PCFormat Forum Archive

Linux is good for servers and the people who's job it is to administrate them. Linux isn't free, you need to spend lots of time administrating. time = money. Just installing Linux and configuring it once would cost me much more then a Windows installation + 30 mins configuring it with all the latest drivers. I could use the spare time working overtime, make my programs extra good looking and get a extra big raise. Then with the extra monthly money I could buy Windows (which I get free anyway) and every program I need every month.

And lets not get into the EPIC FAIL that was the 16 bit SSL encryption some strains of Linux were using. EPIC, EPIC fail of EPIC proportions and it happened only a few months ago and included all versions of Ubuntu and a few others.

Windows is far better desktop OS, XP FTW so far. It's blazingly fast on a dual core with 3GB of RAM (2x1GB + 2x512MB). It's relatively secure and any monkey can set it up. Sure Linux offers the same performance with less processing power, but ultra fast CPUs are cheap these days.

And no it's not that I'm too dumb (maybe too lazy or maybe I just like to work smart ) to set up a Linux box, I had to do it before for a large secure databasing operation with automated billing system for a company with a $2billion/year turnover. I know my way around a Linux box. That same company has asked for me to port the project to a Windows Server 2003 box, the guy in charge says he completely understands why I don't like Linux, he hates it.

In short capitalism isn't perfect but it beats communism.[/quote]

Okay, sooo... linux fails because you can't set up a modem? lol.

rustypup wrote:linux may not accommodate the technically challenged, but it remains the far superior OS in most respects. stability, footprint, resource management, flexibility, cost and customisation far outstrips anything microsoft has ever managed.

Agreed.

Windows is a better workstation OS as well.

Edit: Purely for the fact that most big software vendors still don't make linux versions of their software.

DAE_JA_VOO wrote:Okay, sooo... linux fails because you can't set up a modem? lol.

rustypup wrote:linux may not accommodate the technically challenged, but it remains the far superior OS in most respects. stability, footprint, resource management, flexibility, cost and customisation far outstrips anything microsoft has ever managed.

Agreed.

The completely and utterly inferior user friendliness and lack of compatibility with devices where IHV's have little to no interest in supporting Linux greatly outweigh the few benefits. Even ATI didn't develop drivers until recently. And before screaming bloody murder because the IHVs don't develop Linux drivers, remember it's a cost issue. Why develop Linux drivers for a consumer centric product that will be run on a PC or Mac 99.9999% of the time?

Who in their right mind games seriously in Linux? I know you got Counter-Strike Source to run under Ubuntu, Dae, but didn't you eventually start using XP again for the game because of all the random issues that got in the way?

Linux is not a consumer OS. Just like kits to develop MP3 players will never become mainstream, most people prefer iPods or Zune.

DAE_JA_VOO wrote:Okay, sooo... linux fails because you can't set up a modem? lol.

Which means he can't get on the internet,
Which means he cannot go about important things like online banking.
Which means he is ultimately losing out a lot.

Therefore, Linux has failed.

As much as I respect Linux and what it's done for the world, it still needs to come a long way for the average stupid joe (no offense, rusty).

People were paid to make Windows the industry standard, and so they can't afford to make it a mission for people to set up modems for example.

Linux, I respect you, I admire you, but I cannot use you.

y'know, telling me to stop bitching and whining; telling me to put in spaces; telling me that I dont have anything constructive to add; telling me that i give up just because i cant get a modem to work... none of that helps.
In fact, thats exactly some of the reason a beginner like me wants to run away from using linux. For weeks I have been posting on this and other forums and the responses I got from this one is just more of the same.
(space)
I am here asking for help - not criticism.
(space)
My intention in writing this was not to start another "Windows vs Linux" thread. My intention in writing this was not to be the target of jest. All I was saying was that I really did my best in trying to get Linux to work for me and so far it has failed me. Im sure there are those that understand how the OS works and have very little problems.
(space)
Maybe I am as implied - weakminded. Maybe Im not one of those who enjoys a challenge. Maybe Im not one of those who can handle their mind being challenged. Maybe I was foolish to try something new and different. All apologies!
(space)

If he was using PCLinuxOS or something more streamlined he might have had less trouble


Windows xp is more user/application friendly than most gnu Linux BASED operating systems, but you cant argue that the current vista abomination from microsoft has anything on the GNU Linux distros..

fourtyseven, don't beat yourself up.
Any thread with the title WINDOWS or LINUX eventually degenerates into a mud slinging contest of this nature.
It's too bad I have been busy this afternoon - I would have loved to sling a few mud pies into the Linux camp

Chermobil wrote: you cant argue that the current vista abomination from microsoft has anything on the GNU Linux distros..

no arguments from me there!

Aw damn!

Anyway, to make up for jamin's absence, I found this.

Language warning.

omw... an entire blog dedicated to linux hate

lol. And some windows users go on about how linux users have no life. How ironic

According to a recent poll Mac fanbois are the worst?

But oh my Ettienne, have you turned into a fanboi.

Linux has it's uses, no doubt. Supercomputing, web servers and other types of servers. but on the desktop it's no wonder so many people hate it. It isn't a desktop OS and until someone can make something user friendly it will never be.

99% of the problems that Windows has (viruses, security - although fully patched Vista is close to linux) are there only because it's of little to no use for a virus programmer to target Linux systems. A botnet of 10 PCs per every 1000 you could have infected is not what their aiming to do. After a year or two you might have that 1000 PC dream network all running Linux to do your evil bidding. Or you could have 100,000 Windows PC within 3 months.

If Linux had more market penetration, you'd see more viruses, malware and spyware developed for it. It's success is a result of it's own failure.

WiK1d wrote:According to a recent poll Mac fanbois are the worst?

But oh my Ettienne, have you turned into a fanboi.

There was no fanboyism in my post at all.

I'm not a fanboi, i just hate windows. lol.

DAE_JA_VOO wrote:

WiK1d wrote:According to a recent poll Mac fanbois are the worst?

But oh my Ettienne, have you turned into a fanboi.

There was no fanboyism in my post at all.

I'm not a fanboi, i just hate windows. lol.

That's like saying, I'm not a racist I just hate <insert race here>. Or I'm not a racist I just like whites.

rustypup wrote:linux may not accommodate the technically challenged, but it remains the far superior OS in most respects. stability, footprint, resource management, flexibility, cost and customisation far outstrips anything microsoft has ever managed.

And DirectX counts for nothing?

DX doesnt support Ray Tracing, OpenGL does. Linux supports OpenGL. Ray Tracing is the future of graphical representation apparently. Hmmmza

MS do make good office products though.

I'm on the fence, though I will say this: I changed the desktop layout and colours in Ubuntu UE and simply doing that managed to crash some or other file, which in turn made Ubuntu unbootable. Now I can go into grub or something and fix this, but need internet access to do this.

So basically, without internet access I cannot fix Ubuntu, short of a reinstall/downloading fixes at office and taking them home.

Then again...Ubuntu is smoother than something really smooth on my PC, whilst MS' latest abomination probably wouldn't even boot without giving me the Blue Finger of Death. (that's one finger, not two, jamin)

D3PART3D wrote: Aw damn!

Anyway, to make up for jamin's absence, I found this.

Language warning.

dude, this guys is brilliant! wow, I had intended to make a media PC running on Linux, but after reading a few of the posts, I am thinking Win Media Center FTW.

Also, the Linux fanboys can't fault fortyseven. A month you say? f**k that for a bag of chips. Stick to XP ma boy, things work and you can do more than code C on it...

Hex_Rated wrote:

DAE_JA_VOO wrote:

WiK1d wrote:According to a recent poll Mac fanbois are the worst?

But oh my Ettienne, have you turned into a fanboi.

There was no fanboyism in my post at all.

I'm not a fanboi, i just hate windows. lol.

That's like saying, I'm not a racist I just hate <insert race here>. Or I'm not a racist I just like whites.

LOL!

Nope. A fanboy is someone who loves only that specific thing and "everything else sucks".

That's not the case here. I love linux, i hate windows, have nothing against Mac.

UrBan wrote:DX doesnt support Ray Tracing, OpenGL does. Linux supports OpenGL. Ray Tracing is the future of graphical representation apparently. Hmmmza

Windows supports OpenGL as well as DX10, so why is Linux superior for supporting a single API instead of 2? Raytracing may be the future of graphics, but it's really distant future. DX12 or DX13 will be out by then and we'll all be 10-15 years older.

About your Linux crashing, I managed to crash Fedora and Red Hat countless times while I was working on it. The Linux fanboy at work said he never seen that so many times before, a likely excuse. My main development environment was an HP dual core Xeon server pre-configured with Red Hat, so I was not the culprit. The fanboy installed Fedora for me on another PC so again I can be scratched off the PEBKAC list.

I've had my main Windows machines kept permanently on for a record of something like 90+ days without crashing. The only reason it got reboot was the start of the load shedding. This PC ran SQL Server 2000, 2 MSDE instances, Server 2005 enterprise, SQL Server 2005 express, Oracle, Apache, IIS and VS studio concurrently at times and firefox with about 20 tabs open and Outlook was constantly on. It had a whole lot of things like ActiveSynch running, debugging PDA applications as well as countless SDKs/compilers/drivers for ICEs/ICDs for embedded CPUS and PDAs. It has .NET 2.0 installed for about 3 years and .NET 1.1 for 4 years.

I crashed it about 6 or 7 times in it's life cycle, 2004-2008. And trust me, I abused it. Did things like not restarting when prompted and running the application directly after the install. It was overclocked from 2.66 to 2.9Ghz without a PCI/AGP lock. It had a dodgy serial port extender with 8 extra RS232 ports that often got static electricity sent down the connectors.

Eventually it got too slow and I upgraded to a 2.67 Core2 with Vista Business. I haven't managed to crash Vista but the first thing I did was remove all the HP security tools that cluttered the PC and it's performance is now somewhat descent.

Now imagine government decides to scratch Windows and moves over to Linux. We'd turn into Zimbabwe within 3 months.

D3PART3D wrote: Aw damn!

Anyway, to make up for jamin's absence, I found this.

Language warning.

Holy moley mother of cheese that stuff is funny. What's funnier, however, is the irony in the fact that teh gay writing the "I hate Linux it should die" stories seems to know far more about the useless little irrelevant OS which he so scorns.

I lol'd harder at how well he understands the complexities and technicalities of the Linux OS and related content, than I did at his flames.

I nominate him for a fail, given that he so hates the thing he clearly uses and has studied. LOL!

Ignorant fool.

Would you rather he be sprouting bs because he knows nothing else, like most kiddies here?

Of course you would...

In my opinion:

Everyone has a right to an opinion, and if you have an issue with something, that's your ball in your court.

As much as I love Ubuntu, and as much as I promote it, and considering that I use it for EVERYTHING except gaming, I'm not going to try and prove "Fourtyseven" wrong, or to convince him otherwise.


Sure, I may disagree with you (I haven't had any major issues with Ubuntu, and I love it to bits).

Different OSs serve different kinds of people, and Ubuntu just isn't for you. Possibly in the same way that other OSs aren't for me.

Just saying that even as a hardcore Ubuntu user, I don't feel offended in any way, as long as you have something you like.


my 50c (inflation, tut tut).

DAE_JA_VOO wrote:

Hex_Rated wrote:

DAE_JA_VOO wrote:

WiK1d wrote:According to a recent poll Mac fanbois are the worst?

But oh my Ettienne, have you turned into a fanboi.

There was no fanboyism in my post at all.

I'm not a fanboi, i just hate windows. lol.

That's like saying, I'm not a racist I just hate <insert race here>. Or I'm not a racist I just like whites.

LOL!

Nope. A fanboy is someone who loves only that specific thing and "everything else sucks".

That's not the case here. I love linux, i hate windows, have nothing against Mac.

Nope.

Wikipedia wrote: Fanboy (sometimes spelled fanboi) is a term used to describe an individual who is devoted to a single subject in a fanatical manner, or to a single point of view within that subject, often to the point where it is considered an obsession. Fanboys remain loyal to their particular obsession.

Nothing said about, and I quote: "everything else sucks".

Dude, you are a fanboy. End of discussion.

Linux sucks. Period.

Fanboyism was created as a marketting ploy in my opinion, k so I don't see how it can be implicated on a Gnu linux user.. hurr hurr