Linux VS Windows

port5900

New Member
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
Points
0
@noerrorsfound
Thanks for picking which parts of my paragraph to reply to, cause I notice you totally ignored the virtual box part. and yes I do know wineHQ is not an emu. My reply was for both wine and Virtual box.
Yes I blame Linux and ATI....oh and add broadcom to the list. I'm a big fan of having programs and hardware that works...I mean I should not be mad about he ATI thing its not like theres so much games to play on Linux;)

What's wrong with GIMP? Why not just use an older version of Photoshop?
whats wrong with gimp?....hummmm...well why dont yo give me a million dollars and i give you a penny. I mean there both money right?
 
Last edited:

labboc

New Member
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Personally I prefer a small BSD derivative (falling under the Linux category I guess, since it is POSIX compliant, not linux though) called Mac OS X. Short of that though, I'll take any *NIX.
 

noerrorsfound

New Member
Messages
1,736
Reaction score
1
Points
0
@noerrorsfound
Thanks for picking which parts of my paragraph to reply to, cause I notice you totally ignored the virtual box part. and yes I do know wineHQ is not an emu. My reply was for both wine and Virtual box.
You're welcome. I only include what I'm responding to in the quote. You did the same thing with my "What's wrong with GIMP?" question. The reason I didn't respond to your VirtualBox argument because I didn't disagree with it.
Yes I blame Linux and ATI....oh and add broadcom to the list. I'm a big fan of having programs and hardware that works...I mean I should not be mad about he ATI thing its not like theres so much games to play on Linux;)
I really disagree with there not being many games.
http://icculus.org/lgfaq/gamelist.php
http://games.linux.sk/
That's just a few out of many. That doesn't include the large amount of Windows games you can run through Wine. And there's more things you need good video drivers for, such as 3d rendering. Some people actually research hardware they're buying before they buy it. Since I game on Linux, I purchase NVIDIA cards because ATI cards won't run 3D games as well. I don't buy an ATI video card and then go complain to the wrong people, the Linux community, that it doesn't work. The only people responsible for ATI's video cards not being up to par are ATI. If they'd provide proper drivers, their cards would be just as good for 3D as NVIDIA's are.
whats wrong with gimp?....hummmm...well why dont yo give me a million dollars and i give you a penny. I mean there both money right?
You're still not providing valid reasoning for your argument. You can't buy as much with a penny as you can with a million dollars, yet you haven't pointed out what feature you need that GIMP doesn't have.

Linux works better "out of the box" than Windows does, so it's actually better for people new to computers. It includes many more applications by default and it's much easier to find new applications when you need them.

Dell sells Linux PCs for those who won't spend a few minutes researching hardware for Linux compatibility. Dell also offers paid support.

And, as always, there is no "best OS" for everyone. If you're a "hardcore" PC gamer who has to play all new games immediately, Windows would be a better choice, or you could dual boot and use Linux as your main OS and switch to Windows to play games. Wine does support many games, but it can take quite a while after a game's release for it to be playable. Some might never work playably. Depending on what games you play, you could be a hardcore gamer and still use only Linux. Source engine powered games (Counter-Strike: Source being the most actively played online FPS in the world, although I don't care much for it) will work excellently.
 
Last edited:

port5900

New Member
Messages
150
Reaction score
0
Points
0
my Quote
now if any ones says gimp, its cause you just dont know better.
I'm not going to hold your hand and walk you through graphics land...obviously your one of the people I'm talking about(with no offence). you just don't know better-=/ features like RAW or CMYK support(real CMYK) the interface is bad and hinders workflow, pantone not there, weak text tools bla bla bla.

On the topic of games you stated my points.

I will end this flame war by saying right now Linux is just not up to my needs. I would spend the $100 for XP pro.
 
Last edited:

davem2008

New Member
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Points
1
Linux...Windows...Mac...Unix...BSD...VMS...

My preference is ? It all depends on what I am doing at the moment and if I want to make money doing it. If I want to program for fun then Linux is the way to go. I really like LFS (Linux From Scratch) as it helps solve some of the mysteries of how Linux works.

If I want to program for profit, I generally choose Windows. Why? That is what the majority of the business world uses. I don't expect everyone (or anyone) to agree with this, but it is how I have made my living.

Mac, VMS, Unix, BSD? I have dabbled with all of them and found them good for certain things, but not so good at others.

So, which is better, Linux or Windows? Neither! They both are! Gawd, I think my head is gonna explode!
 
Last edited:

Sohail

Active Member
Messages
3,055
Reaction score
0
Points
36
I wouldn't go for either of them, Mac is the one for me and i have go some details of a website, take a look :-

Opinion: GNOME is nice, KDE is fine and the forthcoming Looking Glass may be wonderful, but the best Unix desktop is the one in the Macintosh.When I first started using Unix, my favorite "desktop" was the Korn shell. Its still my favorite command line interface.

As the years went by and interfaces grew graphical, I grew fond of SCOs Open Desktop. Or, as I sometimes called it on days when my top-of-the-line ATI Ultra card with its 1MB of RAM was grinding away at putting a glorious 256-color display on my monitor, Open Deathtrap.

Then, along came Linux, and life got a lot better. Ive used both KDE and GNOME and a host of more obscure Linux desktops such as Enlightenment. These days, though, Ive become a confirmed KDE user.

Of course, none of these is even close to being in the running for the best Unix desktop.

No, the best Unix desktop is Aqua, and youll find it running on any Mac running Mac OS 10.x.

Somewhere along the line, we over in the Linux/Unix/AIX/Solaris world seem to have forgotten that Macs are now Unix workstations.

Under every bright, shiny Mac desktop beats a Unix heart named Darwin. Darwin, in turn, is built on top of Mach 3.0 operating-system services, which run on top of the 4.4 BSD Unix operating system.

KDE and GNOME have both gotten much better, but lets get real. Theyre not even in the same ballpark.

It comes down to fundamentals. Linux desktops come from developers whose primary interest has always been building powerful tools that give the informed user almost limitless power over how his or her machine works. The key words here are "informed" and "power."

Todays Mac desktop comes from decades of a different design philosophy, where ease of use is all.

Now, as someone with more then 20 years in Unix/Linux, I appreciate what the KDE/GNOME designers are doing, and I know lots of other Linux and Solaris power users do, too.

But most desktop users, and certainly most enterprise desktop users, are not power users. They want their systems to be easy to use and for their applications to work. To them, the fact that GNOME configuration management editor GConf-editor lets a GNOME power user fine-tune everything on the desktop to their fondest wishes is less than meaningless—its useless.

Todays business users also want the applications they already know. StarOffice and OpenOffice are all fine and good but, like it or lump it, most users want the applications they know from Windows, and the Mac gives them most of those. Indeed, Microsoft just released the first service pack for Microsoft Office 2004 for the Mac.

Yes, as Ive explained before, you can run most Windows applications on Linux with programs such as my personal favorite Win4Lin, but the bottom line is that you have to go to extra trouble to run applications.

I also have recently had friends rub my nose in the fact that theres no built-in Linux desktop help thats anything close to what Macs offer, or even, dare I say it, Windows.

Just because you or I have no trouble finding help for our desktop problems using a combination of man and apropos, along with a HowTo file we found on the Web, doesnt mean anyone else wants to go to that much trouble. Or, more to the point, that some would even know how to find an answer that way.

The default Linux approach has always been to either look up the answer, as I describe above, or to look for answers in the Linux community. That was fine when Linux was a hobby, but business users want to find their answers on the desktop, not in a LUG (Linux User Group).

I really hope Linux developers start spending more time on polishing up the desktop and improving its help systems and documentation. In the meantime, while Linux and KDE make up my preferred desktop, I think there can be really no question that the best Unix desktop for most users is Mac OS X and Aqua.
 

HomerJ

New Member
Messages
181
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I agree largely with sohailamir52. Really, I like any Unix-like OS. However, I never use Mac OS, I find Macs to be too expensive (not necessarily over-priced, but definitely beyond my price range). Linux ,and other open source Unix-likes, on the other hand, are free and run on cheap and old hardware.

The power and full control is another reason I choose linux. However, with a small amount of effort, you can install all of the GNU tools on Mac OS as well. You can also install them on Windows through cygwin, but it isn't as easy or as usable since Windows has no Unix base.

So, I have no problems with Mac or any other Unix-like OS. They are all very usable and powerful tools. I'm sure Windows can be a powerful tool, but I can't use it effectively. I much prefer the powerful and simple command-line interface, which totally sucks on Windows, and I'm very accustomed to Bash and the GNU tools.
 

winlux

New Member
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
With linux, I find that I can fix almost any problem in five minutes.

I also find Unix familiar, and Windows almost alien. That's just a symptom of using Linux for so long though.

Well mate I hope you mean ALMOST any problem because I can tell you that quite often in linux there are cases where that 5% fail rate of windows looks really good actually. I agree there are work arounds for many things but uinfortunately the only to get THE LINUX SYSTEM is to stop using distros and just compiling your own stuff... now I dare you to pass on some 5 min solving techniques.

The main thing is simple, I agree people should get introd into linux because for most of it, it's very easy if you stick with pre compiled distrobutions and for just web surfing etc it is great. Well maybe more than that. People that like Photoshop.. take a look at the GIMP a gnu alternative, For .NET programming try mono. these programmes are a little different but you learn them quite quickly. A lot of the open source programmes are available in windows as well so dont worry about having to install linux first. Just get a windows version, try it. By the way... I run the new version of Debian linux with advanced 3D etc enabled on my old 1 GHZ computer with 256 MB ram while running apache, mysql server, php, file integrity checkers etc without it degrading performance. I want to see people try that with the new VISTA.
 

HomerJ

New Member
Messages
181
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well mate I hope you mean ALMOST any problem because I can tell you that quite often in linux there are cases where that 5% fail rate of windows looks really good actually. I agree there are work arounds for many things but uinfortunately the only to get THE LINUX SYSTEM is to stop using distros and just compiling your own stuff... now I dare you to pass on some 5 min solving techniques.

Well, actually, I am only one-step above not using a distro and just compiling everything myself. I am using Gentoo Linux. It is source-based and uses portage (inspired by BSD ports) as its package manager. Only a few necessary programs are installed after the installation (portage, make, gcc, grep, etc). If you know what you are doing or are good are finding answers on the forums, wiki, and google, problems can be solved with a few simple commands.

Of course, there is a massive downside of having to compile everything. But, on a reasonably fast dual-core processor that doesn't take too long, and some of the biggest packages (like firefox, openoffice) have binary versions that don't need compiling.

Although, I must admit, some things do take longer. For example, yesterday, I was setting up my webcam. I did it on Windows (under VMWare) in about 10-15 minutes. In linux, it took about 25-30 minutes. On Windows, I just had to find the drivers, install them, reboot, and find some applications to use the camera. On linux, I had to reconfigure the kernel, recompile the kernel, and then load the new modules (no reboot). Then, I had to do it again after realizing that I missed a necessary module. Keep in mind, this is nowhere near as difficult as it sounds. It only took about two minutes of configuring, and the rest of the time waiting for the compilation to finish.

Setting up the microphone could have been done in two minutes. But, it took me about half an hour to realize that I had the microphone muted and that was why it wasn't recording.:mad:

Overall, most things can be done easily, a few things can take ages of fiddling. However, as long as you research the hardware you are buying, you should never have a problem where nothing can be done.
 

ThePaintGuru

New Member
Messages
208
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Hmm, this is a tough one for me.

If I started again from scratch, I might go for Linux. The way I see it, things keep getting easier and easier for those willing to switch, and with all the great open-source programs out there it would be nice to not pay for a change :). However, I am currently still using Windows XP and have been for a long time. When XP dies out, I won't move to Vista, but will probably go the linux route.

I don't like Macs much at all, something about that animated desktop that only works well on fast computers really bothers me, although an OS is an OS, and I could probably get used to anything.
 

winlux

New Member
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
Well like HomerJ and my previous post said... It takes to time to learn it but the nice thing about linux is that you can do the instalation and set up things the way that you want and then go back and tweak code the way you like. Now this is pain staking and with complicated programmes better to leave as is, you will none the less soon find yourself working on scripts to streamline things on your machine, using any posix type system is fun... not because everything works or is always compatible but you learn things about computers at your own pace and ways which quite frankly I wouldn't have the slightest clue about where to start in windows.

The funny thing about it is that many always try to get more flashy graphical interfaces etc. but once you get into the scripting and coding and things you revert back to the good old command line because it is quicker and sometimes easier to do things there. Funny how something so old being so popular and powerful.

HomerJ I wasn't dissing you for your 5min solutions... I'm new to this forum and just wanted to start getting into things here... Sorry if you were offended. LOL But I believe we have the same view points on operating systems.
 

HomerJ

New Member
Messages
181
Reaction score
0
Points
0
HomerJ I wasn't dissing you for your 5min solutions... I'm new to this forum and just wanted to start getting into things here... Sorry if you were offended. LOL But I believe we have the same view points on operating systems.

No offense was taken. I was agreeing with your post, and I think you are with mine as well.

I was only pointing out the fact that Gentoo is one step away from Linux from scratch.
 

mender42

New Member
Messages
42
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I use both now in duel boot. Depends on what I need. As for Windows is the most used Operating system, maybe, but I notice Servers are say 80% Apache/Linux :) Including this one. =)
 

winlux

New Member
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
As for Windows is the most used Operating system, maybe, but I notice Servers are say 80% Apache/Linux :) Including this one. =)

Windows is the most used correct, but the main reason I is because every new machine comes with it. A few companies say that they have linux pre-installed but I have not seen any of those in shops yet. If computers came without anything I'm sure that linux would have been a highly popular choice because even commercial versions of linux cost only a penny in confront to descend versions of windows. Generally people don't want to spend money, and in the case of choosing linux I believe it's a very good thing. That way if people really want to spend X amount they can donate to projects building programmes you use often.

For servers the story is a bit different. Yes most are linux and apache, but it is unknown how many of these are running commercial versions of linux. I think that what would be interesting to know. Just look at what Open Source has to offer, if say 35% more people bought linux installed pc's, just imagine what open source could have been like now! what do you guys reckon?
 

struni

New Member
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
0
It is usually depends on our requirements.

Windows is very user friendly operating system, when compared to Linux.
since installation of new softwares, and using other features very easily.
But it lacks security.

There comes Linux. It is very secure operating system. Almost you can't
find any virus or other spyware for linux. And comes bundled with many useful utilities.
Its free, and very cheap for enterprise use. Thats why most of the servers are running Linux os. Linux is very very powerful when compared to Windows.But it looks very technical and a new user will find it somewhat difficult. So our requirement counts which to choose, I believe.

Windows for Normal user and Linux for Advanced user.

I am using both as dual booting, Windows XP and Ubuntu Linux.
I personally like both
sorry for making this post very long guys.
 

sclewin

New Member
Messages
88
Reaction score
0
Points
0
For most purposes, especially internet use, Linux is much better. windows does not do very well at all on the internet with the hundreds of thousands of viruses and the almost equal amount of spyware. If you are an avid gamer that requires proprietary games then a extra XP partition is easy to have on your computer like many have said and you can simply disable the internet on your XP side. Personally I use Kubuntu (a Ubuntu variant) with a windows xp partition. 98% of the time I use Linux then I simply switch over to XP to play the couple games I don't want to run through wine.

When it comes to simplicity, now a days Linux haves not only caught up with windows but distributions like Ubuntu that are made for newbie windows users in mind and are easier to install and run than windows.
 

winlux

New Member
Messages
49
Reaction score
0
Points
0
.
...Its free, and very cheap for enterprise use. Thats why most of the servers are running Linux os. Linux is very very powerful...

...Windows for Normal user and Linux for Advanced user...

I do not totally agree with these posts. Linux is not for advanced users only. If you run KDE and Gnome with a standard install it's virtually fool proof just like windows.

Being free and cheap is a misconception. Yes you can download it etc. Yes it can be free. But big companies do not really run just the basic download versions of linux for their servers. Most of them use commercial versions like Red Hat witch is very popular. Now usually with those the operating system is not as expensive as windows maybe... but have you seen the price tag on technical support? A big enterprise always get that. Once considering those things, linux and windows are both going to cost you an arm and a leg.
 

davidrs

New Member
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I use Windows, but only because I am a) a gamer, and most games use Windows; b) the development tools I use on this (AFAIK) don't exist for Linux (Flash, Photoshop, etc.) c) my school runs its network on M$ stuff, so it may as well be compatible.

However, although I use Windows XP, to Vista :)nuts:) all I have to say is :thefinger!
 

struni

New Member
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Points
0
I do not totally agree with these posts. Linux is not for advanced users only. If you run KDE and Gnome with a standard install it's virtually fool proof just like windows....

Being free and cheap is a misconception....

I agree with you buddy. I am not saying that Linux is only for advanced users. What I'm saying is windows is easy for a new comer. For example, Take a newbie, who wants to learn computers for the first time. Give him Windows and Linux and let him tryout. Chances are, he likes Windows than Linux. Because the windows UI is more user friendly. Of course, it doesn't mean that Linux is not user frinedly. But Windows is more user friendly. I tried different Linux versions like Fedora Core, Ubuntu linux etc., and thats just what I believe.

And about the cost concept, Take webhosting packages, You will find everywhere that Linux hosting is cheaper compared to Windows hosting. And Linux is freely availabe for personal users. I just used this concept for comparing costs.

Well, I am talking about the personal users friend. I don't know much about corporate usage. But thanks for your comment.

And What I mean an advanced user is, someone who has experince in computers and a littlebit networking, to use the Complete Power Of Linix.
And most of Linux's power lies in its commands(you can't find this in Windows, whether in commands or in GUI).

Personally I Love Linux.
 
Top