Linux Sucks; Windows is Better

[michaelc]

Yes, this title is misleading. Here's an article I read the other day that I think everyone should read:

 

linux sucks, windows is better than linux

 

OK, we've all heard it: Linux is too hard, Linux sucks, Windows is easier than Linux, yadda, yadda.

 

People who have such feelings need to ask themselves a simple question:

cartoon

 

Why am I using Linux?

 

Because at this point at least, maybe they shouldn't be.

 

Really, I think most of these folks should be asking themselves "Why am I using Windows", but we'll pretend that they actually really tried Linux. I can't understand how anyone can USE Windows for any period of time and not hate it, but these people claim to. And they claim to have tried Linux.

 

And of course they ran into problems. Problems which they couldn't solve by searching Google. And, to be fair, that's not completely unreasonable: it's very rare that something you find will DIRECTLY apply to your problem. You need to apply the knowledge you find to the current situation. However, that can be very frustrating when you first start out because there's so much you need to know that none of it makes sense. It can make you feel very dumb. We've all been there.

cartoon

M3IP inc.

 

But we get people saying silly things, where it is obvious that they haven't even read applicable HOWTO's, because if they had, they wouldn't have the problem they say they have.

 

However, not everyone has the "dig in and fix it" mentality. They want to use their computer, not hack with it. And that's perfectly legitimate.

 

Years ago I used to do my own auto stuff- tuneups, oil changes, even more. Backyard mechanic concept. With the new computerized everything, and the tight engine compartments, and the specialized tools you need nowadays, I don't. My car is just something that gets me from point A to point B and I know not and care not how to fix it if it doesn't. Fortunately, cars today are pretty darn reliable, and you don't need to know much- you chances of needing to adjust your points (not that they have 'em anymore, of course) while out on a trip are nil.

 

Windows is a lot like that. Prepackaged, protective, mostly works- it crashes pretty regularly, but everybody thinks that's normal so nobody cares.

 

And honestly - it doesn't crash as much as it used to. The old blue screen of death is pretty infrequent now, so that's no reason to run Linux. Windows is a pretty good OS now, if you don't mind doing things their way.

 

Maybe that's what you want? All you do is browse the web and read email. Maybe Windows is fine for your needs. That's OK.

 

But it's very difficult when you want to do something unusual, like find all the files that end with ".txt" or ".dat" AND contain "foo" somewhere in the third line, and then ftp whatever you find to xyz.com and delete them. Amazing as it might sound to a Windows user, that's pretty easy do do in Linux/Unix and is what I mean by USING the computer. I don't mean just browsing the web and doing email.

 

In Windows, it's childishly easy to do simple things. However, it's horribly complex or completely impossible to do any more than that. There are so many things I can do in an instant at the command line that you either cannot do at all in Windows or can do only with great difficulty. I don't understand how anyone who really uses a computer can ever stand to run Windows- it's so pathetically weak.

 

The difference is learning to drive a car vs. taking public transportation. The subways and buses take you where they go, but only to those places, and only under certain conditions: you can't tow a trailer with public transportation, you have to travel on their time schedule, etc. Your involvement is minimal; you need barely be smart enough to read the most simple signs, and you need remember almost nothing. Learning to drive, however, takes effort, requires more involvement and intelligence, and will probably require much more memorization: "How do I get to Pittsfield from Boston?" etc.

 

If the subway takes you everywhere you need to go, use the subway. It's cheaper and far easier.

 

Linux doesn't suck. Linux is not an appliance OS. If you want a brainless, "I'm just going to use it, I don't want to know anything about it" OS, you should be running Windows.

 

That's not a put-down of Windows or anyone who uses it. It's like taking the train to work vs. driving a Harley. The train gets you to work, rain or shine, same time (or at least in theory- and Windows is very much like a badly run transit system!). The Harley will get you there too, but you didn't buy it because you wanted to get to work. You *do* buy a train ticket just because you want to get somewhere.

[Darkelve]

The guy does make good points. However, that is not an excuse to be blind for the faults of either OS... and improve them, if/where possible (!)

Edited October 15, 2006 by Darkelve

[arctic]

Full story (dating back to somewhere in 2005) is here: http://aplawrence.com/Bofcusm/873.html

[ffi]

To be honest, I completely disagree with the article. Linux (esp. Mandriva) is really easy to set up for an ordinary user and do most of their chores (ie. browse the web, IM, watch movies, listen to music and do office stuff) but for power users, like gamers, linux is sort of a nightmare, unless you are willing to really dig into the system. Which I think is still the big draw back, get those games working and many, many people will switch...

[Reiver_Fluffi]

To be honest, I completely disagree with the article. Linux (esp. Mandriva) is really easy to set up for an ordinary user and do most of their chores (ie. browse the web, IM, watch movies, listen to music and do office stuff) but for power users, like gamers, linux is sort of a nightmare, unless you are willing to really dig into the system. Which I think is still the big draw back, get those games working and many, many people will switch...

 

True, in my opinion games are the killer as far as Linux is concerned, but at the same time, gaming consoles are in the position to best serve gamers, with a few exceptions, namely those heavily reliant on keyboards. However you have to question the marketing companies of such consoles to recognise the demand for the ever so popular strategy and First person shooters, that heavily rely on keyboards, there's nothing to stop them developing and marketing a keyboard and mouse of their own in order for users to get the best out of these types of games (correct me if i'm wrong here, the last console I owned was a Playstation). So this begs the question, are PC's really needed for games, or is it just an added bonus?

[arctic]

I don't consider gamers as "power users", but professional coders / hackers, server-admins, beta testers (cooker users) and the like. And for those, Linux is imho the better choice. Gamers are about the least "power user" oriented people I can think of. Gamers are imho "powerful computer spec users" but that is something completely different. Most gamers I know don't know a dime about adjusting systems effectively.

 

I think that any power user loves to dig deep into the system.

 

Just my two cents.

[scarecrow]

And, for a Linux user anyway, there's a HUGE difference between an "easy" distro, and a "simple" one.

Mandriva is an easy one, but it's not simple at all- which means that if something goes wrong, then the only way out is calling your guru (even if he is a fake one...).

But there are also SIMPLE distros, which aren't necessarily "easy/newbie friendly". There initscripts and general system structure is a simple as possible, configuration files that you have to regularly modify few and well commented, and package structure deviating very little (if at qall) from the opendesktop standards. Kernels have to be as vanilla as possibble, too.

For me, THIS is the ideal Linux distro, and I think I have already found it.

[Darkelve]

And, for a Linux user anyway, there's a HUGE difference between an "easy" distro, and a "simple" one.

Mandriva is an easy one, but it's not simple at all- which means that if something goes wrong, then the only way out is calling your guru (even if he is a fake one...).

But there are also SIMPLE distros, which aren't necessarily "easy/newbie friendly". There initscripts and general system structure is a simple as possible, configuration files that you have to regularly modify few and well commented, and package structure deviating very little (if at qall) from the opendesktop standards. Kernels have to be as vanilla as possibble, too.

For me, THIS is the ideal Linux distro, and I think I have already found it.

 

This one: http://www.linux-xp.com/ ? :P

[ianw1974]

Actually, that's a pretty damn good idea to ease migration.

[Artificial Intelligence]

...and here I thought I should enter a flame-bait thread :P

[jagwah]

Windows is a lot like that. Prepackaged, protective, mostly works- it crashes pretty regularly, but everybody thinks that's normal so nobody cares.

 

This is one thing that really gets on my goat, it is simply not true, at least with XP, and I am going by the only thing I can, the one thing I know to be true, and that is my personal experience. XP crashes very rarely, I have no problems whatsoever with it. XP is rock solid. Can you crash it?, can you mess it up?, sure, but just because you can crash a Ferrari, or blow up it's engine, does not equate to a Ferrari being a bad car, or it having a bad engine. There is no accounting for a bad user/driver

 

(Well, I guess while I am at it I may as well keep going)

 

In my experience it is also a fallacy that you need to reformat it regularly, there really is no need for it, I know plenty of people who are running the same install years later, and yes, it is running fine. I still have one rig running fine after 2 years plus, can many of us Linux users say the same ?, many can't, simply because of the fact that they upgrade to a new release every year or half year, or change to a new distro every now and then, that they don't even get the chance to acheive that longevity. Are there Linux systems that are running fro that length of time and longer? sure there are.

 

I also find the argument about virus's, spyware, etc, etc, on Windows to be somewhat misleading. Since 1998 I have had 1 virus, and that was given to me by someone I know, who gave me a file that was infected. It caused me no problems at all. I am on the net everyday, I download much, much more than the average joe (I'm a gamer to the core). Also the thing about updating your virus scanners, spyware prog's etc are time consuming and a hassle, like wow, it takes me approx 1 to 2 minutes a day to update my AVG, Spybot, and Ad-Aware.

Is Windows targeted, and is it susceptible to virus's etc, sure, does that mean you ARE going to be struck down, no. I run only the inbuilt XP firewall, AVG Free, Ad-Aware Free and Spybot S@D(the latter 2 do nothing to stop infections etc in real time on my machine, they just scan when I tell them to manually once a week, by the way, they have never found any nasties) Before XP I used no firewall and Mcafee Virus scanner, nothing else. 1 virus in 8 years, hardly worth mentioning.

 

Sure, there are people who are staunch Linux people, they have their reasons why they prefer Linux, and why they think Linux is superior, to them WindBlows !!

 

on the other hand,

 

There are people who are staunch Windows people, they also have their reasons why they prefer Windows, and why they think Windows is superior, to them LinSux !!

 

Who is right? they all are, they are using what suits them, and their needs best.

 

To me the area Windows is just soooooooo far ahead of Linux, is in an area that is not the fault of Linux, it is the lack of support for/from mainstream programs/products. Since comming to Linux, there has not been one 'minor' program that I need, that I don't prefer the Linux equivalent to what I used in Windows, things like compression utilities, ftp, media players, etc, etc, and whats more, most of what I require comes preinstalled, or at least selectable at the installation of the OS, simply amazing, I am still blown away by the depth and quality of software available right off the bat, and then there is the repositories, I actually find it a bit mind numbing at times. But, .... it is the lack of support for/from the mainstream programs/products, and especially the specialist stuff, that lets Linux down, and where for me, Windows just bounds out in front. I need my Doom3/Quake4, "insert game name here" engine tools, but they, or an equivalent, simply don't exist in Linux. I need my ProTools, BFD, Trilogy, 'insert software title here", in some cases equivalents do exist, eg, Pro Tools - Rosegarden, Ardour, but they aren't really 'equivalent' they will do the job to a certain extent, but ...

 

I often fight within myself as to why I even bother with Linux, I mean, Windows does everything I want, it does it easily, and it does it out of the box, it just works as they say. Where as Linux does not do everything I want, I still need to have Windows installed, why bother using/maintaining 2 different systems when all I need is 1? To be honest, I really don't know, I can't really explain it, except for Linux is just plain fun, a joy to just use. Windows is just an OS, a means to an end, where as Linux transends just being an OS, it is fun to use in it's own right, it's a state of mind, it's an Ideal, it's nigh on a way of life

 

 

 

---------------------------------------------------------------

 

 

 

gaming consoles are in the position to best serve gamers, with a few exceptions, namely those heavily reliant on keyboards. However you have to question the marketing companies of such consoles to recognise the demand for the ever so popular strategy and First person shooters, that heavily rely on keyboards, there's nothing to stop them developing and marketing a keyboard and mouse of their own in order for users to get the best out of these types of games (correct me if i'm wrong here, the last console I owned was a Playstation). So this begs the question, are PC's really needed for games, or is it just an added bonus?

 

Besides consoles lacking the Keyboard/Mouse combination (they have been/are maybe available for consoles, but never really took off) consoles also lack in the are of moding, game editing, these are hugely popular today, and greatly extend the games lifespan, this is an area where consoles lack severely, and PC's shine. The ability to customise the game, PC's have it, consoles don't. Sought of like Linux in the OS world.

 

 

Most gamers I know don't know a dime about adjusting systems effectively

 

hmmm, then you know a different sought of gamer than I do. Maybe true for the casual gamer. But most hard core gamers that I know, know how to make there machines fly, know the internals of there PC's inside out, know all about configuring, editing files, getting there hands dirty.

 

 

 

Hope I didn't offend anyone, no offence was intended, sorry for dribbling on incoherently for so long, just that I keep seeing certain reasons why Linux is/should be prefered over Windows, Virus's Spyware, stability etc, and in my experience, well, I never experienced that, quite the contrary, it's just so foreign to me.

 

I feel better now.

 

Linux/Mandriva FTW !!!

[Darkelve]

I would like to add that I run WindowsXP as well, and I haven't experienced a crash for years.

 

Of course, it does tend to get a little bit slower as fragmentation occurs. But it's very seldom that this is necessary.

 

I renamed the "/home/bin" folder to "/home/.bin" in Linux a couple of days ago in Konqueror (didn't like it showing up in my home directory, didn't want to delete it), and Konqueror crashed. However, try a joke like that in Windows and there's a big chance the whole system freezes.

 

It has also a lot to do with user behaviour. Me I've never gotten a virus in the last couple of years. I've also secured my dad's computer with the same measures (antivirus, Spybot, Firewall, ...) and he has gotten 3 viruses in 2 years! Probably courtesy of someone installing "shady" media players, or people indiscriminately opening attachments (with me, e-mails with attachments I don't know the sender of and/or dubious subjects just get deleted without looking... if they survive the spam filter that is).

 

Still, the first time (not long after he bought the new PC) I was completely puzzled as how to the virus got there!

 

And I also agree that most hard-core gamers I know are very knowledgeable about computers, stay on top of technology, and often serve as the "local helpdesk". One might even say that, if Windows wouldn't have all these games, a big part of the "unofficial Windows support team" would dissappear!

 

We can joke and ridicule Micro$ofts products all we like, but doing so doesn't take away the weaknesses Linux has. But to be fair, try to make one thing easier, and chances are you made something else harder. So it's a fine balance.

 

Future, however, is looking pretty good for Linux, IMhO.

Edited October 16, 2006 by Darkelve

[Gowator]

I also find the argument about virus's, spyware, etc, etc, on Windows to be somewhat misleading.

...

The thing is that doesn't match my experiences....

I'm FAR from being a windows expert, mainly its just a old nightmare now but from time to time I get asked to help others.

 

A couple of years ago I bought my father a PC with pre-installed XP ...

I went online to download antivirus, spyware etal and got a virus while still downloading....perhaps 20 mins?

Im frequently fixing others PC's... and frequently removing virus's, I usually like to count them and then tell the person so they know the importance of antivirus progs but on more than one occaision I have abandoned this when the count has been in 3 figures and just set it to auto....

This isn't a single person, its quite a few who admittedly have no or very little interest in IT... BUT

 

I do not know a single person who has ever got a linux virus in the wild.... EVER... but frequently Windows users have several hundred....

 

Now on top of this I have converted several of them to Linux ... and this type of user it does more or less everything they want.

 

Are there Linux systems that are running for that length of time and longer? sure there are.

Erm, most of my systems have uptimes in months and they are only ever shutdown for physical maintainance or very occaisionally for a kernel change or patch. My server was installed in June but its been running since then without a shutdown (ironically till yesterday when I physically had to move it) ...

 

My GF's PC is running kanotix from a couple of years ago just dist-upgraded .... again its only been shutdown a couple of times .... mainly for putting in cards or physically moving it... and this is uptime, not install lifetime.

The box Im using now is a Debian install from about 3 years ago....

 

To me the area Windows is just soooooooo far ahead of Linux, is in an area that is not the fault of Linux, it is the lack of support for/from mainstream programs/products.

Well this is the strange thing....

There are lots of real top end progs for linux and lots of small utilities ...

 

For me serious programs are Oracle or high end CAD/cartographic or scientific apps and these are available abundantly ... most of them never ran on windows anyway and those that did like Oracle never ran properly.

The utility apps are as you say... its the mid range apps (stuff that costs less than $10,000 a licence) that's mainly missing.. like photoshop or semi pro recording or video editing stuff. (pro stuff is available if you have wads of cash - pixar certainy seem to have "managed")

 

The stuff that does existing linux tends to be inferior to the point that it can't be used as a replacement in a professional environment (for instance replacing photoshop)

 

Other areas are coming in both open and closed source.

For instance Skype works almost as well in linux... its certainly reliable its just a sound server hog.

 

Arctic mentioned Scribus the other day....

This is a real pro-app.... its just still in development BUT its being built in a pro-way... so the foundations are good but the interface is still getting there....but so far as I can see it could be used for professional DTP right now... whereas GIMP can never be used for professional graphics work because its built on a amataur base (most significantly it can't handle 16 bit images - so the idea of adding pro colorspace tools isn't even an option...)

 

I do my photo processing with bibblepro ... according to the devels Linux is the most stable and fastest platform for it. For photo processing it is the best I have used, including Nikons own SW and Photoshop doesn't even compare.. its not even in the same ballpark on processing RAW files. For actual editing lightzone looks promising...(currently FREE for linux http://www.lightcrafts.com/products/lightzone/ )

 

OpenOffice really does replace any (or alsmost) 'legitimate' MS Office function....When I say legitimate I mean that lots of Office is actually not only poor but actively very very bad. Without going to deep I mean things like html export from word or powerpoint... This goes beyond just BAD programming its actively ($EXPLITIVE) .. lucky dreamweaver has a dedicated tool to cleaning MS generated code... (again something very hard to replace on linux)

 

Another "illegitimate" example is the support nightmare which is using VB code in Word or Excel.... Sure OO doesn't support this but thank $DIETY not to mention the whole OLE object embedding nightmare or finance spreadsheets with hundreds of dependant speadsheets that suddenly don't work on an upgrade. Or one classic was one user saving a spreadsheet in French.... which had links to spreadsheets with ODBC embedded data...which of course in the MS world is language specific so all the

TYPE="ODBC database" got changed to TYPE="base des donnees ODBC"

 

This sort of dependency with embedded stuff really is a support nightmare...

 

So what Im saying is 90% of missing functionality (like ActiveX or the ability to run a virus in outlook without even opening it) are deliberatly missing.. sure people have having to explicity run that "screensaver" they got emailed ;-( sure kmail and evolution default to not opening html content from untrusted sources... but its for a very good reason.

 

 

Then there is frontpage type stuff.... great this does browser dectection or flash detection ..(oh but if the OS

isn't windows it just throws you out)

 

This doesn't even start on the .asp and/or Access.... both of which are great prototyping tools that lead to a dead end... that is you prototype but then as soon as you want to scale your stuffed.

[Ixthusdan]

xp does not crash like its predecessors. But when it does break (usually after a security update from ms) it is not fixable. The best bet is to roll back to an earlier time when the system actually worked. And, yes, if the installation of a game wrecks havoc on the system, you might have to get the old disk out and reinstall, which is still the windows standard. (I have experienced all of this)

 

Now, Linux can be fixed. Even if you are running "experimental" software that is going to try to kill the system, the system doesn't die.

 

The only reason windows is better than Linux is that the manufacturer has an agreement with Redmond and the stuff comes on the computer when you buy it. But with marketing, that step can be fixed as well. ;)

[Darkelve]

You know what's funny... I just played an older game today in XP, Alt-Tabbed to the file explorer, Alt-Tabbed back, then when I quit the game the screen froze! Well, OS reacted to the mouse cursor movements, but there was no way to resize or manipulate windows, or to type something in...

 

It's almost as if Windows XP is trying to prove me wrong with my previous comment! :P

Edited October 16, 2006 by Darkelve