, winlogon.exe, explorer.exe and many other system processes, while Linux shows you every process on its own, separately.. that's why you see 40+ in Linux and still have fast response and low resource usage..

btw, having 25-27 processes running in XP is unhealthy.. i got mine down to 12-15 at any given time during usage (including fb2k, ie, etc..).. check out Viper's guide to XP's services.. most of them are unnecesary..

[Shadrack]

I enjoy the Open Sourceness of it all. And I really like all the development tools most distros come with. I can start creating right out of the box.

I don't like the fact that I don't have sound in linux.

[- Paul -]

Choice.

[kemical]

Are you drunk again? :D

lol i wish ;-) ok ok ill be serious, to me linux is about control i was always tired of wondering what goes on in the background of my machine while i did my day to day work, hated only seeing pictures to click to run an application and not really being able to configure something exactly how i wanted it run. plus i never saw a need to really look into making additions to software in windows because everything is closed source, and unless you are a killer programmer you can't really expand upon existing windows applications like you can on linux.. so like i said control and knowing what my computer is doing and when it is doing it was my reason.

the laid part is good too ;-)

[MulletRobZ]

I enjoy the Open Sourceness of it all. And I really like all the development tools most distros come with. I can start creating right out of the box.

I don't like the fact that I don't have sound in linux.

What distro and what card do you have? Sometimes, you have to modify the Alsa Mixer or KMix or even the GNOME mixer before the sound will work. I know I had to in Mandrake (10 only needed the PCM to be lowered in order to avoid the blare), Slackware, and Fedora.

[markwolfe Veteran]

I agree with an earlier poster (or two) that "Freedom" or "Free Speech" is not represented in this poll... I avoided the "FREE" option, as it was obviously (by the all-caps) intended to mean "Free as in beer".

I like actually being the OWNER of my PC. I am root. I say what is installed. I control its function.

Maybe having "Linux gives me a power-trip" should have been an option. :whistle: :rofl:

[memNOC]

missing Mpeg audio support (now in all distros) , linux is going down hill lol

what you smokin on?

MPEGs sound just fine..

"all distros"? lol.

your post=snotty-nosed Jimmy. everyone makes fun of little Jimmy. :no:

[speedy_kevin]

It's something new to learn (Y)

That's exactly my reason :p

[splatnix]

I voted Powerful, since my number 1 reason isn't there, but it fit for the current reason that I am happier than ever with Linux.

Power in a respect that others would probably overlook: I can run defunct hardware.

Example 1: The PCMCIA controller chipset on my laptop is most likely damanged by heat [i've burned myself on the RAM cover, so the innards have GOT to be hot]. Windows will no longer initialize PCMCIA, let alone any devices, citing issues with the device [no more detail that that]. This occurs on 2k/XP old and fresh installs. Under Linux... well.. I'm using my PCMCIA 10/100 NIC right now to get to the net.

Example 2: I've also been able to use defunct RAM (as long as the motherboard was fine with it), using BadRAM and BadMEM. In a situation involving a quad-Xeon PII 10U rack-mounted database system and 4 1GB EDO Registered DIMMs, this was a life (and money) saver to boot! Thankfully Oracle makes their products for multiple platforms.

[OT: If you haven't seen a 10U rack case, when loaded it usually involves 2-3 people to mount the bugger - big, heavy, and UGLY]

Control

I also like having control of my machine. Yes, I have a custom unattended DVD install of XP sitting around for my fiancee's computer which is a minimal XP install, but I still don't have total say in the base of the OS. If I don't want something, such as the entire GUI infrastructure, then I don't need to install it. I would never use Windows for an IDS box, mainly because the IDS boxen I've created are low-powered Pentium and Pentium Pro boxen (you don't need a lot for an IDS).

Software. I like Rhythmbox - it doesn't miss a beat on this underpowered PII/400 - iTunes chocked to death. I prefer postfix over IIS or Exchange. I prefer GNOME 2.6 over Explorer. I prefer Nautilus over Windows Explorer. The list goes on.

Smoother support for older hardware. In a Windows world, I would not be able to sufficiently run current software on a 5 year old laptop as an everyday machine.

Example:Right now I've got Rhythmbox playing, Firefox [10+ tabs], GAIM, Evolution, dnetc RC-72 crunching, Apache, MySQL, Postfix, and a few terminals open, under Fedora Core 1 + GNOME 2.5. It is still quite responsive do all of this. Windows XP, on this hardware, becomes unbearably slow with more than Trillian Pro and Firefox open. Can you imagine running iTunes, Firefox, Trillian Pro, Outlook, dnetc RC-72, Apache Win32 (or IIS), MySQL Win32, Exchange on a PII/400 with 192MB RAM? No? I didn't think so. If so, I'll tell you, it's not pretty (as I've tried).

Free (as in beer) doesn't work for me, since I've bought distros, and I've donated to projects. I've willingly paid for software - which I've also done buying Microsoft products as well. Non-Microsoft.. bah.

I use Microsoft products where I find them to be superior than Linux. This is mainly gaming (don't try to argue this one with me) and uber-new hardware (zealots: where are those non-binary nVidia or ATI drivers, huh?). I don't expect to have 3D acceleration in Linux on a video card released yesterday (for the consumer market). MOST hardware vendors just dont support anything but Windows, less actually support MacOS, and even less support Linux. I feel for the crowds that are even smaller than this, be it BeOS, Amiga, et al. My opinion will change in the future, as vendors change their thinking, but I try to stay near reality.

If I were to hate MS, then I'd have to hate Adobe, Macromedia, Apple, Hewlett-Packard, Sun, SGI, etc. You know, people that make quality products.

But, the number one reason why I run Linux:

Because I can.

Edit: That last bit is my personal opinion of the companies mentioned and, in no form whatsoever, is intended as flame-bait.

Edited March 18, 2004 by splatnix

[devilotX]

Things I like about linux

1. Its Free... nothing sucked like buying 2 copies of XP, activation is a nightmare

2. The GUI... I love the look and feel Of KDE 3.2 (and 3.15)

3. It runs on crap... I've got some older hardware kicking around, (600 mhz and 533 mhz respecitivly) and they run like dogs on anything from MS. However I've got pure Debian on the 533 and Suse 9 on the 600, it's extended the life of my hardware, because they were headed to hand-me-down land for relatives, now they make great web/fileserver and the debian computer is my secondary workstation.

[revvo]

wait... security is not there? wow... i'm sure I'm not the first to be surprised at this poll. Nothing's more secure than BSD anyway.

am I blind or did I just see seven people who voted for stability... 7th being me. Linux is the most stable thing you can find n install easily. When it screws up, it's ALMOST everytime the user's fault. I have made linux distros screw up so much times :laugh: , otherwise, it's LIKE A ROCK!! (no, not the GM ad. oh $hit, their after me! *running away from the GM guys* :o )

Linux is STABLE and SECURE and OPEN SOURCE. the three things that make it sexy and appealing.

[KiwiNZ]

For me its simple , linux puts the fun back into computers . Thats it .

Windows does everything for you and doesnt allow to really have fun with it .

Linux allows that.

Also with the variety of distibutions swapping is great and not expensive. After my recent errr "fun"

with Madrake 10 C , I am using Fedora and its fantastic.

But I admit I keep one foot in the Windows patch toplay games but the time i spend in the Windows patch

is getting less and less.