Windows Why Don't You Use Linux?

That's pretty much my reasoning, Tomm(R). I installed Mandrake 9.1 a while ago, worked really well - picked up mostly everything iirc. I was able to download and install all of the updates and it felt like a good OS. However, I could never figure out where to 'put' stuff or what each of the folders or drives actually did or 'meant', like var, usr, etc.

 

Google does.


I use *nix on all of my machines bar one. There are a few apps I really like that are only for Win32. I enjoy using/learning a different OS and nix is much more stable.

 

i use both manny10 and xp on my laptop ... just had a linux class in school ... i dont think my main rig would ever get linux though. I have an odd resolution screen and i just never could get x to accept the timings ... and thats also the box i game on ...

i actually prefer linux for everyday surfing/fsking around/researching papers, etc .. and i am thouroughly addicted to the lbreakout2 ... but when it comes to actually putting papers together, i am just so used to ms office that its pointless for me to try something else.

 

Compatibility... that's really it. I've played around but until it gets developed further with better compatibility like windows has (but doesn't get the windows instabilities!!) I just don't have the time or energy to really set a system up with it.

 

i would move but my complete lack of any linux knowledge is stopping me, ive got a machine ill put it on and play about but as for a main rig, im afraid its xp all the way.

 

slightly o/t bit:
I find the linux/windows argument a bit pointless.

If you're comfortable using windows and have no desire to have more control over everything you do or the pains of learning a new operating system then that's fine. I'm not going to argue with you or force you to change because clearly your happy and there's no need for you to do so.

I know that linux is a superior operating system but I also know it's not as simple to use as windows. Thankfully the main goal of linux so far has not been to provide a simple os that is aimed at the masses of users who dont have a degree in computing or an above average computer interest. That area has been filled.

For all I disslike him I think Bill has done a pretty good job at getting the pc available to the masses. I also think however that Linus has done a pretty good job at starting the development of a more powerfull and alternative os (did I forget to mention free?!)

The above question needs to be asked if linux is to be improved and moved into the main stream and I think it should attempt to do that to some extent. Don't forget that if you do have some gripes about linux there is the possibility to do something about it yourself or petition a friendly developer to do it for you. (yes yes I know you're all too lazy/dont have the skills/ would rather just stick to windows but the possiblity is there at least)

on topic bit:
Personally I use linux but the one thing that made that transition long and not all that easy was the lack of definitive guides. I have mostly found answers to things but usually not with out a lot of searching and reading. The linux document project goes a fair way to resolving this but I often find it out dated and incomplete.

 

nerds might find this controversial, but i think linux is far from being in a finished state (please dont spam about 'linux will never be finished' bla bla bla)

basically, a computer user having to compile his own files sounds crazy to me. it seems like taking a step backwards in computing instead of forwards.

i use redhat linux for one of my servers (apache/ssh/mysql/etc) and it works alright, but its a pain in the arse to set up. whereas in windows youd have a wizard helping you set up your application, in linux youd have to compile it yourself using a zillion different command line switches etc, its just not userfriendly at all... people always act so pro-linux that they defy reality.

lets just face the fact that windows is more user-friendly than linux. until linux can offer the functionality it does, without comprimising on userfriendliness like it does, people are not going to flock to it. right now people say linux is booming, when in reality what is happening is people are trying it out for a week then going back to windows

 

What can i say? It wouldn't work with my Speedtouch ADSL modem (usb) without a lot of hassle that I could only do with help from my mate Google.
Definately a Catch 22; can't figure out how to learn anything in Linux without the internet... I think that pretty much says it all, its unfamiliar.
I mean there are plenty of nice touches in Linux but XP runs fine for me and hence I don't feel the need to change or the desire to learn how to use a different OS that won't be any more useful than what I'm currently using.

 

microsofts new slogan is...

"Linux? Why Bother?"

 

SuSE 9.0 and 9.1 have NTFS support.

About games, some games run native and a lot more faster than under Windows and the other games can be played with WineX.

All you have to do is READ, and I think that's something everybody in the PC world has to do, so I don't see the problem.

This isn't like Windows "double click & install", you have to do it like in the old DOS days.


It's ok for people that don't understand about PC stuff, but for others, I don't see why don't you even try it before saying bad things about it.

 

I don't just linux because it can't (properly) support my hardware and can run or replace my software. But that's only for my full-time desktop machine. My sister's computer runs gentoo becaue that's the only thing that'll run at decent speed on it. Every server I've ever setup runs linux (though that's gonna change soon due to some crappy windows-only software I have to support).

I know that I *could* use linux as my primary OS, just as I *could* use Devorak as my primary keyboard layout. But it's not worth the hassle (yet). However, if the next version of windows is TC then I'm not gonna touch it with a 10-foot pole. If by that time linux is more useful to me than windows XP, it's not a hard decision.

Thankfully there are a lot of companies now making software for linux, and hardware support is constanly improving. If MS keep walking the TC path, linux is gonna leave it behind, and pick up a lot more users on the way through.

 

TC???

 

Total Crap?

 

Trusted/Trustworthy Computing

As proposed by the TCG (Trusted Computing Group), previouly known as the TCPA (Trusted Computing Platform Agreement). You've probably heard of it, and if you havn't you should look it up.

 

thanks i didn't know the evil TCPA had changed their name.i'd switch too,its my pc i'm doing what i want with it.

 

you wouldnt say that if YOU invented ntfs

 

i use linux and xp. im picky. i like linux cause it allows be to do stuff like build my own os (my systems usually run my own hand-built distro), but i like xp simply because all of my games run on it without a hitch (and it has mirc too, which is the king of all irc clients).

arguing the difference between windows and linux is like arguing the difference between macs and pc's. its a pointless task, they each have their own advantages and disadvantages, and never the twain shall meet.

personally, i dont bother arguing the point, i just use the best tool for the job. if its my own server box, it runs my linux. if its my dads pc, it runs xp. use the tool that does the job.

 

I have used every damn OS from Microsquash, I have used every damn OS from Macintrash, And quite a few versions of RedHat. There are elements from each that I like. However, the only thing that linux really needs is standardization. I mean, there's tarball and rpm but that's still a long way from being standard file formats. If they make a standard file format and a native installer for it, then it will be much more user-friendly. Support open-source.