The Windows/Linux discussion topic!

[RichMan]

Originally Posted by mantidor

this is without the intention to flame but, linux unstable???

I created this topic who I wouldn't be offtopic in the "Virus.....ughh" topic. This is a place to discuss Windows and Linux, and you can throw in MAC OS if you want, but personally, I think that is the worst OS of all time!

(i'm talking to Mantidor right now)Yes, it is very unstable. Anything foreign program(meaning it wasn't created by the people who created each type of Linux, such as Mandrake, Redhat, etc) to Linux will lock up(such as various programs created by only for Linux that are not commercial) and i'd like you to ask me this "RichMan, how many times did you have to kill dead application while using Linux?" I'm glad you asked. I had to do it ALL THE TIME, especially when trying to use normal software(like media players and "The Gimp") and it would always lock up when I would mess with the internet settings.

For as long as I've had Windows XP Professional I have NEVER SEEN THE BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH!(it's been about 2-3 months since I first installed it). Also, linux-people try to say crap like "Oooooo Windows locks up all the time" and "Oooooo Windows is not secure and gets alot of virus's" Here's what I have to say about that! When I had Windows 98 and Windows ME it would lock up(and with Windows 98 I have seen the "blue screen of death"), but Windows XP Professional doesn't have those problems(or at least I haven't seen them). Also, about virus's, I swear i'm not lying about this, I am not using a virusscan program at all, and i'm virus-free!(and just to be sure, I use Microtreads free online scan about once every 2 weeks or so to be sure). All I use is a really good Firewall(which I think everyone should have. Windows, Linux, Mac, everyone!). Of course, I do use Ad-aware and Spybot as well(who doesn't?).

Oh yeah, here's another thing I hear from Linux-people "OOOoooo what about all the programs running in the background?" Here's what I have to say about that! Come on people, do any of you guys really have computers weak enough that the performance would be effect by a few programs in the background? I'm running a Pentium 3 clocked at 800mhz and i'm not effected at all. Besides, ever since Windows 2000 appeared you can press "Crl+Alt+Del" and turn them off anyways. Here's one last thing I hear from Linux-people "Oooo Linux is more customizable than Windows." Here's my final answer. Not really, ever since the API has figured out people have been able to completly customize the look of Windows XP. In the control panel u can also mess with the keyboard and mouse buttons as well, but seriously, who doesn't like Windows mouse and keyboard controls as is? That's all I have to say(for now)

The number 1 thing I hear from Linux-people is that they hate the cost of Windows. Come on, whats up with that? Are you people poor or something?

Please, discuss whatever you like, as long as it stays to the topic.

[RichMan]

What's with all the Mac hate? Mac OS X = Windows 2020 though this is a debate that will have no end.

(I'm now talking to Raikage) Windows 2020? ok? I've had to bare with MAC's throughout elementary school till all the way to last year in high school(now that I have Internet class I get to use new Dell's with Pentium 4 2.8ghz, with Windows XP Professional, blah blah blah etc.) With MAC's(even using the good ones that isn't just a screen)I have always hated there slowness, how they always lock up, the look and feel of it, the one-clicker mouse, etc. Plus, you are extremely limited on upgrades(such as adding RAM)It is just sickening, even more so than Linux!!(if you can believe that!)

Plz, let me mention that i'm not starting any flames/flamewars, i'm just telling you how things have been in my experience.

[xris]

I think you have posted a lot of flame bait in these two posts (and why double post in the first palce...)

If this thread does produce flames or insults, then I'll consider RichMan as the culprit (for starting the thing off in the first place) and ban both him and the flamer.

So, if you want to discuss, please discuss, but do not rise to any flame bait.

[RichMan]

Basically, I just wanted to prove a few points for those who bash Windows, and to enlighten them. Heck, it's possible they might somehow prove me wrong. So this is a discussion, not "flame bait"

[xris]

Originally Posted by RichMan

Basically, I just wanted to prove a few points for those who bash Windows, and to enlighten them. Heck, it's possible they might somehow prove me wrong. So this is a discussion, not "flame bait"

You haven't "proved" anything, you have just given your opinion on the experiences you've had with XP and Linux. And statements like "Anything foreign program...to Linux will lock up" isn't exactly stunning evidence is it.

As I said, I consider a lot you posted as direct flamebait. It rather depends if you join in the discussion or not, trolls typically start off the flames and then sit back and watch everyone flame each other (aided with an extra little torch here and here by the troll), so we'll see how this turns out.

I would suggest people treat this as flamebait and so ignore it all but if you do wish to discuss then just make sure it's a discussion.

[Nothing Special]

I'd like to point out that the short form of Macintosh is Mac not MAC. It's not an acronym. I'm surprised at how common this mistake is.

Originally Posted by RichMan

… Plz, let me mention that i'm not starting any flames/flamewars, i'm just telling you how things have been in my experience.

Macs vs. Windows vs. Linux… how many times have we seen these "discussions" turn into flamewars? How many of you out there felt uncomfortable just reading the thread title? That disclaimer's kind of pointless, to be honest.

Here's why I believe these "discussions" turn into a flamewar: "I can't get this guy to agree with me! I guess I'll start talking about something irrelevant! Or I'll start making up stuff!"

I'm not worried about a flamewar here though. I doubt there are many Mac users here and the known Linux users are pretty mature.

Best place for these types of discussion is email, since these disccusions don't usually end well in a public forum. Please don't email me about this though. I use all three platforms and could care less about the negative things people say about each platform. I live in my own blissfully ignorant world.


I hope I have thoroughly killed this thread,

Nothing Special - murderer of threads

[Lefteris_D]

People like writing viruses for windows alot more than for linux or MacOS based on the fact that more people use windows(everyone knows that). That does not mean that other operating systems are more secure just because of the ammount of virus attacks. If somebody were to write a virus for those operating systems we would see how secure an operating system is.

I personally use both windows and linux and I like them both. When it comes to windows however I have learned that with proper patching and a updated antivirus things are fine. With linux on the other hand besides the usual kernel update I rarely bother applying patches due to the small ammount of viruses compared to windows.

[RichMan]

Experience with computers = proof about computers (True true)

&

It doesn't matter how I say mac. As long as you know what I mean. go ahead and say WIN or or just W for all I care.

Does anyone have anything to say?

[Sid_Burn]

All I can say is... WinXP is still the best... since it provides more options and entertainment than Linux and Apple Mac...

That's all...

[Necrodeath]

Meh, I use WinXP Pro, and I haven't thought of changing it to linux or anything else. Why? Simply because WinXP works for me, it works, so why change it? People might be saying stuff like: "Well, you don't know until you've tried it, right?" I don't have a reason to try it, so I won't. To me, WinXP rules them all, because I haven't tried any other.

Originally Posted by Nothing Special

I live in my own blissfully ignorant world.

Same here...

[DAK]

In my opinion, it all depends on what you plan on using your system for.

I know linux relatively well, I often end up discussing with people about linux being better than windows but, I use windowsXP not linux.

Originally Posted by RichMan

Yes, it is very unstable. Anything foreign program(meaning it wasn't created by the people who created each type of Linux, such as Mandrake, Redhat, etc) to Linux will lock up(such as various programs created by only for Linux that are not commercial)

If you compile the program from the source like you are supposed to, it should work flawlessly. I have never had an application crash in linux as I compile from source, not download precompiled RPMs. It is almost guarenteed to work perfectly if you get the source and compile it on your system so it matches your hardware and software setup properly, not matching the software setup of the system that compiled the RPM that you downloaded.

WindowsXP runs poorly on a system that does not have much RAM. My home system has only 256MB of DDR and thus, hinders performance in windows whereas, a customized linux distribution like a Stage1 gentoo install will run absolutely beautifully. Linux is customized to match your system if you do a more advanced form of install using a better distribution like core, or gentoo as compared to the basic distros such as mandrake and redhat that you mentioned. That is part of your problem, those distributions are extremely user friendly and do not display the capabilities of linux very well as they are very generic and are not customized to your system.

Linux has architecture specific components so the OS is customized to work best on your system when you build it. Whereas, windows is very generic, other than drivers your OS is not customized to your hardware and can hurt the system performance (very slightly mind you, no one notices, there isn't that much of a difference unless you're doing major compiling or something similar).

There's also the discussion about virii. There have been around something like 20 virii for linux that have been recorded while window has thousands upon thousands of virii. Linux is much more secure, there is no risk of getting trojans or milicious virii but, if you are very careful with your windows system, you don't really have to worry about that either. As long as you keep your windows OS updated, running windows update regularly and use a good anti-virus and keep it updated, virii aren't much of a problem either.

And after my rant... like I said before, I do think linux can be better but, no, I do not use it on my home system. I run windowsXP pro on my home system. It may have a couple small problems as I said above but, it does what I need it to do. It all depends on what you plan on using your system for. If you game, obviously unless you want to fight with WineX and trying to get decent graphics drivers for your card, you have to use windows. Other things it doesn't matter quite so much.

[ShadowlessMurker]

What are the distinct difference's between Linux, and Window's?
Can someone simplify the pro's and con's of each?

[DAK]

The difference between windows and linux is as follows *sigh* (I figured my past post would have cut it *sigh*):

Functionality in general
Windows and Linux run completely different programs for the most part, a program written for windows will not run on a linux system and a program for linux will not run on a windows system. Unless of course they are made in Java but that is an exception. Windows is easy to use while some linux systems can be hard to use and requires a little bit of learning to use it properly while linux is much much more customizable when you know how to do these things and windows lacks alot of those features.

Stability
Windows is normally far less stable than linux is. Linux tends to have much better memory management than windows and does not require to be rebooted after an extended period of time unlike windows. Its swap setup is much more efficient keeping the swap on a seperate, higher speed partition instead of on the main partition.

Cost
Most linux distributions with the exception of server level distributions are free and are often created by common programmers who are not paid unlike windows where they are paid programmers. Linux has a community working on it, fixing bugs, adding functionality while windows has their company itself. Linux tends to support new hardware much faster than windows due to this. If you are cheap, linux is a good way to go as it is not over $200 for a copy.

Games
If you are a gamer, linux is virtually useless to you. There are very few games out right now that run on linux without requiring another program to allow them to function. The newer games in the Unreal Tournament series would be an example of games that are made to run in linux. Windows is a much better OS if you wish to play computer games.

Pros and Cons

Linux
Pros
- Fast
- Efficient
- Stable
- Secure
Cons
- Hard to learn at the start
- Very few games (Mainstream)

Windows
Pros
- Widely Used
- Basically every program you could want for it
- Very easy to learn
Cons
- Very expensive
- Virii and Trojans
- Insecure

** Anything else, refer to my post above, no more time to rant, I'll post some more after if you wish when I have more time *mutters* stupid class..

[Shii]

A second opinion on Linux games...
Linux has all of the old games that people like me much prefer to 3D terrorist-slaughtering extravaganzas. If you're up for a game of Nethack, Moon Buggy, Tetris, LambdaMOO, Adventure, Zork or other text adventures, Monkey Island or other old DOS games, Pac-Man, chess, or Go, then Linux can provide it, and usually far better than Windows can.

[Vulkar]

I use Mandrake Linux. (yes yes, go ahead and shoot me hardcore Linux users). I like the user friendliness and the stability. Basically, I dual boot though with Linux and WinME. Prior to starting Linux I was stuck with crappy ME. and no to respond to a few things:

Originally Posted by RichMan

Yes, it is very unstable. Anything foreign program(meaning it wasn't created by the people who created each type of Linux, such as Mandrake, Redhat, etc) to Linux will lock up(such as various programs created by only for Linux that are not commercial) and i'd like you to ask me this "RichMan, how many times did you have to kill dead application while using Linux?" I'm glad you asked. I had to do it ALL THE TIME, especially when trying to use normal software(like media players and "The Gimp") and it would always lock up when I would mess with the internet settings.

Actually, I've not really had two much of a problem running any Linux programs. especially stuff like GIMP or Xine. Those two programs it is very easy to find Mandrake/Redhat etc. specifically designed RPMs. Also, if I look a little I can usually find Mandrake specific rpms around on the internet. The easiest place to find them being the repositories such as RPMfind or RPMbone, but I've found them in other places.

Also, if you can't find an RPM, the source code is almost always avaiiable to download for you to compile. Which I've just recently started doing. (sorry, it's always been a little intimidating for me, but baby steps, baby steps )

Originally Posted by Richman

For as long as I've had Windows XP Professional I have NEVER SEEN THE BLUE SCREEN OF DEATH!(it's been about 2-3 months since I first installed it). Also, linux-people try to say crap like "Oooooo Windows locks up all the time" and "Oooooo Windows is not secure and gets alot of virus's" Here's what I have to say about that! When I had Windows 98 and Windows ME it would lock up(and with Windows 98 I have seen the "blue screen of death"), but Windows XP Professional doesn't have those problems(or at least I haven't seen them).

Well, my primary Windows usage, as I mentioned earlier, is with WinME. So, I see the BSOD all the time. I also have a lot of programs which cease to respond and "caused an error in 63767637647somthing-blah-blah" So, I see we're in agreement about the suckiness WinME. When I'm home from college I use my parents XP machine though and I find that OS is yes more stable, but I've still gotten BSOD and crashed/froze applications, but less often. In Linux, I've never crashed my machine. Not once. Sure GAIM or whatever will crash once in a while, but it doesn't take the whole OS with it. Usually when something crashes I just reopen it and continue right where I left off. Which is great. I hate how I constantly have to restart with WinME whenever a problem occurs.

Originally Posted by RichMan

The number 1 thing I hear from Linux-people is that they hate the cost of Windows. Come on, whats up with that? Are you people poor or something?

Actually, I am. Sorry dude. I don't have a job right now and I'm a college student. Books and art supplies are very expensive, so the budget is tight. One reason why I'm a fan of the recommended free games thread here on Animesuki. I can still play something new without paying $50. While I would like a new machine, (so I can ditch WinME and get a better all around system for gaming), can't really afford it.

Originally Posted by Ashibaka

A second opinion on Linux games...
Linux has all of the old games that people like me much prefer to 3D terrorist-slaughtering extravaganzas. If you're up for a game of Nethack, Moon Buggy, Tetris, LambdaMOO, Adventure, Zork or other text adventures, Monkey Island or other old DOS games, Pac-Man, chess, or Go, then Linux can provide it, and usually far better than Windows can.

Also, don't forget. All those emulators also run on Linux. SNES9x, MAME, dgen, and others. It's cool to be able to play Super Mario, Metroid or others.

edit: forget to add this. A note on customization. Since I've started using Linux, I've fallen in love with Windowmaker and that's how I'd prefer to work on my PC. Yes, I could customize something similar in windows, but then I'd have do one of those shell replacement things like Litestep and that's too much of pain for me. So, yeah windows in customizable but do you really want to go through the trouble? I remember it would suck a lot when Litestep crashed since it wouldn't load a desktop or buttons. I'd have no interface to interact with.

[zalas]

Originally Posted by Sid_Burn

I dont know anything about linux... but anyway XP has more features... than the other OS...

Wait... how do you know that XP has more features if you don't know anything about Linux? O_o

Anyways, in response to the feelings people have about Macs:
Mac OSX is IMO a great improvement over Mac OS9. The jump is equivalent to something like jumping from Windows 3.11 with 32 bit extensions to Windows 2000. What was great about this was that Mac OSX, since it's using some variant of *nix, is much more stable than Mac OS9, plus it has a familiar GUI with which the old Mac OS9 users can cope with. Basically, if you want GUI, it's there, but if you need to do something at a lower level, you can also mess in the Console.

Recently I've encountered an amusing problem with Windows 2000. Basically, once I open enough windows, Windows 2000 runs out of window handles or something and will refuse to create new handles. So basically, buttons will refuse to load up, programs will crash, dialog windows don't appear, etc.

Oh yeah, here's another thing I hear from Linux-people "OOOoooo what about all the programs running in the background?" Here's what I have to say about that! Come on people, do any of you guys really have computers weak enough that the performance would be effect by a few programs in the background? I'm running a Pentium 3 clocked at 800mhz and i'm not effected at all.

Actually, I've found the Linux scheduler to be much more efficient than Windows in many regards. Furthermore, I do tend to run a lot of things in the background, and I would prefer for them not to interfere with what I'm doing currently in the foreground. With Windows, if there is a process trying to use as much of the CPU as it can, and even if you set it to lowest priority (and this was on an Athlon 2600 XP), you can still feel the effects of that process. However, doing something similar, without even lowering the priority on Linux, doesn't affect what I'm currently doing in the foreground (and this was on an Athlon 800). So you may say that we should just get better computers to compensate for Windows' scheduler, but I'd rather get much more performance out of my current hardware.

Lastly, the sad thing is, the state of the GUI in Linux is still pretty shabby. Layering GNOME on top of XWindows, etc. provides a somewhat nice looking GUI, but the response times are often pretty poor, unless you have a really fast machine. Furthermore, not many software manufacturers want to develop for Linux, so I would have to end up using Win2K for some things.

[Dopeskills]

Richman: Calm down with your uneducated rants

All of your basic productivity software is available for Linux and is often built right into the distribution. The latest kernel runs nice and fast and does what it is supposed to without any issues. Being a programmer i like the fact most of the software is open source because i can take a look at whats going on and even modify things if I need to.

My biggest issue with windows is all of the spy/adware/viruses. Earthlink submitted a report that the average user has 28 different spyware programs running on thier machine. What the hell is wrong here? Have you ever checked to see how much crap is running on your beloved XP machine and invading your privacy/running trojans?

Also, i crash XP on a regular basis. Several times were fatal crashes which required me to reinstall the entire OS. I've even had it crash in the middle of a windows repair which further screwed things up.

IMO - OSX is the best mix between a friendly user experience and the ability to compile *NIX based apps.

[Roots]

Why Use Linux?

The above site provides an awesome in-depth explanation of the benefits and shortcomings of Linux vs Windows. I know its a long read, but I found it worth my time. For those who are lazy, I'll provide a summary of the key points here. Also note that some of the later sections will give you an inside look on Microsoft's (evil) business practices.


0.3 Linux is difficult for newbies.
This may be true. But the real question is: do you really want to learn it? None of the authors has a computer science background, yet we use Linux everyday and we love it.


0.4 What are the benefits of Linux?
o A modern, very stable, multi-user, multitasking environment on your inexpensive PC hardware, at no (or almost no) monetary cost for the software. Linux is a rich and powerful platform--don't think of it as a "poor people" operating system. Out-of-box Linux has as much capability as MS Windows NT with $5000 in software add-ons, is more stable, and requires less powerful hardware for comparable tasks.

o Unsurpassed computing power, portability, flexibility, and customizibility.

o Advanced graphical user interface. Linux uses a standard, network-transparent X-windowing system with a "window manager" (typically KDE or GNOME). The graphical desktop under Linux can be made to look like MS Windows (or probably ANY other graphical user interface of your choice).

o Dozens of excellent, free, general-interest desktop applications. These include a range of web browsers, email programs, word processors, spreadsheets, bitmap and vector graphics programs, file managers, audio players, CD writers, some good games, etc.

o Hundreds of specialized applications built by researchers around the world (astronomy, information technology, chemistry, physics, engineering, linguistics, biology, ...).

o Scores of top-of-the line commercial programs including all the big databases (e.g., Oracle, Sybase, but no Microsoft's). Many (most?) of these are offered free for developers and for personal use.

o Excellent networking capability built into your operating system.

o Connectivity to Microsoft, Novel, and Apple proprietary networking. Reading/writing to your DOS/MS Windows and other disk formats. This includes "transparent" use of data stored on the legacy MS Windows partition of your hard drive(s).

o State-of-the-art development platform with many best-of-the-kind programming languages and tools coming free with the operating system.

o Freedom from viruses, "backdoors" to your computer, software manufacturer "features," invasion of privacy, forced upgrades, proprietary file formats, licensing and marketing schemes, product registration, high software prices, and pirating.

o A platform which will technically develop at a rapid pace.


0.6 What are the differences between Linux and MS Windows?
- Linux is free, whereas MS Windows costs money. Same for applications. If MS Windows or Office comes preinstalled with the computer it is unlikely it is free. Ask in the store to take it off your computer (your run Linux) and you are likely to obtain a discount, at least in smaller stores.

- Linux file formats are free, so you can access them in a variety of ways. On MS Windows, the common practice is to make you lock your own data in secret formats that can only be accessed with tools leased to you at the vendor's price. How corrupt (or incompetent?) must be the politicians who lock our public records into these formats! "What we will get with Microsoft is a three-year lease on a health record we need to keep for 100 years" [http://news.bbc.co.uk/hi/english/hea...0/1694372.stm].

- With Linux, you are unlikely to violate any licence agreement--all the software is happily yours. With MS Windows you likely already violate all kinds of licenses and you could be pronounced a computer pirate if only a smart lawyer was after you (don't worry, most likely none is after you).

- MS Windows tries to be the "lowest-common-denominator" operating system (for better or worse), whereas Linux is built for more sophisticated, feature-hungry computer users (for better or worse).

- MS Windows is based on DOS; Linux is based on UNIX. MS Windows Graphical User Interface (GUI) is based on Microsoft-owned specifications. Linux GUI is based on an industry-standard network-transparent X-Windowing system.

- Linux beats Windows hands down on network features, as a development platform, in data processing capabilities, and as a scientific workstation. MS Windows desktop has a more polished appearance, smoother general business applications, and many more games for kids (these are not better games though--Linux games tend to be more sophisticated).

- Linux is more feature-rich than you could imagine. Heard on the Internet: "Two big products came from the University of California: UNIX and LSD. And I don't think it's a coincidence." MS Windows is simpler.

[hhaamu]

This is what I think on the subject of OSes:

If you want to play games, go ahead and use Windows. (or buy a PlayStation)
If you want to actually use the computer (word processing, net surfing etc), go buy a Mac and use OS X
If you want to program and stuff, have very good customizability and don't mind hacking a bit, use Linux (or any other *nix OS, such as BSD)

If you think an OS is good for you -- use it. I won't force you to change, but it would be nice if you tried the alternatives.

I, myself, am using Linux. I'm happy about using it, even though it may be frustrating sometimes. (Don't get me wrong. I think all OSes are frustrating, but there's no perfect OS. It's impossible to create such thing on things so complex as computers) Once in a while I dual boot to w2k to play games.

My 0,02EUR

And Richman, I regard you as a troll, since I've seen you hijack two threads that specifically were about linux with your trolling posts. You'll soon be on my ignore list if you continue this.

[Roots]

Originally Posted by hhaamu

This is what I think on the subject of OSes:

If you want to play games, go ahead and use Windows. (or buy a PlayStation)
If you want to actually use the computer (word processing, net surfing etc), go buy a Mac and use OS X
If you want to program and stuff, have very good customizability and don't mind hacking a bit, use Linux (or any other *nix OS, such as BSD)

If you think an OS is good for you -- use it. I won't force you to change, but it would be nice if you tried the alternatives.

I, myself, am using Linux. I'm happy about using it, even though it may be frustrating sometimes. (Don't get me wrong. I think all OSes are frustrating, but there's no perfect OS. It's impossible to create such thing on things so complex as computers) Once in a while I dual boot to w2k to play games.

My 0,02EUR

And Richman, I regard you as a troll, since I've seen you hijack two threads that specifically were about linux with your trolling posts. You'll soon be on my ignore list if you continue this.

I agree for the most part. Except I think any O/S is just as good for web surfing/word processing (but Windows may crash on you a lot...). And yeah if you don't like a particular O/S, don't use it. There's something out there for you


To Richman, (and other people who are insulting O/S's in this thread): I don't think you have ANY right to put down an operating system until you, yourself have used it for at least a few days. You can't say "Oh Windows has so many more features than Linux!" when you haven't even USED Linux! You don't have a god damn clue about Linux! Therefore any argument you make like this has no support. So if you plan to insult another O/S, make sure you have experience using it so you can stop wasting everyone's time with your pointless arguments. :fingers: