|
|
| What O/S Do You Use? |
| Linux/Unix |
|
38% |
[ 21 ] |
| Windows |
|
55% |
[ 30 ] |
| OS-X (Or other apple o/s) |
|
1% |
[ 1 ] |
| Other .. Please Specify |
|
3% |
[ 2 ] |
|
| Total Votes : 54 |
|
| Author |
Message |
hooiz
none
Joined: 13 Apr 2004
Posts: 23
|
 Posted: Sep 12, 2004 12:35pm Post subject: |
 |
|
codemastr...
you touch on one of the very reasons that keep linux from taking over windows on the desktop. yes, virtually anything you can do under windows, can be done under linux, it's just not fully user-friendly at this point. things like mounting the floppy drive, which you just wouldn't expect some blue-haired office type to learn. normal desktop users shouldn't be expected to hand edit the fstab, lilo or other configuration files/scripts.
distributions are changing though, and as they do tasks such as these are being automated. this bugs many of the linux purists, who see it as the 'dumbing down' of linux, but it would be great to see linux mature and make bigger headway onto the desktop.
i think it's great that many decide to learn and know everything about their computers, but the fact is most office and corporate settings don't have time for that.
--
hooiz
www.ircee.org |
|
| Back to top |
|
 |
codemastr
Idler
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 353
|
| Posted: Sep 12, 2004 2:19pm Post subject: |
|
|
Yeah, it always bothers me when the Linux guys say that user friendliness is a bad thing... There is a saying about Linux that is true:
You can call yourself a Windows user after using it for a few hours. To call yourself a Linux user, however, you need to use it for a lifetime.
Most users out there don't want to spend their whole life learning how to use their computer. I don't quite understand why Linux users are so hellbent on having Linux remain hard. When they invented the PC, it was to make life easier. Calculations that took days now took seconds. So why does Linux still want to remain in the past? Put it this way, using my floppy drive example. Do I want to spend more time figuring out how to get the floppy drive working than the amount of time I spent actually creating the data to store on the floppy disk?
Neither Windows, nor Linux is a perfect OS. Windows has some stability/security problems, and Linux has some ease-of-use problems. But there is one thing that I love about Windows and will probably make me never leave. When I go to a #windows channel with a question, I usually get helped. Someone will redirect me to an MS knowledge base article, step me through the solution, or whatever. When I go to a #linux channel, I get responses like "you're too stupid to run Linux if you can't figure that out yourself," or "What gave you the idea that we help people like you?" or "Go back to Microsoft." So when I do experience a problem with Windows, someone is there to help me. When I experience a problem with Linux, someone is there to ridicule me. And seeing as how, when you are learning a new OS, you are bound to have problems, it's not very helpful when no one wants to help you. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pomme
none
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 28
|
| Posted: Sep 18, 2004 8:55pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Until XFree86 comes out with a fully-functional *global* (meaning that it works for every text box in every application) control+c for copy, control+v for paste, and control+x for cut, I'll always stick with Windows (using mouse buttons is very annoying sometimes). Also, anyone know where I can get a Unix/Linux port for MS Flight Simulator 2002? Nope? I've tried FlightGear for Linux, but it had the worst graphics in the world. Heh, and don't tell me X is more stable than Windows, cause that's false. I've had X lock up on me several times (even where control+alt+backspace and any other key was not functioning) and had no choice but push the reset button (I've never had problems like this on Windows XP HE). Without X, I have only a command prompt on a black and white screen. Saying that XFree86 or even Unix/Linux as whole is better than Windows as a desktop (workstation) machine is laughable. Though, I do prefer to use FreeBSD as a server (and occasional workstation). |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sep 19, 2004 9:26am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: |
When I go to a #linux channel, I get responses like "you're too stupid to run Linux if you can't figure that out yourself," or "What gave you the idea that we help people like you?" or "Go back to Microsoft." So when I do experience a problem with Windows, someone is there to help me. When I experience a problem with Linux, someone is there to ridicule me. And seeing as how, when you are learning a new OS, you are bound to have problems, it's not very helpful when no one wants to help you.
|
Because you ask on the channels. You could try asking in #new2Linux on DAL ask for tenthirteen, tell him I sent ya  He also has a sister channel on my net called #Linux.
Most Linux help channels on IRC are laughable at best. For real Linux help you need a real Linux guru, not some kid that just installed it last weekend.
Support does bring up one thing though, the Linux communities on the web, at least in my opinion, are getting much better and more of them. How many interactive Windows support communities are there? I mean ones that have forums, mailing lists .. etc .. not just knowledge base for you to sift through. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
codemastr
Idler
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 353
|
| Posted: Sep 19, 2004 11:09am Post subject: |
|
|
| Quote: | | Support does bring up one thing though, the Linux communities on the web, at least in my opinion, are getting much better and more of them. How many interactive Windows support communities are there? I mean ones that have forums, mailing lists .. etc .. not just knowledge base for you to sift through. |
Well, there are many Windows forums out there. And also, lets give MS a little credit. Their Knowledge Base may be a joke, but their newsgroups
are very helpful. Besides though, I rarely need Windows help. The only time I need help with Windows is when something goes wrong. On the other hand, I need Linux help just to figure out how to do things!
| Quote: | | Heh, and don't tell me X is more stable than Windows, cause that's false. |
Whenever you introduce a GUI, you introduce tons of new bugs, regardless of how good the programmer is. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sep 19, 2004 1:19pm Post subject: |
|
|
| codemastr wrote: | | Quote: | | Support does bring up one thing though, the Linux communities on the web, at least in my opinion, are getting much better and more of them. How many interactive Windows support communities are there? I mean ones that have forums, mailing lists .. etc .. not just knowledge base for you to sift through. |
Well, there are many Windows forums out there. And also, lets give MS a little credit. Their Knowledge Base may be a joke, but their newsgroups
are very helpful. Besides though, I rarely need Windows help. The only time I need help with Windows is when something goes wrong. On the other hand, I need Linux help just to figure out how to do things!
|
Probably because you have more experience with Windows than you do with Linux. So feeling lost, dazed, confused or whatever word may describe your feelings about Linux play a big role in you preference. My dad takes 5 minutes to find the Windows Start button. Why? he's never used it before. He's a Mac guru. So naturaly he get frustrated easily and claims that Mac is better and more user friendly.
Granted, Unix based OS's in gerneral are far from the friendly sometimes self detecting, self correcting friendlyness of Windows. However, since we are issuing credit, lets not forget how far Linux has come just in the short 6 years that I've used it let alone the distance it's come since it's invention. Which I think is rather substantial concidering the percentage of Linux coders that get paid vs the percentage of Windows coders that do. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
codemastr
Idler
Joined: 05 Feb 2004
Posts: 353
|
| Posted: Sep 19, 2004 1:33pm Post subject: |
|
|
| katsklaw wrote: |
Probably because you have more experience with Windows than you do with Linux. So feeling lost, dazed, confused or whatever word may describe your feelings about Linux play a big role in you preference. My dad takes 5 minutes to find the Windows Start button. Why? he's never used it before. He's a Mac guru. So naturaly he get frustrated easily and claims that Mac is better and more user friendly. |
Well, my biggest issue with that is that Windows is pretty standard and Linux isn't (strange seeing as how *nix is supposed to follow POSIX whereas MS makes it up as they go). For example, I remember trying to find rc.d. Every site I found gave me a different location! Some said /etc/rc.d, others /usr/local/etc/rc.d, others still /var/rc.d. And as it turned out, I didn't even have rc.d, my particular *nix called it init.d. So I spent hours looking for this. On the other hand, I know that regardless of what version of Windows I'm using, adding an item to run at startup is exactly the same. I can add it to the Run key, or the Startup folder. Yes, once you know where the setting is, be it Windows or Linux, then everything is easy. But the thing is, Windows throws stuff right in front of your face, Linux makes you go digging for it. For example, 99% of config files in Windows are in C:\Windows or C:\Windows\System32. In Linux, they are all over the place! You have /etc, /usr/local/etc, /var, /sys, etc. And for settings, in Windows you just go to Control Panel and you can find most everything you need. Linux, I don't recall the names, but I remember finding 3-4 control panel type things, each with different settings. It just made it hard for me to find things. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sep 19, 2004 1:55pm Post subject: |
|
|
I agree, to a point, if you tried RedHat and got used it .. then switched to Gentoo or slackware, then yes .. stuff is in different locations. No different than Windows vs Mac or even Windows 3.11 vs Windows 95. However, if you go on RedHat and stayed with RedHat throughout several versions then you will see that locations of settings pretty much stay the same. They don't change from one version to the next.
Not sure when you last messed with any flavor of Linux was but if it hasn't been recently .. you may want to give it another look. I personaly prefer FreeBSD over Linux. FreeBSD uses software in the same fashion as Linux so one can't say that "I like Linux because you can run KDE or Gnome". Well, FreeBSD runs KDE and Gnome too. My biggest objection to any version of Linux is that the kernel was NOT specifically written for that specific flavor. It's a generic kernel and although some flavors customize the kernel to their needs .. slack, mandrake ... etc .. it's still a kernel that is not aimed at a specific flavor, unlike FreeBSD .. the FreeBSD kernel, although similar to OpenBSD's kernel or even Mac OS X's kernel, is not the same .. it's written specificly for FreeBSD.
Kinda like DALnet's Services .. I bet they work better with Bahamut than any other IRC Services set. Simply because DALnet's Services was written specificly for Bahamut. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
v0rtex
Lurker
Joined: 12 Sep 2004
Posts: 108
Location: IRC
|
| Posted: Sep 28, 2004 3:53am Post subject: :P |
|
|
i prefer windows to desktop linux. needless to say hat im using windows. Linux servers are unbeatable.. linux desktops are slow tacky and still not as user friendly as windows. I do have desktop linux machines - i just use my windows one more.
 |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
zeke
Idler
Joined: 04 Oct 2003
Posts: 296
|
| Posted: Sep 28, 2004 6:33am Post subject: |
|
|
my question to you, would be, why?
because linux is slower? i find that difficult to believe, i didn't notice much diff between debian running gnome on X than xp pro, running on a 566.
is it maybe more because you understand windows better? the software is that which everyone else uses, you don't have to go looking all over google or sourceforge to find the right program, and then have to compile and so on? |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pomme
none
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 28
|
| Posted: Sep 30, 2004 2:02pm Post subject: |
|
|
| I personally prefer Solaris/BSD systems. Ever run a server on a multiprocessor UltraSPARC IV 64 bit Solaris 9 server? It's faster than a cheetah on steroids. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sep 30, 2004 2:04pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pomme wrote: | | I personally prefer Solaris/BSD systems. Ever run a server on a multiprocessor UltraSPARC IV 64 bit Solaris 9 server? It's faster than a cheetah on steroids. |
I've run FreeBSD 64 on my AMD 64 for a bit .. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
pomme
none
Joined: 05 Aug 2004
Posts: 28
|
| Posted: Sep 30, 2004 2:07pm Post subject: |
|
|
| Heh, well, it seems to me that SPARC is 100 times faster than Intel Itanium 2 64-bit/AMD 64-bit. Think about the FSB, cache, and pipelining... |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
katsklaw
Guru
Joined: 28 Jun 2004
Posts: 1046
|
| Posted: Sep 30, 2004 2:58pm Post subject: |
|
|
| pomme wrote: | | Heh, well, it seems to me that SPARC is 100 times faster than Intel Itanium 2 64-bit/AMD 64-bit. Think about the FSB, cache, and pipelining... |
who cares? .. it does what I want. |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
Stefano
Eleet
Joined: 03 Apr 2005
Posts: 523
Location: Beirut
|
| Posted: Apr 28, 2005 1:18pm Post subject: |
|
|
windows xp on my tinny laptop.
dats the best |
|
| Back to top |
|
|
|
|
| |
Register
Log in
