Linux... Why?

[jrbush82]

I've installed Mandrake 7.2, Mandrake 8.0, and currently installed and am running Slack 8.0 I'm just kinda confused on why Linux is such an answer. I know the basics and how to get around the Linux FS pretty well, and can compile and all, but what advantages is there over Windows 98? Other than the whole free aspect. I have 3 different Win98 CDs, and I didn't pay for any of em. I use StarOffice in Windows and it works great. Most games run in Windows. Most apps you want run in windows. I dunno, just looking for thoughts on the whole thing.

[HarryGoiter]

hey bush. my guess is that Linux's appeal is the open source community. it provides for much greater versatility in programs than anything else. Somebody wrote "Instead of saying, 'I guess we'll have to live with that" we can now say 'We can change that'". And then the security aspect running servers and what not, but of course you could argue NT in that sense and what not. So open source is the main attraction I would guess.

[Saptech]

Give this site a good reading over:

http://www.linux.org/info/advocacy.html


It may give you more insite!

[Malakin]

When you buy a computer and it "comes with windows" you are paying for it in package price.

[Joeri Sebrechts]

The thing which drove me to linux was the fact that I didn't have any real control over windows. While I have almost absolute control over my linux boxes. I like how you can start from lilo and trace the execution path all the way to konqueror and exactly know what it is doing (and be able to change it) at every step of the way.

Plus, the fact that my linux boxes never, ever, crash is a nice addition. My local lan server / gateway / secondary desktop has been up for 70 days. I use this machine for a lot of network related tasks, from serving up the filesystems to all the other computers in house, to reading my e-mail, and it has been running flawlessly for 70 days. I know win2k has good stability nowadays, but does it do 70 days non-stop?

Ofcourse, once you pass a month of uptime more uptime only buys you peace of mind. Having to reboot once a month would not be a disaster for most people (including me).

[AdaHacker]

Well, if you have three copies of Win98, you either got them with three different computers, in which case you paid for them in the price of the computer, or you got them illegally.

In any case, if Windows works fine for you, and it's all you need, then use it. There are a lot of things you can do with Linux, but if you don't want to do any of them, then there's no reason to use it. I have a friend who knows plenty of UNIX and yet runs Windows. Why? Because he uses his computer for the web, Perl, and games. That's all he wants to do, and Windows does it fine.

Personally, I like never having to reboot. I like being able to set up a home network without needing any additional software. I like never having to worry about viruses. (What are there, maybe a dozen Linux viruses?) I like not having to pay $200+ for a server class OS, having all sorts of useful utilities (what I souldn't give for grep and kill for Win32), having a usable command line (as opposed to DOS), and a whole bunch of other things.

What do I use my system for? Various servers for the home network (dhcp, telnet ftp, etc.). I code on it, which is much easier than on Windows. (And don't even talk to me about Visual Studio. I write VB for a living and I hate it with a passion. Besides, these days, I'm writing Ada95 and Prolog in my free time.) I also play emulated Nintendo games, which is about the same on Windows as on Linux. (It's hard to find a good emulator for any platform.)

Long story short (too late), it's all a question of what you want to do. If you need Windows for most of the things you do, then use Windows. If you don't need what Linux offers, then use something else. It's as simple as that.

(Rant finished. Time to get back to <shudder> learning FoxPro. God, I need a better job.)

[jrbush82]

The main thing is, so far I have yet to see a distrobution of Linux that just has what every linux user would need. Such as glibc and gcc and such, but without the hundreds of megs of other software. I know there is a minimal install and such, but then it takes out some stuff that a person would need later down the road to install or compile another piece of software, or still has some of the stuff a person would never dream of using. In my experience with Linux, I thought it was great, the only thing was that half the stuff you download all have dependancies. I don't understand why programmers do this?

Slackware 8.0 has been by far the best distrobution that I have used yet, but it still comes with problems. Such as KDE crashing or locking up when a game is being played, even more so than Windows.

It would be great if maybe a distrobution would do what Micorsoft is doing with Windows. You have only so much you can install, and that is it, period, end of discussion. Later, if you would like to install more software, its on you. That way, you know you have a solid OS without the problems of unknown servers being started without you knowing about it and such...

Dunno, just ranting and raving...

[sym]

Originally posted by AdaHacker:
<STRONG>Time to get back to &lt;shudder&gt; learning FoxPro. God, I need a better job.)</STRONG>

Do you work for Corning Inc.?

[sym]

Originally posted by jrbush82:
<STRONG>I've installed Mandrake 7.2, Mandrake 8.0, and currently installed and am running Slack 8.0 I'm just kinda confused on why Linux is such an answer. I know the basics and how to get around the Linux FS pretty well, and can compile and all, but what advantages is there over Windows 98? Other than the whole free aspect. I have 3 different Win98 CDs, and I didn't pay for any of em. I use StarOffice in Windows and it works great. Most games run in Windows. Most apps you want run in windows. I dunno, just looking for thoughts on the whole thing.</STRONG>


Other people have pointed out that you actually did pay for those windows 98 CD, but to put an actual price on them, it is about $70 (or was a year and a half ago). When I bought my laptop, they didn't list "No Operating System" as an option, but when I called them directly, I could get it with nothing on it for $70 less than with Windows 98. They assume that everyone wants a version of windows, so the default assumption is whatever is the most current version of consumer windows (now ME, previously 98).

The reason I switched to Linux is because of the XP liscensing agreement. I don't like the idea that I have to register my OS everytime I make a change to my PC. Also IIRC, it has features built in so that MS can do remote trouble shooting on your machine. For some reason I get nervous when MS builds even more remote connectivity into the OS (&lt;sarcasm&gt;not that they have ever been known to have security holes or anything&lt;/sarcasm&gt; ). I like knowing that I have a choice because I know how to use more than one OS.

Also, the themes for the Linux desktops are much cooler than the ones for windows. ;)

[evulish]

Cheap games :) Quake 3 for linux is 15 bucks. Quake 3 for windows is 30.

Stability. Crashes are hard to come by in linux (unless you know what you're doing). I can think of lots of things that gives windows BSOD's.

Security. Windows still uses netbios. Period. They can't get rid of it since they'll lose the compatability between win3.1 machines and so on. Does that new IIS bug mean anything either? I don't recall Apache having something like that.

Funness (If that's a word.) Great experience (especially if stuff doesn't work.) You get to learn how things work rather than just pointing and clicking.

Community. How many other things have such a huge community of support and raves? I don't see a windowsnewbie.org :)

[manual_overide]

You do know that there ARE grep, ls, etc for windows right??

You just have to install the reskit. It should be in the i386 dir on an NT cd.

They aren't as functional, but they are there. There are also registry settings that give tab completion. Also, you can instal cygwin and get pretty much a bash shell in windows. Windows really isn't that bad of an interface, but you have to really hack at it to make it usable. The underlying OS and config stuff make me not want use windows.

If you are stuck using it at work or whatever, you CAN make it more like your linux box at home. :)

[jon787]

Why not?

I never even reboot or turn off my computer anymore! I never would have considered that under windows.

[teeitup]

Remember they are DIFFERENT operating systems. This means NOT the same.

Don't confuse Windows Apps with Windows the operating system. You like the Apps.

The last three WIndows OS releases have strived to be more like Linux/Unix than the other way around.

Better stability, better resource management, less reboots when making changes, a more complete TCP/IP package.
All examples of Windows the OS trying to get better, more like Linux/Unix.

These have been staples of Linux since the beginning. The Windows OS is still trying.

The only major thing Linux struggles with is the GUI. Windows does this part well. It was designed for the masses and it is what the masses judge everything against.

Do you drive a truck, sportscar, or ride a bike. They all get you from here to there. How do want to get there?

Hint...no wrong answer!

Cheers,