For Solar - what's a load of bull? If you're saying that Cybercide should ignore my recommendation and install Windows 2000 Server for his 'house network' connectivity to the Internet - why? You've got the money to sponsor his installation - never-mind issues of technogical base, cost of licensed upgrades, proprietary source, etc.? I don't think Cybercide is a corporate, but just a peep trying to get ahead...
-
Join the MyBroadband community
South Africa’s biggest forum. Discuss, discover, and connect with thousands of members.
-
Question of the Day: Do you bet on sports?
ADSL + Linux
- Thread starter Cybercide
- Start date
Reasons why Linux is better than Windows [}
]
Security - Linux is Open Source Software, while Windows is not. The simplest benefits of Open Source Code to demonstrate are increased security, reliability and functionality; because users of Open Source are readily able to identify and correct problems with the programs and to submit their own enhancements for incorporation into the program. Closed Source systems enjoy none of those benefits.
Scalability - Systems implemented under Linux can be cloned limitless times without paying additional software licensing fees - With Windows, you pay for each installation/workstation/server/cpu.
Power - Linux is made with the Unix design philosophy, which dictates that system tools are small and highly specialized. The result is an incredibly powerful and reliable system, limited in capability only by the user's imagination and ability to integrate the Unix utilities. The Windows philosophy is to create unwieldy swiss army knives, limited in capability by how many features the user purchased on their particular knife. Diminished reliability is arguably a side effect of increased complexity. Thus with Windows, the case is often that you have tools that ALMOST do what you want them to, if they didn't crash.
Reliability - The architecture of Linux is superior to Windows because critical operation system functions are implemented in such a way that buggy programs can't cause the computer to become unstable and crash. In fairness, though not quite as robust as Linux, Windows 2000 and Windows XP are much improved over Windows 9x and Windows Millenium Edition.
Advanced Capabilities - In addition to the system utility tools from the Unix world, Linux usually comes with the Apache Webserver, an email server, router/firewall capabilities and SQL databases. These are extras costing up to thousands of dollars on Windows. There IS free software to do these jobs on Windows, but it has mostly been adapted from Linux and loses some functionality when ported to Windows.
Compatibility - Linux is POSIX Compliant which means that applications developed for Linux can be operated on other POSIX compliant Unix derivatives with a minimum of reworking.
Support - For persons not familiar with the Open Source Community, the quality of free technical support on the internet may come as a shock. Sometimes knowing enough to ask the right questions can be a problem, but overall the best and the brightest are there to assist you at no charge when you run into problems that can't be solved by reading the documentation included with Linux. With Windows or other commercial software, your manufacturer support is only free for a limited time and is often of little value anyways.
Not Single Source Software - Linux is distributed by several companies, giving consumers to pick and choose the flavor that best suits their needs. Windows is the product of a single company, Microsoft Corporation. Windows users have no choice but to accept what Microsoft offers.
Rate of Advancement - Linux has and will continue to advance at a rate impossible for a close development project such as Microsoft Windows to sustain. A few factors driving this rate of progress are (in no particular order): the number of active developers; quantity and quality of feedback from the field; short development cycle from development team to the end user; absence of corporate "meddling" in the design process; independently developed open source subsystems frequently incorporated into Linux, giving it quantum advances in a short time.
Cost - That Linux is FREE deserves honorable mention and a bit of explanation. You can package and sell Linux for money. The competing Linux distributions all provide slightly different feature sets beyond the core system, including canned e-commerce solutions, printed manuals and phone support options. There is no rule that says you can't make money distributing Linux. For those who choose to download and install free distributions from the Internet, Linux is truely free. Some cynics have proclaimed, "Sure Linux is free now, but the Linux People will start charging for it once it catches on!". That statment is completely false. No single person or organization controls Linux, so that will never happen. In the unlikely case that Linus Torvalds (the author of Linux) adds some proprietary code and proclaims that all future releases will be $99.99USD, someone will simply take the latest "free" version and possibly rename it to Spin-UX. Then all the volunteer developers and contributors will jump on that bandwagon. Spin-UX will diverge from its Linux roots, over time becoming better supported and more advanced, rendering its ancestor obsolete, except possibly for purposes specifically addressed by that hypothetical proprietary added code. Furthermore Linux is covered by the Gnu Public License, stating that it and all derivative works must be distributed with the source code. This makes it extremely unlikely that anyone will wield monopolistic power in the Linux Sector.
To conclude this hopefully persuasive bit of Linux Advocacy, it must be stated that an Operating System without suitable Applications is of little use. There are free web browsers and email clients for Linux, as well as the free Star Office product from Sun Microsystems. Star Office includes the traditional productivity applications: Word Processing, Spreadsheet and Database. Corel Office is also available for Linux at little or no charge.
As more small businesses adopt Linux, the number of Indepdendent Software Vendors offering industry specific (Vertical Market) applications will increase. As I learn of business applications designed for Linux, I will document them on this site.
He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous
]Security - Linux is Open Source Software, while Windows is not. The simplest benefits of Open Source Code to demonstrate are increased security, reliability and functionality; because users of Open Source are readily able to identify and correct problems with the programs and to submit their own enhancements for incorporation into the program. Closed Source systems enjoy none of those benefits.
Scalability - Systems implemented under Linux can be cloned limitless times without paying additional software licensing fees - With Windows, you pay for each installation/workstation/server/cpu.
Power - Linux is made with the Unix design philosophy, which dictates that system tools are small and highly specialized. The result is an incredibly powerful and reliable system, limited in capability only by the user's imagination and ability to integrate the Unix utilities. The Windows philosophy is to create unwieldy swiss army knives, limited in capability by how many features the user purchased on their particular knife. Diminished reliability is arguably a side effect of increased complexity. Thus with Windows, the case is often that you have tools that ALMOST do what you want them to, if they didn't crash.
Reliability - The architecture of Linux is superior to Windows because critical operation system functions are implemented in such a way that buggy programs can't cause the computer to become unstable and crash. In fairness, though not quite as robust as Linux, Windows 2000 and Windows XP are much improved over Windows 9x and Windows Millenium Edition.
Advanced Capabilities - In addition to the system utility tools from the Unix world, Linux usually comes with the Apache Webserver, an email server, router/firewall capabilities and SQL databases. These are extras costing up to thousands of dollars on Windows. There IS free software to do these jobs on Windows, but it has mostly been adapted from Linux and loses some functionality when ported to Windows.
Compatibility - Linux is POSIX Compliant which means that applications developed for Linux can be operated on other POSIX compliant Unix derivatives with a minimum of reworking.
Support - For persons not familiar with the Open Source Community, the quality of free technical support on the internet may come as a shock. Sometimes knowing enough to ask the right questions can be a problem, but overall the best and the brightest are there to assist you at no charge when you run into problems that can't be solved by reading the documentation included with Linux. With Windows or other commercial software, your manufacturer support is only free for a limited time and is often of little value anyways.
Not Single Source Software - Linux is distributed by several companies, giving consumers to pick and choose the flavor that best suits their needs. Windows is the product of a single company, Microsoft Corporation. Windows users have no choice but to accept what Microsoft offers.
Rate of Advancement - Linux has and will continue to advance at a rate impossible for a close development project such as Microsoft Windows to sustain. A few factors driving this rate of progress are (in no particular order): the number of active developers; quantity and quality of feedback from the field; short development cycle from development team to the end user; absence of corporate "meddling" in the design process; independently developed open source subsystems frequently incorporated into Linux, giving it quantum advances in a short time.
Cost - That Linux is FREE deserves honorable mention and a bit of explanation. You can package and sell Linux for money. The competing Linux distributions all provide slightly different feature sets beyond the core system, including canned e-commerce solutions, printed manuals and phone support options. There is no rule that says you can't make money distributing Linux. For those who choose to download and install free distributions from the Internet, Linux is truely free. Some cynics have proclaimed, "Sure Linux is free now, but the Linux People will start charging for it once it catches on!". That statment is completely false. No single person or organization controls Linux, so that will never happen. In the unlikely case that Linus Torvalds (the author of Linux) adds some proprietary code and proclaims that all future releases will be $99.99USD, someone will simply take the latest "free" version and possibly rename it to Spin-UX. Then all the volunteer developers and contributors will jump on that bandwagon. Spin-UX will diverge from its Linux roots, over time becoming better supported and more advanced, rendering its ancestor obsolete, except possibly for purposes specifically addressed by that hypothetical proprietary added code. Furthermore Linux is covered by the Gnu Public License, stating that it and all derivative works must be distributed with the source code. This makes it extremely unlikely that anyone will wield monopolistic power in the Linux Sector.
To conclude this hopefully persuasive bit of Linux Advocacy, it must be stated that an Operating System without suitable Applications is of little use. There are free web browsers and email clients for Linux, as well as the free Star Office product from Sun Microsystems. Star Office includes the traditional productivity applications: Word Processing, Spreadsheet and Database. Corel Office is also available for Linux at little or no charge.
As more small businesses adopt Linux, the number of Indepdendent Software Vendors offering industry specific (Vertical Market) applications will increase. As I learn of business applications designed for Linux, I will document them on this site.
He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous
Nothing is ever irrelevant to me when it comes to PC's. So what if I don't need it now for my home network? As a 3rd year Info Systems student I'll take any idea's advice and debates on these sort of topics I can get hold of...
Solar
Well-Known Member
Right... the whole explanation of 'Linux better than Windows' really brings tears to my eyes...
Try the following little exercise:
Take someone.. explain to him the theory behind TCP/IP routing and firewalls.
Now take that same person, give him a Windows 2000 CD, and a Linux CD.
Let him try to implement that theory now.
The point I'm trying to make is: this millions of network "boffins" that's starting to emerge now, can scream and shout about Linux all they want. Linux is still far from a complete package. The closest thing to a "user friendly" system I've came across, was Fedora Core 1, and I must admit, I'm currently running that at home - Still.. WHY do I have to look for some obscure samba configuration file to change the name of my computer? Where's the button?
It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.
And you seem to be coming back to the fact that "on Linux the software is free" quite often in your post. Well, perhaps it is, and yes, I agree, sometimes the software is even better than their windows counterpart. But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...
I certainly don't find that amusing.
Try the following little exercise:
Take someone.. explain to him the theory behind TCP/IP routing and firewalls.
Now take that same person, give him a Windows 2000 CD, and a Linux CD.
Let him try to implement that theory now.
The point I'm trying to make is: this millions of network "boffins" that's starting to emerge now, can scream and shout about Linux all they want. Linux is still far from a complete package. The closest thing to a "user friendly" system I've came across, was Fedora Core 1, and I must admit, I'm currently running that at home - Still.. WHY do I have to look for some obscure samba configuration file to change the name of my computer? Where's the button?
It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.
And you seem to be coming back to the fact that "on Linux the software is free" quite often in your post. Well, perhaps it is, and yes, I agree, sometimes the software is even better than their windows counterpart. But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...
I certainly don't find that amusing.
Karnaugh
Banned
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Still.. WHY do I have to look for some obscure samba configuration file to change the name of my computer? Where's the button?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
That’s disturbing.. 'echo name=mynewpcname >> /etc/samba.conf', the thing is you might actually have to take the time to understand the linux userland and its allot easier to use than windows imho
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Again your only argument is your own incompetence. Since when does Windows 2000 do BGP routing anyway? And besides, I think if my ISP used Windows for that I'd get a new ISP quite sort of sharpish.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
'route add [network] gw [gateway]'. Thank god for the 'man route' pages (real men use CIDR notation). That’s allot easier than flicking through stupid management snap-ins IMHO.
Ease of use is a point of view - functionality and stability are hard facts on the other hand.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The closest thing to a "user friendly" system I've came across, was Fedora Core 1<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
"Sorry... that's just disturbing"
Try a worthy Linux distribution like Debian or Gentoo. Before you say Debian is 'too hardcore for me to install' take a look at Knoppix which comes preconfigured.
Since when did "user friendly" become trying to make it look and behave like Windows? Thats all Mandrake and RedHat try to do. If you actualy learnt how to use UNIX, you'd understand differently. Compare how long you've spent learning Windows in the long run with how long you've botherd trying to use Linux or UNIX.
<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
NetLink Research
That’s disturbing.. 'echo name=mynewpcname >> /etc/samba.conf', the thing is you might actually have to take the time to understand the linux userland and its allot easier to use than windows imho
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Again your only argument is your own incompetence. Since when does Windows 2000 do BGP routing anyway? And besides, I think if my ISP used Windows for that I'd get a new ISP quite sort of sharpish.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
'route add [network] gw [gateway]'. Thank god for the 'man route' pages (real men use CIDR notation). That’s allot easier than flicking through stupid management snap-ins IMHO.
Ease of use is a point of view - functionality and stability are hard facts on the other hand.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">The closest thing to a "user friendly" system I've came across, was Fedora Core 1<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
"Sorry... that's just disturbing"
Try a worthy Linux distribution like Debian or Gentoo. Before you say Debian is 'too hardcore for me to install' take a look at Knoppix which comes preconfigured.
Since when did "user friendly" become trying to make it look and behave like Windows? Thats all Mandrake and RedHat try to do. If you actualy learnt how to use UNIX, you'd understand differently. Compare how long you've spent learning Windows in the long run with how long you've botherd trying to use Linux or UNIX.
<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
NetLink Research
Karnaugh
Banned
Oh yes, and I doubt IIS could do even 1/10th of what Apache can [
]
<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
NetLink Research
]<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
NetLink Research
Hehe - [
][] my postings really set the cat amongst the pigeons...
For Cybercide, trust you find the debates interesting, and that it will help formulate your own opinion regarding which computing environment to ultimately opt for... Given the fact that you're reading Info Systems, I would imagine you'll go the Linux route, as it will give you a much better handle on Info Systems issues...
For Ant - a small correction: Sun's Star Office is not free, but commercially licensed. The free Open Source product is Open Office, which is now in fact the primary resoure for the Star Office product (it used to be the other way around) - see http://www.openoffice.org - other than that, your advocacy post was great...
For Karny - don't forget FreeBSD, which I think is just as great as Debian and Gentoo...
For Solar - I think it boils down to your approach and need at the end of the day. If your approach includes the need to understand what you're doing and why you're doing it, Linux is the best option. If you just want to get the job done and are willing to let your hand be held (which is the route a lot of corporates take - after all, they have other business imperatives), then use Windows. Of course, be prepared to pay for the 'privilege' of using proprietary products, which you have no way of knowing will sustain your business indefinitely...
][] my postings really set the cat amongst the pigeons...For Cybercide, trust you find the debates interesting, and that it will help formulate your own opinion regarding which computing environment to ultimately opt for... Given the fact that you're reading Info Systems, I would imagine you'll go the Linux route, as it will give you a much better handle on Info Systems issues...
For Ant - a small correction: Sun's Star Office is not free, but commercially licensed. The free Open Source product is Open Office, which is now in fact the primary resoure for the Star Office product (it used to be the other way around) - see http://www.openoffice.org - other than that, your advocacy post was great...
For Karny - don't forget FreeBSD, which I think is just as great as Debian and Gentoo...
For Solar - I think it boils down to your approach and need at the end of the day. If your approach includes the need to understand what you're doing and why you're doing it, Linux is the best option. If you just want to get the job done and are willing to let your hand be held (which is the route a lot of corporates take - after all, they have other business imperatives), then use Windows. Of course, be prepared to pay for the 'privilege' of using proprietary products, which you have no way of knowing will sustain your business indefinitely...
mithrandi
Well-Known Member
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">Still.. WHY do I have to look for some obscure samba configuration file to change the name of my computer? Where's the button?<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
You know, there's a reason why SWAT (Samba Web Administration Tool) exists. That said, the Samba configuration files will never be as cryptic as the Windows config, where there are no less than three separate locations that control the basic access rights to a single share.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
If you had spent the time learning Linux that you have on learning Windows, the difference would be even more dramatic. I would consider myself extremely competent on both operating systems, and it still takes goddamn forever to configure a Windows box. Heck, Windows is still COPYING THE INSTALL FILES by the time I've finished setting up a Linux system. Microsoft insists on obfuscating everything with wizards and management consoles and registry settings that result in you making stupid mistakes, or taking forever to locate the setting you need; either that, or you need to change about 345234534 things to accomplish some simple change.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...I certainly don't find that amusing.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Funny how the rest of us don't have this problem. Maybe it has something to do with your apparently absurd choices of distribution. In fact, I'll agree with you; the Redhat-based distributions are probably even more screwed up and confusing than Windows... so don't use them! As Karnaugh said, use Debian (my recommendation), or Gentoo, or some derivative.
You have also, so far, ignored the fact that remote exploits that allow attackers to gain full control over your Windows boxes are coming out almost weekly now, and some of them can't even be blocked by a firewall unless the firewall is located on another system in front of the Windows box.
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
You know, there's a reason why SWAT (Samba Web Administration Tool) exists. That said, the Samba configuration files will never be as cryptic as the Windows config, where there are no less than three separate locations that control the basic access rights to a single share.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
If you had spent the time learning Linux that you have on learning Windows, the difference would be even more dramatic. I would consider myself extremely competent on both operating systems, and it still takes goddamn forever to configure a Windows box. Heck, Windows is still COPYING THE INSTALL FILES by the time I've finished setting up a Linux system. Microsoft insists on obfuscating everything with wizards and management consoles and registry settings that result in you making stupid mistakes, or taking forever to locate the setting you need; either that, or you need to change about 345234534 things to accomplish some simple change.
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...I certainly don't find that amusing.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Funny how the rest of us don't have this problem. Maybe it has something to do with your apparently absurd choices of distribution. In fact, I'll agree with you; the Redhat-based distributions are probably even more screwed up and confusing than Windows... so don't use them! As Karnaugh said, use Debian (my recommendation), or Gentoo, or some derivative.
You have also, so far, ignored the fact that remote exploits that allow attackers to gain full control over your Windows boxes are coming out almost weekly now, and some of them can't even be blocked by a firewall unless the firewall is located on another system in front of the Windows box.
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
Karnaugh
Banned
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by mbs</i>
<br />
For Karny - don't forget FreeBSD, which I think is just as great as Debian and Gentoo...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
I certainly won't forget about FreeBSD
EDIT: Sorry just realised my quotes serriously messed this page up - appologies for that.
<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
NetLink Research
<br />
For Karny - don't forget FreeBSD, which I think is just as great as Debian and Gentoo...
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
Code:
[root@sandy]~: uname -a; uptime
FreeBSD sandy.netlink.za.net 5.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE #0:
8:49AM up 1 day, 8:04, 2 users, load averages: 0.00, 0.00, 0.00
[root@azrael]~: uname -a; uptime
FreeBSD azrael.netlink.za.net 5.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE #0:
11:55AM up 12 days, 12:12, 1 user, load averages: 0.33, 0.23, 0.13
[root@gabriel]~: uname -a; uptime
FreeBSD gabriel.netlink.za.net 5.0-RELEASE FreeBSD 5.0-RELEASE #0:
11:54AM up 12 days, 35 mins, 4 users, load averages: 0.01, 0.08, 0.08I certainly won't forget about FreeBSD
EDIT: Sorry just realised my quotes serriously messed this page up - appologies for that.
<hr noshade size="1">
"Since light travels faster than sound, people appear bright until you hear them speak."
NetLink Research
Solar
Well-Known Member
Ag.. this is getting silly now. I'll try Debian.
Hail to linux.
Hail to linux.
Hi
I think you will find that once the Linux box is running it rarely if ever lets you down. True, running around in the config files can be daunting to a newbie but you can get excellent gui's for configuration by simply downloading them from the web. In fact most recent Linux distro's come packed with them! []
If you are looking for an easy operating system, then you may use Windows. If you are looking for a solid system which is more than well documented then Linux is the way to go. I find that just by using Linux you tend to understand the digital world better. It is both a workhorse and teacher just by the way it is structured. It is also about the community surrounding Linux. Way more advanced and friendly than you will find anywhere in the Microsoft world.
I do not think it should be a debate. I think experience is more of a decider in this regard. []
Cheers
Antowan
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Solar</i>
<br />Right... the whole explanation of 'Linux better than Windows' really brings tears to my eyes...
Try the following little exercise:
Take someone.. explain to him the theory behind TCP/IP routing and firewalls.
Now take that same person, give him a Windows 2000 CD, and a Linux CD.
Let him try to implement that theory now.
The point I'm trying to make is: this millions of network "boffins" that's starting to emerge now, can scream and shout about Linux all they want. Linux is still far from a complete package. The closest thing to a "user friendly" system I've came across, was Fedora Core 1, and I must admit, I'm currently running that at home - Still.. WHY do I have to look for some obscure samba configuration file to change the name of my computer? Where's the button?
It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.
And you seem to be coming back to the fact that "on Linux the software is free" quite often in your post. Well, perhaps it is, and yes, I agree, sometimes the software is even better than their windows counterpart. But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...
I certainly don't find that amusing.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous
I think you will find that once the Linux box is running it rarely if ever lets you down. True, running around in the config files can be daunting to a newbie but you can get excellent gui's for configuration by simply downloading them from the web. In fact most recent Linux distro's come packed with them! [
]If you are looking for an easy operating system, then you may use Windows. If you are looking for a solid system which is more than well documented then Linux is the way to go. I find that just by using Linux you tend to understand the digital world better. It is both a workhorse and teacher just by the way it is structured. It is also about the community surrounding Linux. Way more advanced and friendly than you will find anywhere in the Microsoft world.
I do not think it should be a debate. I think experience is more of a decider in this regard. [
]Cheers
Antowan
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"><i>Originally posted by Solar</i>
<br />Right... the whole explanation of 'Linux better than Windows' really brings tears to my eyes...
Try the following little exercise:
Take someone.. explain to him the theory behind TCP/IP routing and firewalls.
Now take that same person, give him a Windows 2000 CD, and a Linux CD.
Let him try to implement that theory now.
The point I'm trying to make is: this millions of network "boffins" that's starting to emerge now, can scream and shout about Linux all they want. Linux is still far from a complete package. The closest thing to a "user friendly" system I've came across, was Fedora Core 1, and I must admit, I'm currently running that at home - Still.. WHY do I have to look for some obscure samba configuration file to change the name of my computer? Where's the button?
It's not a question of technical incompetence, it's purely too much of a hassle to set up, when I can do exactly the same thing with a box running Windows, in a fraction of the time.
And you seem to be coming back to the fact that "on Linux the software is free" quite often in your post. Well, perhaps it is, and yes, I agree, sometimes the software is even better than their windows counterpart. But to sit through the night trying to figure out what to type to get my little linux box'o'tricks to route...
I certainly don't find that amusing.
<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous
mithrandi
Well-Known Member
<blockquote id="quote"><font size="1" face="Verdana, Arial, Helvetica" id="quote">quote:<hr height="1" noshade id="quote">If you are looking for an easy operating system, then you may use Windows.<hr height="1" noshade id="quote"></blockquote id="quote"></font id="quote">
This is just my opinion, but:
In most cases, the only thing that's "easy" about Windows is that most people are using Windows, so you can go to them for help. If you didn't have a clue about any OS, and you had people around to help you with any OS, then installing a decent Linux distribution and using it would be a lot less frustrating and confusing than Windows.
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
This is just my opinion, but:
In most cases, the only thing that's "easy" about Windows is that most people are using Windows, so you can go to them for help. If you didn't have a clue about any OS, and you had people around to help you with any OS, then installing a decent Linux distribution and using it would be a lot less frustrating and confusing than Windows.
<hr noshade size="1">mithrandi, i Ainil en-Balandor, a faer Ambar
Partly true.
Windows does however allow fools to use it while Linux is a bit more demanding in the sense that you actually have to think about what you are doing. In windows it just happens for you. Note that Windows is bulkier for that same reason…
Cheers
He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous
Windows does however allow fools to use it while Linux is a bit more demanding in the sense that you actually have to think about what you are doing. In windows it just happens for you. Note that Windows is bulkier for that same reason…
Cheers
He who does not understand the value of war at the right time, cannot comprehend the value of life at any time - Anonymous
Sorry guys not gonna mess around with quoting here... ;-)
Those FreeBSD uptimes are frankly disturbing - did you have a power failure? (not knocking FreeBSD, just your uptime)
That's a server doing multiple virtual web hosting with dynamic perl/postgres backend code serving around 10000 page views per day, just FYI.
But I actually dropped into this thread to share one personal experience story with Linux vs Windows on a computer newbie. My housemate had almost no computer experience so when I set up a PC for her I decided to simply slap RH9 on it (it's what I had lying around) and let her run with it. She's still a rank newbie, but she can do what she needs doing & hardly ever needs me to help her - except if she needs new software installed - I prefer to do it myself than let her do it for now. She browses the web, emails, uses a spreadsheet for her budgeting, looks at pictures, listens to mp3s, plays on a mud, etc.
Ciao
Zak
Those FreeBSD uptimes are frankly disturbing - did you have a power failure?
(not knocking FreeBSD, just your uptime)
Code:
Linux xxx.xxxx.xxx 2.4.9-6 #1 Thu Oct 18 09:39:55 EDT 2001 i686 unknown
3:59am up 319 days, 23:16, 1 user, load average: 0.23, 0.22, 0.24That's a server doing multiple virtual web hosting with dynamic perl/postgres backend code serving around 10000 page views per day, just FYI.
But I actually dropped into this thread to share one personal experience story with Linux vs Windows on a computer newbie. My housemate had almost no computer experience so when I set up a PC for her I decided to simply slap RH9 on it (it's what I had lying around) and let her run with it. She's still a rank newbie, but she can do what she needs doing & hardly ever needs me to help her - except if she needs new software installed - I prefer to do it myself than let her do it for now. She browses the web, emails, uses a spreadsheet for her budgeting, looks at pictures, listens to mp3s, plays on a mud, etc.
Ciao
Zak