OS WARS MEGA THREAD (Now debating proprietary vs. open-source!)

[Ghostrider]

Boys, boys! Can't we all just get along?

Apparently not. IMHO, OS wars are a rehashing of the old "my computer is better than yours" and just as pointless. Computers, like their OSs, are simply tools and the fact that there are "communities" up in arms one against another because of their choice of tools speaks little about the tools in questions and volumes about human nature.

I have a very simple view about OSs: I need certain things done, and I pick the tool that does the job, period. I harbor no love for it, it's not a living thing nor a heirloom or anything, no program interface brings fond memories to my mind (except some abandonware games) and I cannot for the life of me understand the f4nb0i mentality.

 

[eveningsky339]

As I said, I don't begrudge anybody their choice of OS. Windows has its uses: I plan to keep 7 on my netbook so I can do video editing and play a couple of my favorite games if I get stuck somewhere with nothing to do.

Windows has its positive aspects. It runs many modern games (if only for the sake of money and business) and the video editor is very nice.

However, there is a growing amount of free and open source games for Linux, and WINE continues to mature. As for a video editor, PiTiVi is becoming an adequate replacement for Windows Movie Maker.

When it all comes down to it, I wouldn't have a problem with Windows if it were free. Because using a generally inferior operating system at no charge costs only time.

Linux is also good, and in fact I obviously prefer it. I didn't have to learn a great deal about the innards of Linux to use it, just how to use the package manager (which admittedly was a pain before I got my wireless network hooked up), and Ubuntu is even easier. Stuff tends to just work like in Windows, but without paying a dime for it If Linux ever makes it big on the desktop, Ubuntu will undoubtedly be the way it happens.

One of the things I enjoy about Linux is learning about my operating system. I think it's great that distro's such as Ubuntu are aiming to be more user-friendly than Windows (and most of the time, they are!), but we shouldn't close off the opportunity for the end-user to learn about Linux.

As for Ubuntu-- it's a good distro. It's what introduced me to Linux. But after the release of 10.04, I gave openSUSE 11.2 a try, and Ubuntu no longer appealed to me. It removes options from the end-user in order to be more user-friendly-- for example, you don't have the option to set up a separate /home partition during an Ubuntu installation.

 

[orb]

As for Ubuntu-- it's a good distro. It's what introduced me to Linux. But after the release of 10.04, I gave openSUSE 11.2 a try, and Ubuntu no longer appealed to me. It removes options from the end-user in order to be more user-friendly-- for example, you don't have the option to set up a separate /home partition during an Ubuntu installation.

You can't do that? Last time I installed Ubuntu 5 or something, I could make as many mount points as I wanted. Can't you just CTRL+ALT+F1(..F8) switch to console, and manually edit the "/etc/fstab", or even run the fdisk and mkfs from there?

 

[Hielor]

Not really. I think it can be annoying at times, but so can the other OS'. Windows can be pretty nice actually. I am used to the thing, the behavior is deterministic most of the times, and the glassy borders DO look sexy

Deterministic behavior is always a plus. Although, I could see a market for an OS which isn't deterministic for people who like their computers to have personality... "I'm sorry, I can't do that, Dave."

Plus I can't really play Orbiter without it There is no question of ditching Windows anytime soon. It is just minor, but many problems that are annoying. For instance, my sound output would suddenly just disappear. I didn't have that issue with XP, however apparently it is common in seven. The only solution as far as I know is to restart. Not a show stopper, but very annoying.

That's really odd, and sounds like a driver bug. Are you using the default driver that Windows provided for the sound?

No you weren't! You just said that to try to make me feel bad! :rofl: But honestly? GTA IV blows...Vice City is still the best in my opinion. I don't like that game that much to be honest.

I don't know, I preferred San Andreas to Vice City. Much, much larger world, you could actually fly things, and it wasn't automatic death if you fell in the water. Although, it's been awhile since I've played Vice City.

IV has a bunch of new things over the previous series, most of which are good.

But on a slightly less relevant note, you should totally try this thing called "Arch linux". It is really, REALLY fast. Looks better too. Costs a couple hundred dollars less then the crummy old OS you use now...

Well, I'm not going to be replacing Windows on my desktop anytime soon since I primarily use it for gaming and Windows-based software development. The only use I have for Linux was in the really old laptops I was planning to use for the simpit that I never got very far with, and for that I was using Slackware since it had been recommended independently for both of the models of laptops i was using. I also keep a couple Knoppix live DVDs around for those times when it's useful to not be using the hard drive at all, like when I want to while browsing some .

My god...The outside is a wonderful world too

Well, during the day I'm a software engineer...and at night I go home and play games or do some hobby programming...same with weekends. The outside is too full of allergens and stuff, not much fun at all!

There is one situation where I'm not sitting behind a computer, though, and that's when I'm flying. The newfangled fancy glass cockpit planes don't appeal to me at all...I'm sitting in front of a computer all day normally, why should I go pay more than a hundred dollars an hour to rent a plane just to sit in front of a computer? The place I rent planes from has a glass-cockpit C172 in the fleet, and I have no intention of using it anytime soon. Sure, at some point I might spend a few hours on it for familiarization purposes, but all of that electronics feels like cheating to me.

Not really... I have personally met many people who want this exact same thing. You can't really say conclusively that I am in the vast minority who wants this feature. But as we are on the topic of Microsoft not typically implementing things used by a fraction of a percent of its users, how about UAC or the scroll-ctrl feature you just mentioned? I don't think anyone wants to be harassed by their OS anytime they want to move a file, and I hadn't even heard of the icon resize feature till now. I doubt many knew about it.

The ctrl-scroll thing is pretty standard across all containers like that, you can do it in explorer too. Like most keyboard shortucts in Windows, though, it's not particularly well documented or easy to figure out.

 

[Linguofreak]

Trust me. I used Fedora 9 without an internet connection for weeks. It was RPM hell. VLC Media Player alone had more dependencies than an AA meeting, and I spent more time in that stupid terminal screen than I did in the graphical interface

The error messages from RPM will tell you which dependencies you need, but some of those dependencies have dependencies themselves, which the program doesn't tell you about until you try to install the first level. So I ended up carrying my flash drive back and forth five or six times between my Windows internet machine and my Fedora machine.

If your Linux machine has broadband, you will find that pretty much every distribution has a Software Management Center of some kind, where you just look under the category in question and download whatever you want without even opening your browser.

Long story short: if you have broadband, get Linux. If you don't, get XP or 7.

I was about to rebut this, but then I realized what exactly your problem was. Windows was designed around a "buy the software from the store model", so there is no package manager and programs typically come with all their dependencies on the CD with the program. It would be an interesting exercise to write a Windows version of a Linux package manager that could download *.debs/*.rpms from a distro's repositories along with their dependencies and prepare them for tranfer-by-disk-or-flash-drive to another machine...

It's a significantly larger decision tree than that, for example:

Do you enjoy needing to know how the innards of your OS work? If so, get Linux.

I'm not sure I know much more about how the innards of Linux work than the innards of Windows. And I haven't really needed that knowledge for much other that my own curiosity...

If you prefer things to just work without you having to do anything about it, get Windows (no, not everything is perfect in Windows, but statistically speaking...)

Well, getting the OS from the OEM rather than installing it yourself does help, and you have the most options for that with Windows. But System76 sells perfectly good Linux machines.

As to the only machine I've ever run both Windows and Linux on, the biggest problem was the same under both Linux and Windows: ATI drivers causing various unpleasantries (such as Orbiter immediately bluescreening on launch when I first tried it on that machine under Windows, until I installed new drivers, or the Linux drivers making GNOME totally unusable on Linux after upgrading to Ubuntu 9.04), but I'll chock that one up to ATI.

I did have major problems with Flash under Linux on that machine, but the whole system there was installed by yours truly. This machine, which came from the manufacturer with Linux and Flash pre-installed, has had no problems (except for one that some recent troubleshooting showed had nothing to do with flash at all).

Do you want to play games with your PC? Get Windows.

That entirely depends which games you want. My gaming tastes aren't exactly mainstream, but I find I can game quite happily on Ubuntu. Except of course for *one* game...

If you will amend that to: "Do you want to play Orbiter with your PC? Get Windows," then I will have to agree with you...

Do you want to be the person that everyone you know asks for tech help? Get Linux.

Not quite... My roommate asked me for some tech help with Vista earlier in the year, and it was a bit difficult to find my way around (though I managed), considering that the start menu layout was vastly different than what I'd learned on XP (And heck, even on XP I used the classic, rather than the default start menu).

If I'd gotten a Vista laptop, I wouldn't have had that problem, now would I? (OTOH, I probably would have used the classic interface, or as close as Vista would let me get to it, so I still mighta had trouble... Oh well...)

 

[Hielor]

I'm not sure I know much more about how the innards of Linux work than the innards of Windows. And I haven't really needed that knowledge for much other that my own curiosity...

The fact that you have to deal with package managers at all, as you just mentioned above, is a whole lot more of the "innards" of Linux than the usual Windows user will need to deal with.

That entirely depends which games you want. My gaming tastes aren't exactly mainstream, but I find I can game quite happily on Ubuntu. Except of course for *one* game...

If you will amend that to: "Do you want to play Orbiter with your PC? Get Windows," then I will have to agree with you...

The set of games which run on Windows but not on Linux (...without a lot of work, anyway) is significantly larger than the set of games which exist on Linux but not Windows. Orbiter is not unique in this regard.

Sure, if you're playing flash games it doesn't matter, but those don't count.

Not quite... My roommate asked me for some tech help with Vista earlier in the year, and it was a bit difficult to find my way around (though I managed), considering that the start menu layout was vastly different than what I'd learned on XP (And heck, even on XP I used the classic, rather than the default start menu).

If I'd gotten a Vista laptop, I wouldn't have had that problem, now would I? (OTOH, I probably would have used the classic interface, or as close as Vista would let me get to it, so I still mighta had trouble... Oh well...)

I meant it as a how-people-perceive-you sort of thing.

 

[Linguofreak]

The fact that you have to deal with package managers at all, as you just mentioned above, is a whole lot more of the "innards" of Linux than the usual Windows user will need to deal with.

Huh?

The knowledge and effort needed to use Synaptic, or to double click on a *.deb and click "Install Package" (At least, I think that's what the English says. I've actually been using the German interface to help immerse myself) is comparable to or less than that required to use a Windows executable installer or to unpackage a zip file. Pretty much all you need to know is that A) Synaptic exists. B) You're looking for "*.deb" files (or rpm's, per your distribution).

The set of games which run on Windows but not on Linux (...without a lot of work, anyway) is significantly larger than the set of games which exist on Linux but not Windows.

Well, more to the point, if you're looking for a *specific* game, and it runs on Windows, yes, you are likely better off with Windows. If you just want to be able to entertain yourself, Linux offers more than enough possibilities for that. (Then again, most of the commercial titles for Windows are low-content crap, and non-commercial titles tend to have higher rates of cross-platformness).

Orbiter is not unique in this regard.

Sure, if you're playing flash games it doesn't matter, but those don't count.

*Shudder*. I'll say they don't...

Besides, given the shakiness of Flash on user-installed Linux installs, flash games have a slight bias towards Windows as a platform. (Furthermore, I wouldn't be surprised if the fact that the Web page a Flash game is on might contain IE-specific features doesn't give Windows yet another advantage WRT Flash games, though the fact that Firefox is sucking away IE market share hand-over-fist probably will put an end to that fairly soon, some statistics show IE already below 50%, though you know what they say about lies, damned lies, etc.)

I meant it as a how-people-perceive-you sort of thing.

True, although that very perception of Linux as a technophile's OS probably makes it so that a good chunk of those who don't bolt at the mere mention of its name are already perceived that way...

 

[Urwumpe]

Actually, you can make Windows as safe as Linux (if you are spending as much time learning windows administration as you need for Linux), and you can also customize Windows heavily... Just work for a company that has a "Minesweeper Consultant - Solitaire Expert" that really earned his MCSE title. Even in the darkest Windows NT 4.0 days, you had many options to customize Windows.

Just saying: Linux is safer because it is Linux, is just idiotic. There are actually many malware kits around in the darker areas of the Internet, that do nothing else but hacking linux servers. A blank Ubuntu installation is likely as easily compromised as a blank windows installation.

The difference between Linux and Windows in terms of security is somewhere else: When Windows is hacked again, you read it on CNET or Slashdot. When Linux is hacked, you read it in the Kernel Mailing List or from the mouth of a crying Linux administrator at your LUG.

 

[eveningsky339]

You can't do that? Last time I installed Ubuntu 5 or something, I could make as many mount points as I wanted. Can't you just CTRL+ALT+F1(..F8) switch to console, and manually edit the "/etc/fstab", or even run the fdisk and mkfs from there?

h:

 

[cjp]

As for Ubuntu-- it's a good distro. It's what introduced me to Linux. But after the release of 10.04, I gave openSUSE 11.2 a try, and Ubuntu no longer appealed to me. It removes options from the end-user in order to be more user-friendly

Which will probably good for the future popularity of Ubuntu, if you look at the continuous popularity of windows.

I'm still using Ubuntu. While I am an experienced Linux geek, I also like it when a system gives me productivity, and when it 'just works' after installation, so that I don't waste time on fixing problems.

If I ever move away from Ubuntu, it will probably be because it's becoming too commercial. I'll probably move to Debian. But feel free to advertise openSuSE to me, if you like.

-- for example, you don't have the option to set up a separate /home partition during an Ubuntu installation.

Ahem, I did exactly that during the installation of Ubuntu 10.04.

The partitioning step of the installation program is exactly what it should be: it gives two standard configurations for newbies (dual boot with windows, or use the entire hard disk for Ubuntu), and a third, non-default, manual option, where you can manually partition and format your hard disks, assign mount points and configure the location of the boot loader.

 

[Turbinator]

Linux, it makes my head explode.

I really do want to properly try Linux, instead of look at me I am running Linux on a live CD, and the only thing I know how to do is go on the Internet, I want to be able to use it properly, and comfortably like I do with Windows. However there is such a barrier that it feels like I need a PhD in Linux to get it.

 

[Linguofreak]

Linux, it makes my head explode.

I really do want to properly try Linux, instead of look at me I am running Linux on a live CD, and the only thing I know how to do is go on the Internet, I want to be able to use it properly, and comfortably like I do with Windows. However there is such a barrier that it feels like I need a PhD in Linux to get it.

What exactly is giving you trouble? Finding your way around the interface? Dealing with command line stuff? Stability issues?

 

[Artlav]

I want to be able to use it properly, and comfortably like I do with Windows.

Linux is inherently a piece-it-yourself kit.

Windows - you buy a flat with all comforts and a city around, but you can only move furniture around, and knocking down a wall to make room for a dinner hall could bring down the building.

Linux - you get a square of land for free, and can build anything on it with stuff from nearby scrap yard. Or spend some money and get pre-made designs with support. Or order an unpacking house to be put there. Etc.
Comfort must be achieved by customization.

Linux is a professional operating system, the values in it are different.
You don't put comforts in a military jeep.

Now, what makes you confused?

 

[eveningsky339]

I can see some of my earlier posts during my distro-hopping days... good memories. :lol:

The only problem I had with switching to Ubuntu was understanding the file system-- / and all its subdirectories. A quick trip to Wikipedia cleared it up for me.

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//usr

Linux is more logical than Windows, and I found Ubuntu much easier to understand and use compared to Vista.

 

[Turbinator]

To describe what exactly it is that is bothering (confusing) me;

The file system, file extensions, where is the "My Computer" folder.
How do the drivers work, How can I move files on the HDDs around on a live CD.

That's so far, of the top of my memory.

 

[Artlav]

The file system

Different, pretty logical.
Description here:
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki//usr

file extensions

No such things.
Executables are marked by X flag.
(
attributes - in windows they are hidden, archive, read-only and other obsolete crap.
In linux they are all.
rwxrwxrwx - r readable, w writeable/changeable, x executable. First triplet for you, second for your peers, third for the public.
)

where is the "My Computer" folder.

No such thing.
Your files (aka My Documents) is in /home/username or ~ (shortcut)
Settings are in there too.
It evolved from a multi-user OS, so all the stuff is localized.

How do the drivers work

Mounted in /media or /mnt directory.
No C:, D:, etc. One disk ("tree"), other can be set as directories on it (mounted).
"All is file" philosophy - you can read directly from hardware as files in /dev directory (CAREFUL!)

How can I move files on the HDDs around on a live CD.

Console.
Get Midnight Commander (mc command), it's like the familiar Windows Total commander (or FAR).
If you like Explorer-like nonsense, many distros offer something similar too, but nothing mainstream.

From LiveCD you might need to find or mount your HDD's. Now that takes thinking. Stuff said above combined with google should be enough to solve it.

 

[Linguofreak]

Linux is inherently a piece-it-yourself kit.

Windows - you buy a flat with all comforts and a city around, but you can only move furniture around, and knocking down a wall to make room for a dinner hall could bring down the building.

Linux - you get a square of land for free, and can build anything on it with stuff from nearby scrap yard. Or spend some money and get pre-made designs with support. Or order an unpacking house to be put there. Etc.
Comfort must be achieved by customization.

Linux is a professional operating system, the values in it are different.
You don't put comforts in a military jeep.

Now, what makes you confused?

If Linux is a military Jeep, then Ubuntu must be a civilian hummer.

To describe what exactly it is that is bothering (confusing) me;

The file system, file extensions, where is the "My Computer" folder.

As far as the file system, its organization is a bit of a pet peeve of mine (as it was designed more for multiuser systems than for the modern desktop), but the basic layout is fairly easy to understand:

/bin and /sbin contain system binaries, broadly like "C:\Windows" on windows, except that it only contains executables.

/etc contains system settings and databases, again, broadly like "C:Windows", except that it only contains settings files.

/dev contains direct access to system devices. Windows doesn't do this. Unless you're a geek, you can (and probably should) ignore it.

/home contains users' home directories, which are equivalent to "My Documents".

/mnt and /media contain removable media like CD drives and USB sticks (when they're there). (Actually, as I understand, /mnt is being replaced by media for most things).

/lib contains system libraries (like .dll's on windows), and is, again, broadly equivalent to C:\Windows, except it only has libraries in it.

/root is the root user's home directory. Since you generally won't be logged in as root, you can usually ignore it.

/tmp contains temporary files, like C:\Windows\Temp on Windows.

/usr and /usr/local are broadly equivalent to "Program Files" (with /usr/bin being like the executables in program files, /usr/lib being like the dlls, etc), except that I don't tend to run stuff directly from /usr on Linux *nearly* as much as I run stuff from Program Files on Windows.

/var contains various and sundry files that may change often, but once again, unless you're a geek, you can probably ignore it.

As for file extensions, you have those on Windows too, but Windows hides them by default. Most file types are the same: *.txt is for plain text files, *.bmp, *.jpg, etc, are for image files, and so forth. The biggest difference is that executables on Linux have no extension, whereas executables on Windows have the extension *.exe.

For Ubuntu, the "Places" menu is approximately equivalent to "My Computer". The "System" menu is approximately equivalent to "Control Panel". The "Applications" menu is approximately equivalent to "Start > Programs". Your home folder is basically "My Documents".

 

[eveningsky339]

Allow me to briefly butt in and say that with I have used Ubuntu, openSUSE, and PCLinuxOS with absolutely no knowledge of how the Linux filesystem works. I could have kept living like that but I decided one day to sit down and get a basic understanding of my OS, and after some time I found it to be more comfortable than Windows (which is using the NTFS file system if I remember correctly?)

There is no C: or D: in Linux; it all fits nice and snug under our friend root, also known as / .

If you can't get your head around the Linux filesystem, just don't try to save your documents to /dev/null. Long story.

 

[Turbinator]

Thanks guys, this makes it seem a bit more clearer, however still a lot to do. Linguofreak, that was a good explanation.

Do you guys recommend any good Linux "start off" books?

 

[Pyromaniac605]

O-F Staff Note: these four posts moved here from the What is the worse software bug ever? thread. Feel free to rant away in this thread, but please keep it out of other threads.

Mac OS. :lol:

Darren