A Little Rant About Reasons to Use Linux

[Dark Ninja]

So I have been using Linux for a few months now (all the time anyway -- I dual booted before), and I have to say that I think Linux is a wonderful, powerful operating system. I enjoy playing around with the "innards" of my computer and it's software. And, in the course of a few months (especially since I installed Gentoo), I have learned more about my computer than I ever knew since I began using a computer over 10 years ago.

So...what do I have to complain about then? Well, over the past few months I have been keeping an eye on different OSS and, specifically, Linux sites. I enjoy reading people's opinions on the topic and it's fun to help others out if they're having troubles.

On these sites, one topic that generally comes up is, "Why should I use Linux over Windows." or "How can I convince so-and-so to use Linux over Windows." It is then that the typical responses start flowing in. Heck, I'm sure you're already thinking them:

1.) Linux is more stable. You *never* have to reboot.
2.) Linux is free! Yay free!
3.) You aren't being monitored by Bill Gates & Co.
4.) You can fix bugs in the software on your own 'cause you have access to all the software.
5.) It's not Windows.

...and so on. The list gets long and bloated and, generally, the person who asked the question is more confused then they were before they asked the question.

Now, I'm not saying that I don't agree with the answers I just suggested. In fact, they are *kind of* true...to a certain extent. However, if the OSS community wants to convince people to use their software over Microsoft's (or whoever else happens to come along) there needs to be reasons to use this software other than reasons that WE would use it. For example -- item number four on the list is COMPLETELY useless to any "normal" user. (READ: People who just want to use their computer and no nothing about the internals.) They would have NO CLUE what a buffer overflow is, or how to fix a NullPointerException.

In fact, I could make an argument against every one of those arguments I listed above -- that's the problem. As far as most people are concerned, they don't want to waste their time trying out a new OS when the one they have is already good enough. (Notice that I didn't say *great* -- I said *good enough*)

So, I guess my point of this entire rant is that, if the average person is going to begin using Linux, he or she needs to have a real reason to -- none of these, "'cause I say you should" reasons.

:: sigh ::

Okay. That felt good to get that out of my system. So, for anybody who wishes to respond, my purpose of this post was not to say Linux is not a good OS -- in fact, it's the best out there for what I need it for. But what I hope you realize is that...well...as far as the Average Joe is concerned -- our reasons for using this great OS...well...stink.

[Icarus]

MY answer for getting more people using Linux...

Install UT2004 and when they logon it goes right into the game!!
That way they never have to see the OS or learn how to use it! Brilliant!!

Or for more 'usefullness' have it boot the Doom for System Administration (http://www.cs.unm.edu/~dlchao/flake/doom/) and let them kill all the processes and wonder why the system crashed when they kill 'the boss' ... PID 1 :D

[IsaacKuo]

Yeah, those are the typical reasons given and they basically stink.

What are good, average Joe reasons? IMHO:

1. It's fun. Windows is kind of boring, really. Linux has fun stuff like random slideshow backgrounds and zoomy OSX dock clones. That's the sort of stuff that actually gets noticed by my friends and gets them interested in trying it out.

2. The hordes of good freeware. In fact, Windows has more freeware/shareware, but even dinky little things like a random desktop background switcher tend to be shareware/nagware/crippleware. So while Windows gets a really powerful and popular nagware/crippleware program like ACDSee, Linux gets a bunch of knock-offs inspired by ACDSee--some of which are better in some ways and almost all of which are less bloated.

With Windows, it gets kind of depressing when you find out there's a cool little program which does something you'd like to do--but you either have to cough up $19.95 or deal with crippleware/nagware or shareware time limits.

[knute]

The eye candy is a big draw. I'm working with a computer place here in town. They are heavily entrenched in windows, and need to have a web server set up.

The owner's draw, whose a friend of mine, got hooked by kde's translucent windows of all things! :D

hehehe... So I started setting up his box (Gentoo) and all he was worried about was KDE and the games before we got apache2 installed and set up.
:rolleyes:

[Dark Ninja]

Thank you, IssacKuo -- that's exactly what I'm talking about. "Average Joe" wants to see "pretty." He or she wants to see flash and fun.

I would like to add one thing to my rant, however. I find that general arguments rarely work with anybody. Usually, when I'm attempting to convince people to use Linux, I like to tailor it to what I know they'll like. For example, a friend of mine loves having the most minimal system possible. He would spend hours cleaning out his Windows machine. Then...I introduced him to Gentoo and explained how he got COMPLETE control of what went on his system. Let's just say, I think he is in love.

On the other hand, another friend of mine really could not afford Windows products (Windows XP and Office, specifically). And, she was unwilling to pirate software. So, I explained the benefits of Linux and how she wouldn't have to pay a cent and it is completely legal -- she is now a happy Mandrake user, and become much more proficient at using her computer.

So, maybe the problem is that Linux advocates don't use the right arguments at the right time with the right people. Hmmm...

[Icarus]

Most 'business' people I know prefer using the expensive software for Windows, toteing the "support" thing.
I'm sorry, but $200 per call/issue seems a little steep to me, but if that's what they prefer...

I really don't understand people's IIS arguments at all. Do they like it because it has a GUI (that doesn't work)? I setup one webserver for testing using Apache (on Windows) and it took me about 3 days to get Tomcat working properly. I then did the same thing with an IIS install...let's say I'm still trying to get Tomcat working correctly (ok, in truth I gave up!)

Then I have a personal web server that is serving PHP web pages off a mySQL database on Fedora...took a day or two to change the php pages to my likeing, and it works with very little effort.

I can see why people want to use Windows, if just for the gaming...but I have absolutly no clue why people would use IIS over apache, in ANY platform!

And let's not get started on the "why use mySQL when I can use MSSQL"...:rolleyes:

[bwkaz]

Originally posted by Icarus
I can see why people want to use Windows, if just for the gaming...but I have absolutly no clue why people would use IIS over apache, in ANY platform! The thing is, most of them don't. Apache runs something like 60% of the Web, and last time I saw any figures, IIS was at 25-30% and falling. ;)

But, of course, at work we use IIS. :rolleyes: (Actually, that's because the current and former admins had never used any Unix at all, let alone Linux, and they got 2K Server with IIS from Dell on the servers. Not that that's a good reason, but they never tried anything different. Plus, they're not trying to use Tomcat or anything like that, just simple static web pages -- made with the piece of crap "HTML" generator (quotes because it won't validate at ANY HTML version) known as FrontPage.)

[Loki3]

People like my father like how Linux is trim. It's business. It's not all cutesy-fisher-price. An application is designed to do one thing and one thing well. There's no stupid paperclip trying to help you out. Searching for files doesn't mean telling a little puppy what to do with a button menu.

Significantly less spyware/viruses/adware.

[aNoob]

Originally posted by Icarus
...let's say I'm still trying to get Tomcat working correctly (ok, in truth I gave up!)



Don't! What's the problem with Tomcat? I just installed it an took me about 30 mins to configure it properly.Of course,you need J2SDK (at least 1.4).Setting JAVA_HOME is a very good idea. Let's just say that I leave all by default in config (I will change that later). Tomcat is running on my box .Correctly.And I can also start/stop from Eclipse using the Tomcat plugin from sysdeo.com

[je_fro]

I'm convinced there's a small army of Redmond-backed trolls who post that crap the forums. When somebody says "Why?" or "Convince me!", if I bother to answer at all it's to say "Don't waste your time or pollute my community: Keep using Windows."

Then again, I wear a size 6 tinfoil hat.
:p

[Parcival]

Dark Ninja, these reasons


2.) Linux is free! Yay free!
3.) You aren't being monitored by Bill Gates & Co.


are actually the ones convincing people the most overhere. When I explain to them the meaning of free software their typical reaction is "Oh, I didn't know there's an alternative. Can I try it out?" All I gotta do then is passing on a Knoppix and a SuSE CD-ROM and they're hooked.

Oh, you forgot another reason:

6.) safety from viruses and worms.

[Icarus]

Originally posted by aNoob
Don't! What's the problem with Tomcat? Let me ******** it, since I was too vauge...

Tomcat works fine, on port :1000 (or whatever it is :p)
But I have troubles getting the jk connector working so it is accessable through port 80

In Apache, this was no problem since almost ALL the documentation for Tomcat is geared for it. There is very little for Tomcat with IIS...on top of that, they are ALL out of date and have little flaws that cause it not to work.

Honestly, I don't care. I wasted a week working on that little part, where with no previous knowledge I had it working in 2 days in Apache.
It hasn't been mentioned to me since (and was told to drop it), as most projects happen to end up here :rolleyes:
If they want it, they'll ask...but they have asked for a couple dozen other things since, so I don't care! :D

[hlrguy]

Last night I had a friend stop over, he wanted me to record his albums to digital and burn them to CD. So the whole time I am recording the entire album session with Audacity, I am surfing the web, using Gimp to create a CD cover, even installed rezound to check it out, now remember, this is all WHILE recording the album. After about 10 minutes, my friend finally pipes in, and says, you know that the recording is going to be useless with all that extra work you are doing. I laughed, and explained that Linux is a real OS, with real multitasking. He didn't believe me, I could tell, but since I was doing him a favor.

After side one recorded, start side 2, and in parallel, use Audacity to remove noise, etc, and split into individual tracks. Side 1+2 done, start recording next album, then start k3b and start a 24x burn of the first album, again, note WHILE recording the second album side one.

Finish the burn, slide it into my DVD player and not a single pop, skip, distortion, just a re-master that blew him away.

Don't try to convince anyone of anything, unless they show interest first, just use it, and they will come. :D

I take for granted that I can do anything and everything all the time anytime no matter what, compile, burn, surf, record, etc, and when you do in front of someone whose only experience is MS software, it never fails to make an impression.

hlrguy

P.S. Why did my friend come to me, could not get Windows, W2K to record a full side before dying or losing some of the record while Windows does it's pause for system resources? He knew I had mastered my albums (all both of them :D) and wanted to see if I could do his.

[rocketpcguy]

linux is good for functionality and everything, but for eye candy, windows XP wins. if you want transparent menus, docks, shadows, etc. in KDE or something, just look at the processor usage.
XP has real alpha transparency. you can have transparent windows, shadows, see through terminals, etc. and it's not so processor intensive if you have good drivers.
it's only people don't bother customizing XP, but it's very possible, even more than linux (with non-explorer shells).

[Icarus]

Originally posted by hlrguy
I laughed, and explained that Linux is a real OS, with real multitasking. He didn't believe me, I could tell, but since I was doing him a favor. As true as this statement is, it comes off a bit arrogant.

You could say something like
"Unlike Windows, which was designed to be a single user platform, Linux was designed from the begining to run multiple concurrent tasks without allocating all resources possible to a single process"

:D

OK, maybe that will make you only sound like a smart-arse :p

[knute]

Originally posted by Icarus
As true as this statement is, it comes off a bit arrogant.

You could say something like
"Unlike Windows, which was designed to be a single user platform, Linux was designed from the begining to run multiple concurrent tasks without allocating all resources possible to a single process"

:D

OK, maybe that will make you only sound like a smart-arse :p

It's like saying that the car that you have that just happens to have a bored out v12 with a 4 barrel, under the hood and has a couple of dings and such in it, can blow that shiny new sports car out of the water. You know the one that looks fast and sleek, and has an engine that consists of a gerbil running on a wheel.
Oh yeah, and the gerbil is lazy. :D

[JohnT]

Originally posted by hlrguy

Don't try to convince anyone of anything, unless they show interest first, just use it, and they will come. :D

My brother , a die-hard Mac user and I mean die-hard...his last win comp. was a 386, has just recently installed Yellowdog due to seeing me work on mine.

[aNoob]

Originally posted by Icarus
Let me ******** it, since I was too vauge...

Tomcat works fine, on port :1000 (or whatever it is :p)
But I have troubles getting the jk connector working so it is accessable through port 80

In Apache, this was no problem since almost ALL the documentation for Tomcat is geared for it. There is very little for Tomcat with IIS...on top of that, they are ALL out of date and have little flaws that cause it not to work.

Honestly, I don't care. I wasted a week working on that little part, where with no previous knowledge I had it working in 2 days in Apache.
It hasn't been mentioned to me since (and was told to drop it), as most projects happen to end up here :rolleyes:
If they want it, they'll ask...but they have asked for a couple dozen other things since, so I don't care! :D

Are you sure port 80 is not used?What does it say the log?You will find them under CATALINA_HOME/logs (either windows / linux) . But anyway,since you dropped it :D
I know that in the ole days of 3.x versions was a pain in the arse to make it even start(one would need to add to classpath rt.jar etc). But since you've mentioned port 1000,I find that pretty strange. I let that on default 8009 and no problemito at all. I wouldn't use Tomcat ,but I'm crap at scripting languages :D, I would very much like to get a hold of php, have no time :(. Basicaly I use Tomcat at work and home for intranet site (have few nice apps picking database objects and organize them in projects etc,boring ).Back to my Tomcat now :D

[hlrguy]

Originally posted by Icarus
As true as this statement is, it comes off a bit arrogant.


You are right the way I wrote it in the post. I don't remember the exact words, but I did mention true multitasking. I was thinking I better hide now, the RIAA will be pounding on my/his door for the retroactive fees for his 2 Genesis Albums we recorded. :D

hlrguy

[janet loves bill]

Originally posted by rocketpcguy
linux is good for functionality and everything, but for eye candy, windows XP wins. if you want transparent menus, docks, shadows, etc. in KDE or something, just look at the processor usage.
XP has real alpha transparency. you can have transparent windows, shadows, see through terminals, etc. and it's not so processor intensive if you have good drivers.


Ya BUT, Bill Gates stole the Idea from LINUX............did win 2K have transparent menus........NO
how about win ME........NO

Mosfet's High performace Liquid gave KDE translucent menus long before
XP was ever thought of..........
just more proof that M$ has not and never will come up with
Ideas on their own........they have to steal what they have!

[knute]

Run gerbil run! :D

[j79zlr]

Originally posted by rocketpcguy
linux is good for functionality and everything, but for eye candy, windows XP wins. if you want transparent menus, docks, shadows, etc. in KDE or something, just look at the processor usage.
XP has real alpha transparency. you can have transparent windows, shadows, see through terminals, etc. and it's not so processor intensive if you have good drivers.
it's only people don't bother customizing XP, but it's very possible, even more than linux (with non-explorer shells).

Eye candy, XP? Teletubby theme? I think Windows is ugly, even with using different msstyle themes. You are still limited. What alpha transparency btw, I must have missed that option somewhere? Last time I checked their browser doesn't even handle alpha-transparency without a messy javascript workaround that must be done on the website itself.

[rocketpcguy]

Ya BUT, Bill Gates stole the Idea from LINUX............did win 2K have transparent menus........NO
how about win ME........NO

are you joking? win2k CAN have real transparent menus. microsoft DID NOT take it from KDE!!


Mosfet's High performace Liquid gave KDE translucent menus long before
XP was ever thought of..........

MS isn't very innovative, i know. it copied mac, unix, BUT NOT LINUX! mosfet was after 2k!


I think Windows is ugly

yes, very ugly:
http://skins4.wincustomize.com/b0se/guio2004/opulence.jpg
remember, those are real shadows, not fake ones. compare with mosfet liquid everyone's talking about:
http://www.kde-look.org/content/preview.php?preview=1&id=2247&file1=2247-1.png&file2=&file3=&name=KDE3+%2B+Mosfet%27s+Liquid

this is windows 98, remember how KDE looked then?:
http://www.customize.org/view/8863

also windows 98 (this is XP but it works in 98):
http://www.lighttek.com/images/t2.jpg

functionality?
http://www.wincustomize.com/window.asp?Cmd=PREVIEW&source=http://skins2.wincustomize.com/normanbates/litestep/LS_enhanced-OTS_20030109.jpg

i'd like to see this in linux:
http://www.wincustomize.com/window.asp?Cmd=PREVIEW&source=http://skins2.wincustomize.com/DavidK/screenshots/alienskin3.jpg
it's hardware accelerated (back buffer only, but at least half accelerated) with nvidia drivers. can XFree86/X.org do that, no. can freedesktopX do that, no, only shadows (no practical window transparency). can directfb do that? no, no shadows and proper drivers.

linux is the best OS in almost everything, but it's GUI isn't as good+fast as windows.

[JohnT]

MS isn't very innovative, i know. it copied mac, unix, BUT NOT LINUX! mosfet was after 2k! And Enlightenment was before both.

[XiaoKJ]

BTW, this flaming/bashing/debate isn't going anywhere.

M$ is definitely crappy and to be honest I am on the side that M$ doesn't look nice. I remember the talk once that Apple has the best designers while M$ has the worst. Even the names in M$ are crappy.

BTW, M$ and linux aren't competing on designs isn't it?

I would like to state my reason to move to linux.

For the past few days, a client brought in a computer to be repaired. It had nothing on the hard drive and since she's a relative, I installed linux on it. After 15 mins, the FC2 system was buzzing away like a bee.

Yet on the same system, installing windows was hell. Windows XP installation went bonkers, policies are stupid and you-know-what. Yet after installation updating was slow like molasses. I have made a scroll of directions to safely install windows and follow it duely -- I install windows so many times that I could make instruction sheets by hard, and I can memorise both windows and office XP serials.

Installation of M$ Office was so damning that I got fed up and installed OpenOffice on it. The installer was so buggy that Office wouldn't install. Luckily I knew about OpenOffice which was zippy compared to it.

Lastly, those that want to say that Windows' drivers are complete are on crack. I didn't need to modprobe any modules in FC2 but in windows, I had to search the web for 2 days just to get those damn drivers. And those drivers in Windows are so sucky and buggy that the system slowed down so much after those things were installed. Whoever said that Windows has 0 hardware incompatiblities are from the dinosaur age. And for heavens sake those Windows' drivers aren't developed by M$!!!

I do not care about how nice something look -- they consume resources! BTW, as long as the app is usable and will exist for long, users will eventually develop nice graphics for it. Therefore, KDE became much eye-candy these days. IMO windows is very far behind time in terms of everything. M$ just collects other's works together and claims credit for it. KDE had to live with old hardware during the times of win98 when windows was always demanding more powerful hardware....

[IsaacKuo]

When it comes to Windows eye candy, I have to plead innocence because I and most others have NEVER SEEN ANYONE with any of those eye candy apps on their Windows box. Why? Maybe because most of it is shareware/nagware/crippleware. Put bluntly, most people aren't going to spend $19.95 on something which only makes their desktop a little prettier.

IMHO, eye candy is pretty much moot unless it's free. When shareware is nickel and diming you just for the stuff which is actually USEFUL, the thought of messing with eye candy shareware is ROTFLOL ridiculous.

[rocketpcguy]

And Enlightenment was before both.

so? it doesn't have real transparency, don't fool yourself.

IsaacKuo, you know litestep is opensource? and msstyles only requires a free patch.

who cares about pretty GUI anyway, linux is better in everything else!

[IsaacKuo]

No, because like I said I'm innocent of Windows eye candy. Also, searching around wincustomize.com, I found a link to litestep's web site but it wanted me to register before even reading what the heck it is--much less downloading it.

[IsaacKuo]

Bleh, searching around there looking for those Windows eye candy apps reminds me of why I and all of my windows-only friends do NOT have these apps installed. We aren't even aware of them, because it's so demoralizing trying to sift out Windows freeware which is actually free--no strings attached. It simply isn't any fun!:(

[JohnT]

Originally posted by IsaacKuo
Bleh, searching around there looking for those Windows eye candy apps reminds me of why I and all of my windows-only friends do NOT have these apps installed. We aren't even aware of them, because it's so demoralizing trying to sift out Windows freeware which is actually free--no strings attached. It simply isn't any fun!:( They do exist..one of the best places to customize your win install and with free apps and tools is....
http://virtualplastic.net/

[hlrguy]

All of you, I like hamburgers and there is NOTHING you can do about it!

hlrguy

[knute]

Originally posted by hlrguy
All of you, I like hamburgers and there is NOTHING you can do about it!

hlrguy

I'll take you up on that challenge.

Did you know that 85% of all of the hamburger sold in Texas is NOT cow?

Yep. 65% is dog, 35% is cat, 2% is squirrel and the rest just happens to be whatever limbs get cut off in the processing of the carcasses. :eek:

Don't ya' just love made up stats? :D

hehehe....

[Icarus]

OK, this has gone so far off topic it's embarrassing to let it go on
We went from arguing who made what first, to why does it matter to hamburger to something even more pointless (didn't think that was possible at this point)

Ok guys...back to work :D