50 Reasons to Dump Windows
I wanted to write 5 reasons to dump windows over linux, but soon I was so overwhelmed by rush of reasons that I could find, that I ended up making a list of 50 reasons.
So here it goes:
- Windows is Expensive.
- Windows crashes more often than Linux ever will. (Windows BSOD) (Linux Kernel Panic).
- Windows Task manager is not half as cool as Linux Htop.
- Windows Notepad is not 1/1000th as cool as linux vi.
- Microsoft office for windows is not free. Openoffice, which was originally developed for *nix platform is free on all platforms that it supports.
- Windows Terminal vs Linux Terminal. No comments, see for yourself what you can do.
- Windows is not friendly towards linux installations on a separate partition.
- The release of Windows Vista comes more than five years after the introduction of its predecessor, Windows XP, making it the longest time span between two releases of Microsoft Windows.
- Internet Explorer is prone to vulnerabilities more than any other mainstream web browser.
- Microsoft Windows still looks the same. (95 98 2000 2003 XP Vista Longhorn).
- Windows in owned by profit hungry corporation with little hope of innovation.
- Linux is for people by people.
- It is legal to share linux, not so with windows.
- Linux is not tied down by one look, like windows, you can choose several looks; ie, KDE, GNOME, fluxbox. To name a few.
- Linux hardware requirement is so minimum you can run most current popular linux distro on a ten year old hardware, try that with windows vista.
- Viruses are few and far between.
- Linux faces open standard unlike windows, and so a system update won’t make any programs or systems obsolete.
- Linux can be configured by the user.
- Linux can be customized by the user.
- Linux can be built from scratch by the user, (if you are programmer and know how to).
- Linux doesn’t hog system in default installation like windows do.
- Linux gives you the freedom to choose application/hardware unlike windows.
- Most top linux distros are updated every six months.
- High quality support are available for free online, in the form of HOWTOs, forum, e-books, wikis.
- Support of linux won’t be discontinued, like windows 98 in not supported by Microsoft anymore.
- *nix has been around for more than 35 years, and is well tested and as secure as possible.
- No licensing fees for linux.
- Linux is more secure.
- You won’t have to upgrade your computer hardware in order to switch to the newer version of linux.
- Linux is capable of operating on a wide variety of platforms (i.e., processor and system types), rather than just being limited to Intel-compatible processors and computers.
- Government security agencies use Linux over windows; SElinux is an example of dedication towards Linux.
- Linux doesn’t have Backdoors like windows do.
- Development and popularity on linux platform encourages competition and perhaps whatever innovation that window has.
- Linux doesn’t need to defragment HD.
- Ext3 and other linux file system is better than ntfs.
- Google runs on Linux, there is a reason for that. Think.
- Apache on linux hosts more websites than IIS on windows.
- Apache is more secure than IIS.
- Firefox is far more advanced/secure than Microsoft IE. Even though you can run Firefox in windows it doesn’t provide the secure platform that linux provides and are open to attacks/exploits that firefox on linux aren’t.
- Linux has superior network and system management.
- Linux is also supported by IBM, HP, Novell.
- Linux is reliable.
- Linux doesn’t discourage running virtual machine like windows.
- Linux is the de-facto OS for security forensics.
- There is a reason why Apple switched to *nix; OSX is the defining example of what you can do with *nix. It has reached such a point that Microsoft is copying ideas from apple/OSX, again.
- There is no “service packs”. There are updates.
- If you think Linux doesn’t doesn’t provide eye candy like windows does, think again. Two words, Beryl and Compiz!!!
- There is nothing you can do in windows that you can’t do in linux, not the other way around.
- If you are stuck with the looks of windows you can switch to linux and still use the same looks. ie, Linspire.
- Last but not least. Linux is FREE.
If you have any recommendations, feel free to add as comment.
Cheers
pavsNews
Loading ...
Ok, it was looking good for the first few, but I have to admit some of them are total crap.
# There is no “service packs”. There are updates. - Is that a difference?
# There is nothing you can do in windows that you can’t do in linux, not the other way around. - … Can I run iTunes to manage my iPod?
# Windows in owned by profit hungry corporation with little hope of innovation. - I guess I shouldn’t buy a Dell either?
# Linux doesn’t discourage running virtual machine like windows. - I have been running VMWare on my PC for years!
Don’t get me wrong, I’m pro linux (although more pro mac) although I have to use windows for work (Windows .Net Developer) and I think if your going to to come up with a list like this, you can come up with better reasons.
This is the absolute worst list I’ve ever seen in my life.
Seriously, you’re hating just to be hating. I don’t even think you know why. And I guess linux doesn’t help you write better code because you’re missing #1 with an empty <li>.
Let me some this up for you, so I can make it simple to understand just like linux (lol)
Linux — Awesome for Servers, anything where security is of top priority.
Windows/Macs — Desktops
The casual user is going to hate linux (unless they want to just use a browser and other simple things). Once you have to install anything then you run into issues that are a nightmare and take 2 days to fix.
And also for half of your reasons I’ll use the awesome quote “Linux is only free if your time is worthless”
Next time please come up with a list of reasons that don’t repeat themselves and that make sense. Why was this on Digg again?
Looks like you created a login and commented just to bash the post. Who’s hating just to be hating again?
comments by carazy prompted me to think about the top thing I like about Linux and hate about Windows; getting new software. On my Ubuntu linux software is free and sooo easy to find and install with adept or apt-get. I have had no problems at all installing any program I wanted in seconds.
While it may be true that installing a Linux application from source can be a nightmare, it is at least *possible*, because you can get all of the development tools free. On Windows, the equivalent set of compilers and libraries would cost a Caddilac. Anyway, almost nobody does it that way anymore. Usually (on a Debian-family distro) it’s:
Search the Synaptic database for the function you want.
Pick one of the applications (there is usually more than one search hit).
Three clicks and do something else while the package manager does its thing.
Of course, if you know the exact name of the package you want, an ‘apt-get install…’ line is even quicker. The package manager takes care of resolving the dependency issues that Windows addicts know as ‘DLL Hell’. Once in a while, a Linux package installation may abort, but even then it doesn’t crash the whole system, as I used to see too damn often in Windows.
If you browse with Firefox in Windows, you could probably sit down at a Kubuntu system and not notice that isn’t Windows until you needed to work directly with the file system (What, no drive letters?) or needed one of a few high-end Windows-only applications like Photoshop.
If they would figure out how to run windows games in linux, ALL the games , that would win over the gamers , and that would convert the windows base , but for some reason , Linux wont do that , I wonder why ?
I find this list very worrying, not for what it contains, but for what it omits! The two greatest reasons, I believe (and which actually have resulted in my rejecting Windows for over 90% of my computer usage, after only two months after having adopted Linux), are Windows spyware (Windows Genuine Advantage) and Windows Digital Rights Management (DRM). DRM is Microsoft’s latest weapon designed to maintain its monopoly by locking out Linux (and other ‘free’ OS). (It has relatively little to do with the wishes (copyrights) of Hollywood studios and recording companies.) That a list containing 50 entries does not include DRM is depressing and is indicative that Microsoft probably will be successful. DRM should be at the top most people’s lists (if only they were aware of and understood Microsoft’s intent).
dmullaney,
I’m going to go ahead and address your post line by line.
Your post will be noted by the brackets [[ & ]]
My replies will be in plain text below you..
[[Ok, it was looking good for the first few, but I have to admit some of them are total crap.]]
Calling his posts crap. Very productive, thanks for the maturity.
[[# There is no “service packs”. There are updates. - Is that a difference?]]
Yes, there is a difference. Service Packs are essential only for core Windows applications, are extremely large, and are mostly for a large slew of security packages as well as other software to further restrict the OS. Updates in Linux are system-wide, come as soon as they are available, and updates mostly the entire OS included almost all installed programs.
[[# There is nothing you can do in windows that you can’t do in linux, not the other way around. - … Can I run iTunes to manage my iPod?]]
Yes you can. Evidently someone hasn’t done their homework. But, it should be noted that you can also run software that is much better at managing iPods without imposing all of the DRM bullshit that Apple and Microsoft are imposing on you. All free, I might add.
[[# Windows in owned by profit hungry corporation with little hope of innovation. - I guess I shouldn’t buy a Dell either?]]
I think the key phrase “with little hope of innovation.” Dell is much more a community driven corporation than Microsoft is. Dell sales PC pre-installed with Ubuntu Linux. Microsoft won’t even take the time to make a boot loader that even recognizes Linux.
[[# Linux doesn’t discourage running virtual machine like windows. - I have been running VMWare on my PC for years!]]
I’ve been running a .. nevermind.
Anyway, the author said that Windows “discourages” running a virtual machine, not makes it impossible. Windows (including Vista) has somewhat poor memory management, which makes it harder for Virtual Machine Software (like VMWare) to dedicate memory to a Virtual Machine. Also, running a Virtual Machine on a Linux Distro out performs (easily) a Windows machine running the same Virtual Machine.
[[Don’t get me wrong, I’m pro linux (although more pro mac) although I have to use windows for work (Windows .Net Developer) and I think if your going to to come up with a list like this, you can come up with better reasons.]]
I am a Certified Technician for Microsoft Windows. I grew up on DOS, Windows 3.0 and 3.1. I’ve lived through NT, NT4, 95, 98, ME, 2000, XP, Server 2003, MCE 2005, Vista, Whistler (XP in BETA) and Longhorn (Vista) in BETA. I know basically all of these inside and out. I have absolutely nothing against Microsoft. I use, at home, nothing but Linux. If these reasons are reasons that he switched, then those reasons are good enough for him. If you don’t like it, go somewhere else or make a list of you own. Bashing someone else list is in no way productive and goes against what Linux stands for. If this is always your attitude to a fellow Linux user I for one am not happy to have you in our corner. Maybe you should stick with your Macs.
Jason, Thanks for your support. however I have no bad feelings towards dmullaney or anyone else. I agree I am not always right. Sometimes it’s good to know when I am wrong, if I am wrong. The list was a fun list from my point of view, I completely switched to linux about 2 years ago, but I regularly use windows at work or whenever I have to. I don’t hate windows, I just dislike the way MS is handling it’s development.
You said you would appreciate comments, so here it goes.
• Windows is Expensive. It depends, if you get it with a new PC, as an OEM license, it is not that expensive; the prices ranges from 60$ to 130$ depending on vendor and version. Nothing stops you from you using only free and open source programs with Windows.
• Windows crashes more often than Linux ever will. (Windows BSOD) (Linux Kernel Panic). Many of the pictures you have as Windows BSOD are related to the Windows 9x series, NT operating systems are far more stable. I have to admit I had more crashes that brought the entire system down on Windows, however Linux, as a whole, is not really that stable, just try to run Beryl/Compiz and you’ll be amazed just how often X crashes, and for a regular user there not much difference over X crashing or the whole operating system.
• Windows Task manager is not half as cool as Linux Htop. Well, the graphical interface is quite good, equal to what Linux offers. Microsoft has on their website several utilities, with a GUI or without one, that have many more options.
• Windows Notepad is not 1/1000th as cool as linux vi. VI is a remarkably advanced text editor, but for a user that is accustomed with a regular text editor it can be almost unusable.
• Microsoft office for windows is not free. Openoffice, which was originally developed for *nix platform is free on all platforms that it supports. If you use Windows nothing stops you from choosing OpenOffice.
• Windows Terminal vs Linux Terminal. No comments, see for yourself what you can do. This is completely true, but if you use Vista or Longhorn, then you have power shell.
• Windows is not friendly towards linux installations on a separate partition. You are right.
• The release of Windows Vista comes more than five years after the introduction of its predecessor, Windows XP, making it the longest time span between two releases of Microsoft Windows. Service Pack 2 was a major upgrade, but your point is true, Vista is about two years late.
• Internet Explorer is prone to vulnerabilities more than any other mainstream web browser. Yes, although Internet Explorer 7 in Vista restricted mode is arguably safer.
• Microsoft Windows still looks the same. (95 98 2000 2003 XP Vista Longhorn). If you say this, then Linux hasn’t changed either. When it comes to look and feel, Linux is copying Windows.
• Windows in owned by profit hungry corporation with little hope of innovation. Besides Microsoft, you can add IBM, HP, Dell, Sony, Intel, Sun Microsystems, Apple, Novell.
• Linux is for people by people. This doesn’t make it automatically better, communism as a political system had the same motto, still I think democracy is better (this is just a comparison, and has nothing to do with Linux).
• It is legal to share linux, not so with windows. Yes, Windows is a commercial product, using a very different licensing system than Linux.
• Linux is not tied down by one look, like windows, you can choose several looks; ie, KDE, GNOME, fluxbox. To name a few. Yes, unfortunately this is also a huge disadvantage when it comes to overall look and feel. Often, Linux programs give you the feeling that they are not well integrated, as there is not just one interface API. Sometimes quality is much better than quantity
• Linux hardware requirement is so minimum you can run most current popular linux distro on a ten year old hardware, try that with windows vista. Funny, I just tried running Ubuntu 7.04 on a PC with 128MB RAM and a 800Mhz Celeron CPU and it is very slow. Do you really think you could run Fedora 7, OpenSuse 10.3, Mandriva, Ubuntu/Kubuntu on a system that was built 10 years ago?
• Viruses are few and far between. Yes, the architecture of Linux is much better at dealing with viruses, still the number of viruses available for Windows is greater in part due to the fact that it owns about 95% of the market.
• Linux faces open standard unlike windows, and so a system update won’t make any programs or systems obsolete. True, yet the life span of major Linux distributions is shorter that for Windows.
• Linux can be configured by the user. So does Windows, it even provides really good GUI application to do basic customization, and for more advanced changes you can always use the registry, after all in Linux you have to deal with text files.
• Linux can be customized by the user. Same as the previous point. Yes, Linux is more flexible than Windows, but Windows can be customized too.
• Linux can be built from scratch by the user, (if you are programmer and know how to). Yes, again different licensing and development philosophy.
• Linux doesn’t hog system in default installation like windows do. Windows doesn’t do it either. It is debatable if Linux is faster than Windows.
• Linux gives you the freedom to choose application/hardware unlike windows. Actually I think Windows provides more freedom. Nothing stops you from using open source software on Windows, Linux on the other hand is not that keen on closed source software. Windows supports far more hardware than Linux, and when a hardware manufacturer releases a new product, it also provides device designs drivers for Windows. Try using MTP enabled mp3 players with Linux, try using many printers and multifunctionals, or smart phones/PDAs. Actually just try using brand new video cards, let’s say from ATI.
• Most top linux distros are updated every six months. Again, not necessarily a good thing. Often these updates have backward compatibility problems, and there are not always tested enough before release.
• High quality support are available for free online, in the form of HOWTOs, forum, e-books, wikis. You make me laugh … many manuals, HOWTOs that come with the system itself are out-dated, and believe me the help that comes with Windows is far superior in terms of both quality and quantity. Using google and forums we will find answers for almost every problem, but the same goes for Windows. The web help available from Microsoft is also much better than what Linux vendors provide.
• Support of linux won’t be discontinued, like windows 98 in not supported by Microsoft anymore. Oh really, how come Fedora offers updates only for Fedora 6 and 7? Or please explain what you mean by support. How many Linux vendors still offer support for their distributions running kernel 2.2 or 2.4?
• *nix has been around for more than 35 years, and is well tested and as secure as possible. Yes, the age also has disadvantages, but I agree that the *nix architecture is stable and secure.
• No licensing fees for linux. Yes.
• Linux is more secure. Yes, as you mentioned two times already.
• You won’t have to upgrade your computer hardware in order to switch to the newer version of linux. Depends, if the computer is old than you have to. For a Linux distribution that releases twice a year, it would be stupid to require new hardware every six months, given the fact that it brings no major changes. Vista however has come 5 years after XP and has many improvements, so it is normal to demand more hardware resources, although the demand is by no means huge.
• Linux is capable of operating on a wide variety of platforms (i.e., processor and system types), rather than just being limited to Intel-compatible processors and computers. I agree.
• Government security agencies use Linux over windows; SElinux is an example of dedication towards Linux. Indeed, many however use Windows at least for workstations and client computers. Linux, due to its Unix like architecture, is more stable and secure, making a perfect choice for the field.
• Linux doesn’t have Backdoors like windows do. Debatable. Given the fact that anyone has access to the source code, it is less likely, but not completely impossible.
• Development and popularity on linux platform encourages competition and perhaps whatever innovation that window has. Still, over 600 distributions … don’t you think it’s a bit too much?
• Linux doesn’t need to defragment HD. This is a problem that it is greatly exaggerated, NT operating systems still require defragmentation but it is not a severe problem.
• Ext3 and other linux file system is better than ntfs. Do a google search and you’ll find tests and technical articles that clearly state and prove that ntfs is superior to ext3, it is faster, safer and has more advanced features,
• Google runs on Linux, there is a reason for that. Think. Yes, Linux is great for web servers, stable and secure.
• Apache on linux hosts more websites than IIS on windows. The same reason as above. Not to mention it is a lot cheaper, although when it comes to TCO the difference is not that great.
• Apache is more secure than IIS. Yes, however starting with 2003, things are bad for IIS.
• Firefox is far more advanced/secure than Microsoft IE. Even though you can run Firefox in windows it doesn’t provide the secure platform that linux provides and are open to attacks/exploits that firefox on linux aren’t. True, just because for Linux there are no viruses or spyware.
• Linux has superior network and system management. Debatable, see tests related to network stack performance, and compare system management tools for Linux vs. Server 2003/2008.
• Linux is also supported by IBM, HP, Novell. Yes, but they also support Windows to some extent. For servers and mainframes Linux is perfect. But why don’t you mention the companies that support only Windows, and don’t care at all about Linux?
• Linux is reliable. Yes, but if you consider the system as a whole, including X, than the advantage is really small.
• Linux doesn’t discourage running virtual machine like windows. And Windows does?
• Linux is the de-facto OS for security forensics. No, BSD is de-facto when it comes to security and stability.
• There is a reason why Apple switched to *nix; OSX is the defining example of what you can do with *nix. It has reached such a point that Microsoft is copying ideas from apple/OSX, again. True, but Apple doesn’t like open source, and they have nothing to do with Linux. You forget to mention they chose BSD, and not Linux, as the core of OSX.
• There is no “service packs”. There are updates. The difference is that a service pack is a collection of updates and that it is really well tested to make sure no compatibility problems exist.
• If you think Linux doesn’t doesn’t provide eye candy like windows does, think again. Two words, Beryl and Compiz!!! Yes, if you own an Nvidia card, if you go with ATI you have to downgrade essential parts of the operating system. Not to mention that Beryl/Compiz is unstable, and some of the themes and effects and grotesque, and have nothing to do with esthetic or functionality.
• There is nothing you can do in windows that you can’t do in linux, not the other way around. Really? Can you play games in Linux (don’t mention wine)? Can I use my ipod in Linux, can I use my Clix2 in Linux, can I use my iphone in Linux, can I use my Sony web cam in Linux, can I use my Canon printer in Linux, can I use the wireless connection of my laptop with Linux? Do I have a legal alternative to patented audio/video codecs? No.
• If you are stuck with the looks of windows you can switch to linux and still use the same looks. ie, Linspire. Just a cheap imitation and probably one of the worst Linux distros.
• Last but not least. Linux is FREE. More than that, it is open source.
For the record, Games are playable in Linux (even without Wine, and in some cases run smoother than their Windows counterparts.)
iPods can easily be used in Linux. Easily. Easily. Incredibly, painlessly easily. Wow, I’m surprized this question still gets asked.
As far as Clix and the iPhone, I personally don’t own either and wouldn’t know.
Same with Sony Webcam.
Would you like to see my Canon Printer Test Page from Linux? I have an iP1800 btw.
One of my three servers operates entirely via a wireless G connection. That system has been running and updating itself for about 4 months now without any connection issues or reboots.
No “legal” alternative for codecs, but you can thank Microsoft and Apple for that.
Also, all systems in my home (excluding my wife’s Windows laptop) run Compiz and I think in total X crashed on me maybe twice. Even after the crach, beryl-manager automatically reselects metacity as the window manager, which in turn keeps any real productivity from being loss. Even after a x crash, the system STILL doesn’t need to be rebooted. Windows, by DEFAULT, reboots on the BSOD. So what if you have a BSOD related to say a Video Driver and every single time the driver is initiated the system BSOD. Now you’re tasked with booting into safe mode (if you’re lucky) and trying to figure out what the hell happened. System Restore, however, is awesome.
Well, I’m not going to address all of your commments because I just walked in and don’t feel like re-reading your post now. But let me thank you for the maturity you have in your post, I don’t see where you’re bashing anyone, and that I appreciate.
Excuse all the commas lol, long day.
See my response to each point here:
http://www.mostlycli.blogspot.com
Actually, there might be only 30 unique arguments, but I only count about 3 which are actual arguments, and aren’t completely wrong, or completely lame, making no sense.
One for instance is: Linux runs on 10 year old hardware (so a 166Mhz processor, with MMX, and 64mb of ram was the cutting edge then). If you can install it using a text based installer, it will probably just run, and the video card probably will be a pre-3dfx one (tseng labs maybe?) OOH, KDE 3.5 running on a 166mhz processor with 64mb of RAM, and 16MB VRAM, AS IF!!!
Another: fragment proof and EXT3 is better. EXT3 is actually garbage, and unlike windows, there are no defragmentation tools for any linux filesystem that I have seen. Even worse, EXT4 is being released to fix fragmentation (automatically defragging small files, but it still can fragment). So thats proven wrong.
Or MS office is commercial whilst OpenOffice was designed for nix and is free. You can tell the author is new to linux (maybe within the last 1 or 2 years?), because Openoffice is the open source version of Sun’s Staroffice, which was never free. So its based on a commercial product. Furthermore, its a minus for linux, because Windows can run both properly.
Some linux distro’s also charge licensing, and they have “distribution updates”, which are the same as service packs, and updates often break previous programs (its still a bitch getting webcams working).
And then they say if you want windows looks, use linspire, which uses a packaging system WHICH COSTS MONEY!!! Which means you are better off with Windows.
My favorite is when he said that “all windows versions look the same”, but i look back at gnome 1.4 days which is ages ago, nothing has changed, in fact, Windows has changed in appearance more, and cleaned up a lot more.
And they say government uses linux, but then again, NSA funds openbsd, so thats kind of a dumb argument.
Obviously written by a newbie. The only real argument here is that linux is better for webservers (big whoop there, because web serving takes some pretty serious hardware, but apache does run on windows and OSX, and is easier to use on OSX server).
And when IBM, HP and Novell support Linux, but use Windows mainly inhouse, you know that you just made yourself look like a fool. And Novell only supports linux because they tried their own linux distro remember.. Which was commercial (so they were just trying to profit from it)
The rest is all common disillusions that are totally wrong. Not going into it, but the guy who wrote this seriously has showed his lack of linux technical knowledge.
I’ve also found that linux developers are a lot less willing to admit fault that there are areas they need to catch up with (like wireless network configuration or any non-dhcp network, which still is a pain on most distro’s), or Quartz composer on OSX, and so will just say instead “I’d rather watch where linux flows to”.
I posted a whole list of stuff they should catch up to on http://auzy-linux.blogspot.com/, and whilst I admit some aren’t that great, some people just see them as stuff apple implemented, but dont want to accept the fact that apple implemented them was because they are helpful to have. Thats when I think I kind of gave up on linux. KDE4 is on the right track, but the issue is, there are too many developers who are recoding 500 clones of the same program, instead of fixing the existing ones
Sorry mate, I find most your arguments of “Epic Fail” quality.
“There is nothing you can do in windows that you can’t do in linux, not the other way around.”
Bullshit.
-Try synch your iPod or iPhone in iTunes, what about that? Don´t come with the usual, “but you can use x or y software that let you do that”, I want my iTunes.
i think that this list is bad and that linux will not be a desktop OS till it supports windows applications like games and itunes and all the stuff ppl mentioned so just deal with it and use windows for now
Did anyone ever tell the idiots who seem to like windows not know that MS win Vista records and sends data back to MS > ? Microsoft > There watching you HAHA … Linux We love you .
Oh yes, this is true … MS are recording your actions as you type away … P.s hope you have a lot of bandwidth .
@Pavs: I don’t think that linux programmers wanted some programs to be cooler than windows programs (task manager, notepad), but useful (for them, because they are also users of these programs, unlike windows programmers - hint: another reason why programs for linux are better).
@Pavs: OpenOffice was made first for Solaris, not linux, but indeed was ported to linux before than to windows (well, I think so).
@Pavs: there are some paid-for distros of linux, but, unlike windows, you are not limited to just one computer to use.
@Pavs: “Support of linux won’t be discontinued, like windows 98 in not supported by Microsoft anymore.” Well, this is not correct. Red Hat by example does not support older version of Fedora, the same with Canonical and older version of ubuntu (and variants).
@Andrew: “One for instance is: Linux runs on 10 year old hardware (so a 166Mhz processor, with MMX, and 64mb of ram was the cutting edge then). If you can install it using a text based installer, it will probably just run, and the video card probably will be a pre-3dfx one (tseng labs maybe?) OOH, KDE 3.5 running on a 166mhz processor with 64mb of RAM, and 16MB VRAM, AS IF!!!” Certainly you will find a distro that works even on such older hardware, so here Pavs pointed right.
@bausto3: “• Linux hardware requirement is so minimum you can run most current popular linux distro on a ten year old hardware, try that with windows vista. Funny, I just tried running Ubuntu 7.04 on a PC with 128MB RAM and a 800Mhz Celeron CPU and it is very slow. Do you really think you could run Fedora 7, OpenSuse 10.3, Mandriva, Ubuntu/Kubuntu on a system that was built 10 years ago?” I don’t think so, but see the previous answer to Andrew - just try another distribution, aimed at such hardware, becasue ubuntu needs 384 MB of RAM (xubuntu just 192), and is very normal to be slower if you privide it with less memory than necessary (try Windows XP with 128 MB or Vista with 256 MB - oh yeah, they will fly, isn’t it? )
@Andrew & bausto3: try Damn Small Linux, for example, it will work also on 486 processors, with even less memory.
@bausto3: “• Linux is not tied down by one look, like windows, you can choose several looks; ie, KDE, GNOME, fluxbox. To name a few. Yes, unfortunately this is also a huge disadvantage when it comes to overall look and feel. Often, Linux programs give you the feeling that they are not well integrated, as there is not just one interface API. Sometimes quality is much better than quantity.” OR: “• Development and popularity on linux platform encourages competition and perhaps whatever innovation that window has. Still, over 600 distributions … don’t you think it’s a bit too much?” You make me wonder why there are so many car producers and each of them produces so many models. Or maybe it will be better with just *one* perfect car producer, that produces just *one* perfect model? The same here: *one* Microsoft, *one* Windows (well, not just only one, but at a time, they have just one complete Windows, and the variants are just ripp-offs to that).
@bausto3: “• There is nothing you can do in windows that you can’t do in linux, not the other way around. Really? Can you play games in Linux (don’t mention wine)? Can I use my ipod in Linux, can I use my Clix2 in Linux, can I use my iphone in Linux, can I use my Sony web cam in Linux, can I use my Canon printer in Linux, can I use the wireless connection of my laptop with Linux? Do I have a legal alternative to patented audio/video codecs? No.” Linxu also has its share of games. ipods I understand can be used in liunx, I don’t know why your Clix2 does not work, at my work we have three webcams that don’t work with neither Windows or Linux, and two that works with both, with my hp printer I just connected to a linux pc and it was ready, but in windows I had to install drivers (and it took some 15 mins.), but indeed with some other printers it is sometimes not so easy, but even then it is easier than in windows to make it work. And about the codecs, in some/most countries that kind of patents are illegal. But if you live in USA (and most people on the planet don’t), indeed you have a problem here, but elsewhere there is no such problem (including the countries from EU - and I live in one).
@hardist: “If they would figure out how to run windows games in linux, ALL the games , that would win over the gamers , and that would convert the windows base , but for some reason , Linux wont do that , I wonder why ?” Simply, because is not the job of linux programmers to make a *commercial*game* to work on linux, but it is the job of the game’s developers - they will earn money. Why don’t you ask *them* ? And this is valid also for other programs (ie Photoshop). And what about CorelDraw or Star Office? They have linux versions too, so it is possible to produce commercial software for an open-source OS, such as linux.
heh, games and ipods come up again and again.
DAMMIT why am I confronted withfiorms like this oe again and again!? The foreground colour in this textarea is set to almost black, but the background colour is not set! Black on black, not exactly weasy to read >:@
Anyway games and ipods. Yeah, they both work. lol. Not much more to that. Well, ok, ipods “just work” I think. Games are another story.
I’ve played far more games on Linux than what I ever have on Windows. This isn’t strictly an advantage though; I’ve played more because there are so many free games in the repositories. Many of them were not to y taste, or lacked the modern graphics and such of today’s commercial games :( .. The ones that I found and really liked (for free) are still not an advantrage for *nix systems, because they twnd to run OK on Windows too ;)
As for commercial games.. The number of Commercial games steadily increases actually. Frankly I’m not much of a gamer so I’m happy with the free ones (wesnoth, widelands, alien arena) .. Loki/ID for example releases commercial games now and then on Lniux. I’d go sio far as to say that Linux has about 10% of the commercial games offernigs as Windows. That’s not exactly a conservative estimate, I’ve erred on the side of too-big-ness.
Can you run a modern Linux distro on ancient hardware? Yes, to some extent you can - but you have to turn a lot of things off. It does have the advantage over Windows there /I thnik/ because it’s a bit more difficult to trim all the unwanted bits from Windows (I mean who doesn’t turn off the stupid visual themes and baby-control-panel in XP?)… So if you want to run Windows on old hardware you can’t just strip it down, you kinda have to go with an older and unsupported version such as 98.
I might be wrong, I’m really thinking aloud. Correct me for all your worth ;)
Anyway basically I agree, there is nothing that you can do on Windows that you can’t do on Linux. Windows might have all those patented codecs…. So does Linux, actually ;) it’s just that in some countries it might not be legal to install them. I don’t think that stops most people. Anyone with half a brain realises that most XP users are not using a legal copy of Windows anyway - that’s why Virus Explorer 7’s popularity doubled the day they enabled non-wga-users to upgrade (duh)
Can you do everything on Windows that you can on Linux? I don’t know. Maybe you can, it’s just really, really, really, really hard to find and install (free) software for Windows. Try to find a regular expression editor for Windows as powerful as Kregexpeditor. If you can’t find one, don’t worry, there are only one or two out there and they’re very well hidden. If you do find it (even on your first attempt), well, by the time you’ve installed it, a Linux user has already installed kregexpeditor and is using it.
Reasons why Linux (and BSD and Mac) are better than Windows? There are plenty (and the other way round, I guess. I mean we’re comparing apples with hedgehogs here) … Software installation.
I like that I can just type in what I’m looking for, and install a quality application in ten seconds and for free.
Software installation in Windows is a nightmare, is arduous, and can fatally break your system at the touch of a
Do I preach about the joys of Linux and frustrations of Windows to my workmates and family? Yeah, when I get frustrated that some Windows program is really hal;f-assed, I will say “man I wish this had the features of app_xyz in Linux” but… I don’t mind if they don’t switch, I won’t push themm. It’s their decision to make, right? button.
Meh, some of the reasons are good. I’m a full 100% linux user, but I still say some of those are crap.
First off, at the end, you mention Linspire, which is a paid distro (freespire, a subdirivative is free), and then you say “Last but not least, linux is free”.
* Windows is Expensive. — True, but then again, so is a Hummer…Does that make it not ‘good’?
* Windows crashes more often than Linux ever will. (Windows BSOD) (Linux Kernel Panic). — This is true by far…. (Comment 11: You must have been running it on a pentium 2 with 256mb ram or something.. Runs fine on my 2.0ghz with 3gb ram, and decent on my 3.06ghz with 512mb ram, but a little sluggish)
* Windows Task manager is not half as cool as Linux Htop. — That’s true. Htop shows off ncurses very well. :)
* Windows Notepad is not 1/1000th as cool as linux vi. — Notepad is GUI, and Vi(m) is CLI. Two different things, though otherwise i agree with this.
* Microsoft office for windows is not free. Openoffice, which was originally developed for *nix platform is free on all platforms that it supports. — No argument there. Oo.org is awesome.
* Windows Terminal vs Linux Terminal. No comments, see for yourself what you can do. — True, although windows’ can do some stuff, like telnet, ping, and taskkill.
* Windows is not friendly towards linux installations on a separate partition. — Uh…. it just wants to be installed first.
* The release of Windows Vista comes more than five years after the introduction of its predecessor, Windows XP, making it the longest time span between two releases of Microsoft Windows. — and? The last release of Debian was about a year ago. That doesn’t mean its bad. I use it on my server, and have for 3 years.
* Internet Explorer is prone to vulnerabilities more than any other mainstream web browser. — True, but back it up with facts.
* Microsoft Windows still looks the same. (95 98 2000 2003 XP Vista Longhorn). — Not a valid point. Looks don’t mean crap. And also you can theme it.
* Windows in owned by profit hungry corporation with little hope of innovation.As another comment said, … look at Dell or HP.
* Linux is for people by people. — True.
* It is legal to share linux, not so with windows. — True.
* Linux is not tied down by one look, like windows, you can choose several looks; ie, KDE, GNOME, fluxbox. To name a few. — There’s also a KDE port for windows, but yeah i agree with this. Choice of D.E is nice.
* Linux hardware requirement is so minimum you can run most current popular linux distro on a ten year old hardware, try that with windows vista. — Yeah but not with X. well…maybe Puppy or DSL, but it’d be a little rough.
* Viruses are few and far between. — few and far between? There are *none* for linux and there never *will* be any for linux.
* Linux faces open standard unlike windows, and so a system update won’t make any programs or systems obsolete. — er…. depends on distro. For example archlinux updates packages, and not full distro-upgrades. Debian hardly updates its packages, etc….. (not necessarily bad)… but that does dependo n distro.
* Linux can be configured by the user. — So can windows.
* Linux can be customized by the user. — So can windows, though not to the full extent of linux.
* Linux can be built from scratch by the user, (if you are programmer and know how to). — Yep. Gentoo.
* Linux doesn’t hog system in default installation like windows do. — debatable. though probably true.
* Linux gives you the freedom to choose application/hardware unlike windows. — Very true with window’s bloatware, however aside from that i find hardware, in some cases, easier to set up on windows…This is not really a valid point.
* Most top linux distros are updated every six months. — Oh? Tell debian that.
* High quality support are available for free online, in the form of HOWTOs, forum, e-books, wikis. — Is for windows too……Though the archlinux wiki/forum and ubuntuforums are nice.
* Support of linux won’t be discontinued, like windows 98 in not supported by Microsoft anymore. — True, but you might get laughed at if you go to someone asking for RHEL 6 support (been there, done that).
* *nix has been around for more than 35 years, and is well tested and as secure as possible. — True.
* No licensing fees for linux. — Yep.
* Linux is more secure. — Er… We know.
* You won’t have to upgrade your computer hardware in order to switch to the newer version of linux. — That depends… Not valid.
* Linux is capable of operating on a wide variety of platforms (i.e., processor and system types), rather than just being limited to Intel-compatible processors and computers. — mm….. and?
* Government security agencies use Linux over windows; SElinux is an example of dedication towards Linux. — Meh, selinux is annoying. It blocks stuff that you DO want to use.
* Linux doesn’t have Backdoors like windows do. — no? Then why can i reset my forgotten root password on most default linux/GRUB installs in about 2 minutes?
* Development and popularity on linux platform encourages competition and perhaps whatever innovation that window has. — what, competition for the best distro? I’m missing the point here.
* Linux doesn’t need to defragment HD. — True.
* Ext3 and other linux file system is better than ntfs. — true, ext3 wont die if unplugged while running.
* Google runs on Linux, there is a reason for that. Think. — So does my toothbrush, whats the point (not really…just saying)
* Apache on linux hosts more websites than IIS on windows. — so?
* Apache is more secure than IIS. — Probably valid.
* Firefox is far more advanced/secure than Microsoft IE. Even though you can run Firefox in windows it doesn’t provide the secure platform that linux provides and are open to attacks/exploits that firefox on linux aren’t. — So very invalid…The only way it’s true is because linux has no viruses. Firefox for windows is much better than IE. I don’t care what you say.
* Linux has superior network and system management. — Yep.
* Linux is also supported by IBM, HP, Novell. — Er.. commercial distros maybe, like HP-UIX
* Linux is reliable. — Windows can be too, depending on conditions.
* Linux doesn’t discourage running virtual machine like windows. — Uh, windows discourages VMs? When did that happen?
* Linux is the de-facto OS for security forensics. — meh.
* There is a reason why Apple switched to *nix; OSX is the defining example of what you can do with *nix. It has reached such a point that Microsoft is copying ideas from apple/OSX, again. — Apple switched to BSD for it’s backend. BSD is based on Unix as is Linux. That’s the only connection.
* There is no “service packs”. There are updates. — True.
* If you think Linux doesn’t doesn’t provide eye candy like windows does, think again. Two words, Beryl and Compiz!!! — True.
* There is nothing you can do in windows that you can’t do in linux, not the other way around. — Uh.. True for the *MOST* part, though some things are harder to set up on linux (@ comment 11: My canon printer works FINE on linux..scanner and all.)
* If you are stuck with the looks of windows you can switch to linux and still use the same looks. ie, Linspire. — Commercial distro…then you state:
* Last but not least. Linux is FREE. — see comment above. Not all distros are free. Most are. And they are open source as well.
CodeBlock {}{}