5 Reasons not to use Linux.

[n0cmonkey]

Link.

 

[The Green Bean]

"If Microsoft says so, it has to be true"

:roll:

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: hatim
"If Microsoft says so, it has to be true"

:roll:

What an elegant and understated rebuttal. I think it would be likely I'd agree with your point, if you made one.

 

[Bulldog13]

kde makes my eyes hurt

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Bulldog13
kde makes my eyes hurt

What about it causes you physical pain?

 

[ITJunkie]

This is a good one...I especially liked the Linux is more expensive comment.

Hell, I just purchased a new server and priced it with Win2003 Standard(5 CAL's) plus 5 additional CAL's and priced without. I ended up adding a second XEON processor, dumped Windows and still saved $600 off the price of a single proc W/windows loaded.

Microsoft can yammer all they want about "the cost of supporting" Linux but for those small companies that are priced out of their licensing agreements, etc. Linux is an awesome alternative. Support costs, in my experience, are negligably higher with Linux versus Windows. You may have to pay a little more per hour for a Linux support tech but the fact that you don't have to use them near as much as you do with Windows support techs makes this whole argument a varitable wash.

IMHO, of course.

 

[kamper]

I wish people would stop writing articles like this. People who use linux will use it, people who use windows will use it. People who are interested in switching will try linux out and possibly switch. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than that and evangelistic arguments and articles will just get you into endless and largely pointless discussions on why people use the software they use.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: kamper
I wish people would stop writing articles like this. People who use linux will use it, people who use windows will use it. People who are interested in switching will try linux out and possibly switch. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than that and evangelistic arguments and articles will just get you into endless and largely pointless discussions on why people use the software they use.

That would be like telling a cow to stop mooing. Or a duck to stop quacking.

 

[Phoenix86]

I'm pretty sure one can come up with a good list of reasons to use linux w/o having to invent or omit facts of life.

"Reason number three: Linux doesn't have enough applications"
Open office, while very nice, doesn't replace office. Here, open this excel file with marcos in open office. Nice, but not a replacement. Are there even replacement commands for macros in OO?
Games, missing from the list. Why? I think everyone running linux already knows.

edit: *quack*

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86
I'm pretty sure one can come up with a good list of reasons to use linux w/o having to invent or omit facts of life.

"Reason number three: Linux doesn't have enough applications"
Open office, while very nice, doesn't replace office. Here, open this excel file with marcos in open office. Nice, but not a replacement. Are there even replacement commands for macros in OO?

Stop using Macros. They've been a security headache since like '95.

Games, missing from the list. Why? I think everyone running linux already knows.

Because PC games suck?

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Phoenix86
I'm pretty sure one can come up with a good list of reasons to use linux w/o having to invent or omit facts of life.

"Reason number three: Linux doesn't have enough applications"
Open office, while very nice, doesn't replace office. Here, open this excel file with marcos in open office. Nice, but not a replacement. Are there even replacement commands for macros in OO?

Stop using Macros. They've been a security headache since like '95.

While a wonderful suggestion, I know you work in IT. Explain to the users of *3rd* party companies that *they* need to stop using them or else. While your at it, please re-write some of our apps running on access to be compatible with OO. Again, OO is nice, but it's not a 1-1 replacement. Because of that, it has problems in a work environment. Thanks for answering the question, oh wait, you didn't.

Games, missing from the list. Why? I think everyone running linux already knows.

Because PC games suck?

Oh, you got me there... Are you trying to have some sort of serious conversation or what? Your replies smack of a trollish post. I'm trying to be reasonable and you reply "because PC games suck". Nice, OT is over there. *points*

Maybe I should take the default position Linux sucks and we can go back and forth on these finer points. :roll:

edit: fixed tags.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86
While a wonderful suggestion, I know you work in IT. Explain to the users of *3rd* party companies that *they* need to stop using them or else. While your at it, please re-write some of our apps running on access to be compatible with OO. Again, OO is nice, but it's not a 1-1 replacement. Because of that, it has problems in a work environment. Thanks for answering the question, oh wait, you didn't.

I can't. I don't use OO.

Don't switch to Linux. You're banned from Linux.

Oh, you got me there... Are you trying to have some sort of serious conversation or what? Your replies smack of a trollish post. I'm trying to be reasonable and you reply "because PC games suck". Nice, OT is over there. *points*

The article was more trollish than my responses. We've dealt with the Linux gaming issue a million fricking times. Do we have to do it again?

Why aren't there games for Linux? There are, you just don't pay attention. Why aren't there more? Because you're using Windows.

Maybe I should take the default position Linux sucks and we can go back and forth on these finer points. :roll:

Go for it. I won't disagree.

edit: fixed tags.

Those pesky tags! They get everyone, no matter what platform!

EDIT: See? Those stupid tags got me! Again.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Can I use Microsoft Access files within OpenOffice.org? Whatever that means.

OOo does not appear to support Microsoft Macros just yet. There appears to be discussion on it, if not actual work done. Their site sucks though, so more/better information won't be coming from me.

Games: There are games. Doom 3 is apparently a recently released game that has a native Linux client. Other games are written for DirectX, which is proprietary to Microsoft. Blame the companies for using inferior technologies.

Cedega and WINE are supposed to allow some Win32 applications the ability to run on a better platform. Plenty of games are supported too. With the price of Linux + cedega being much less than the price of a decent copy of Windows, it might be a solution worth checking out.

Also, if people migrated to Linux and used the powers they receive as consumers more games would be ported to Linux. Right now companies don't see a market because users don't see the games.

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Don't switch to Linux. You're banned from Linux.

Oh, you got me there... Are you trying to have some sort of serious conversation or what? Your replies smack of a trollish post. I'm trying to be reasonable and you reply "because PC games suck". Nice, OT is over there. *points*

The article was more trollish than my responses. We've dealt with the Linux gaming issue a million fricking times. Do we have to do it again?

No, but you could have just agreed with me. I was pointing out some of the trollishness in the article.

Why aren't there games for Linux? There are, you just don't pay attention. Why aren't there more? Because you're using Windows.

I though you just said you didn't want to have this discussion.

edit: fixed tags.

Those pesky tags! They get everyone, no matter what platform!

EDIT: See? Those stupid tags got me! Again.

[/quote]
Tag your IT!

 

[Gooberlx2]

Right now companies don't see a market because users don't see the games.

And therein lies the circular problem.

 

[kamper]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: kamper
I wish people would stop writing articles like this. People who use linux will use it, people who use windows will use it. People who are interested in switching will try linux out and possibly switch. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than that and evangelistic arguments and articles will just get you into endless and largely pointless discussions on why people use the software they use.

That would be like telling a cow to stop mooing. Or a duck to stop quacking.

Why do cows moo anyways? Is it a mating call? Do they use it to find eachother in the mist or the dark?

 

[The Pentium Guy]

Originally posted by: kamper
I wish people would stop writing articles like this. People who use linux will use it, people who use windows will use it. People who are interested in switching will try linux out and possibly switch. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than that and evangelistic arguments and articles will just get you into endless and largely pointless discussions on why people use the software they use.

Yeah what the hell. This article is so god damn biased.

Example:

Really now. I mean, most Linux systems only come with secure Web browsers, like Firefox; e-mail clients, like Evolution; IM clients, like GAIM; office suites, like OpenOffice.org 2.0; Web page editors, like Nvu; and on, and on, and...

Microsoft, on the other hand, gives you Internet Explorer and Outlook Express, the most popular Web browser and e-mail client around -- even though they do have a few little, teeny-weeny problems. Of course, Windows also has an IM-client, Windows Messenger, which, come to think of it, has also had some problems.

Who the hell says GAIM doesn't have problems? Has anyone EVER sucessfully completed a file transfer on GAIM?

OpenOffice? Shush. I'll stick with MSOffice.

But what the hell. What's the point of using linux as a desktop environment? What's with those idiots that say windows isn't stable? Hell I've never had windows crash on me before.

On the flip side. You can't be such an advocate to microsoft and exclaim that windows is the best for servers (unless you use ASP.NET). We all know it's not secure enough for that. Hell I'm willing to bet that even Microsoft uses linux boxes as their main servers.

It's all a matter of perspective.

-The Pentium Guy

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86
I though you just said you didn't want to have this discussion.

I thought I could sum it up quickly.

 

[KeyserSoze]

Originally posted by: kamper
I wish people would stop writing articles like this. People who use linux will use it, people who use windows will use it. People who are interested in switching will try linux out and possibly switch. It doesn't need to be any more complicated than that and evangelistic arguments and articles will just get you into endless and largely pointless discussions on why people use the software they use.

Agreed. I play around with a few distro's, but these articles are counter-productive. These come off as arrogant. People will use what they want to use. This article will not convert anyone over to Linux.



KS

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: The Pentium Guy
Yeah what the hell. This article is so god damn biased.

Example:

Really now. I mean, most Linux systems only come with secure Web browsers, like Firefox; e-mail clients, like Evolution; IM clients, like GAIM; office suites, like OpenOffice.org 2.0; Web page editors, like Nvu; and on, and on, and...

Microsoft, on the other hand, gives you Internet Explorer and Outlook Express, the most popular Web browser and e-mail client around -- even though they do have a few little, teeny-weeny problems. Of course, Windows also has an IM-client, Windows Messenger, which, come to think of it, has also had some problems.

Who the hell says GAIM doesn't have problems? Has anyone EVER sucessfully completed a file transfer on GAIM?

I've completed conversations on GAIM.

OpenOffice? Shush. I'll stick with MSOffice.

My biggest problem with Office is that it is VERY limited in available platforms.

But what the hell. What's the point of using linux as a desktop environment?

Some people prefer it. It makes more sense to me than Windows does.

What's with those idiots that say windows isn't stable? Hell I've never had windows crash on me before.

When did you start using Windows?

On the flip side. You can't be such an advocate to microsoft and exclaim that windows is the best for servers (unless you use ASP.NET). We all know it's not secure enough for that. Hell I'm willing to bet that even Microsoft uses linux boxes as their main servers.

It is secure enough though. There in lies the rub.

I don't know about Linux, but Microsoft has run plenty of other non-Windows OSes for various functions.

 

[Phoenix86]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Phoenix86
I though you just said you didn't want to have this discussion.

I thought I could sum it up quickly.

Gaming support on Linux sucks. Summed up fair enough?

 

[KeyserSoze]

n0cmonkey,

I would like to add that I personally like Linux a lot. For someone like me that just likes to dig in and learn, I think it's a lot of fun. The web has endless tutorials/forums, guides to get just about everything done. I constantly play around to try to get better. Who cares if I mess it up, I got a Windows machine here to get everything done if necessary.

But my point is that not everyone will convert, nor will they ever see a need to. My hope is to be fully dependent on a Linux Distro by the time that Vista comes out.




KS

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: Phoenix86

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: Phoenix86
I though you just said you didn't want to have this discussion.

I thought I could sum it up quickly.

Gaming support on Linux sucks. Summed up fair enough?

But it sucks less than it used to.

 

[P0ldy]

Erm, everyone does realise that the writer is joking, right?

 

[chcarnage]

The real reasons not to use it are:

1. You like Windows or are into gaming
2. You have a kind friend who fixes your OS problems
3. You don't know Linux exists
4. You own Microsoft shares
5. You already use OS X



Anyway, why the stir about this column? The writer relativates his critics in the conclusion.

When you really think about it, you can see why there are lots of reasons not to use Linux.

There just aren't any good ones.