5 Reasons not to use Linux.

[manno]

Even with the KDE and GNOME graphical windowing interfaces, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit a configuration file.

Compare that with Windows where, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit the Windows registry, where, as they like to tell you, one wrong move could destroy your system forever.

ha.... ha... HA!!! I call bullshizzle on that one I have yet to use a Linux distro that did not REQUIRE I use a shell prompt to get it configured correctly. This includes Ubuntu, Simply Mepis, Vector Linux, Vida Linux, Mandrake, Mandriva, Redhat 7/8/9, Fedora Core 1/2/3, Install one piece of software without using a shell prompt or opening a text file to configure it correctly. Even the Linux doll of the day Ubuntu (which I like, and am currently using) requires you edit a criptic config file to get samba to work. This guy is full of it.

"Possible -- not likely"!? What form of heroin, and crack laced cronik is this guy smoking to have rotted out that much of his brain.

As for the comments on Windows software compared to Linux software... perhaps he's missing something. I use OPEN SOURCE software every day on my Microsoft Windows PC... not LINUX software. So I can and do use Open Office, Inkscape, The Gimp, Firefox ect. on my Windows PC, as well as on my Linux PC's. I like open source I would like to see Linux catch up, and surpass Windows, but anyone saying that it has done so already should put down the koolade. Windows 2000, and XP are great Desktop OS's, not for running web servers mind you, but for doing desktop things, and more importantly gaming. In the desktop area MSW beats the tar out of Linux.

By no fault of Linux mind you just simply because of shady business practices, and paranoid hardware developers Linux is behind Windows in a number of key areas on the desktop. Ignoring the problem isn't going to make it go away. Point out the fact that Linux has terrible graphics drivers because of ATI's competitive paranoia, and MS's anti competitiveness. Point out that most major distro's don't ship with the ability to play .WMV, and DVD's by default because it would require them to break the law to do so. And when you install software that allows you to you are breaking the law.

This guy is doing more to hurt Linux, than help it, and he's not particularly funny, or clever to boot.

-manno

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: manno

Even with the KDE and GNOME graphical windowing interfaces, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit a configuration file.

Compare that with Windows where, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit the Windows registry, where, as they like to tell you, one wrong move could destroy your system forever.

ha.... ha... HA!!! I call bullshizzle on that one I have yet to use a Linux distro that did not REQUIRE I use a shell prompt to get it configured correctly.

I bet I could do it.

opening a text file to configure it correctly.

This isn't fair. You have to open preferences dialogues and stuff in Windows, the text file is the same thing on Linux.

Even the Linux doll of the day Ubuntu (which I like, and am currently using) requires you edit a criptic config file to get samba to work. This guy is full of it.

That's not Linux, it's samba.

And it's totally unnecessary to share files with the majority of OSes out there on PCs.

 

[manno]

4) Lack of driver support
-If it wasn't for this, I might actually consider setting up linux on my main box and dual booting.

Odd I only have 1 device in 5 machines that I know for a fact doesn't work and it's the SD slot in my notebook which I wouldn't use anyway.[/quote]

Congratulations, ask me how well my ATI video drivers are working... go on ask me.

5) Gaming
-So I'm writing a term paper at 3am and I get writer's block. Decide to grab some cookies and fire up a few rounds of counterstrike to clear my mind... WAIT, I have to go boot up my other box just to have a few rounds of counterstrike.. UGH.

Of course if you want to play something that runs on Windows you'll need Windows (or WINE, supposedly CS runs well in WINE), just as if you wanted to use iDVD you would have to buy a Mac.[/quote]


WOW CS RUNS ON LINUX!! Oh be still my beating heart I can play a game based on an engine from 1998 on my $1000 computer with a $300 video card. Oh thank God! I may as well toss that coppy of Windows XP out along with my coppies of Rise of Nations, FarCry, Battlefield 2, Dawn of War, and 90% of all other PC game titles out there that barely run on cedega, let alone WINE. I mean who needs the confusion of owning all those games when with just 8 hours of poking and prodding looking on forums, and digging through man pages I can get CS to run on my pc! Oh the joy, oh the sheer and utter ecstacy of it all! Thank you for totaly dissmissing the very rellavent and valid point that makken brought up and replying to it with a total bubkis. Worthless, Totaly.

-manno

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: manno
Congratulations, ask me how well my ATI video drivers are working... go on ask me.

How are ATI's drivers that have almost nothing to do with how well Linux does anything, and absolutely no bearing on this thread working out?

WOW CS RUNS ON LINUX!! Oh be still my beating heart I can play a game based on an engine from 1998 on my $1000 computer with a $300 video card. Oh thank God! I may as well toss that coppy of Windows XP out along with my coppies of Rise of Nations, FarCry, Battlefield 2, Dawn of War, and 90% of all other PC game titles out there that barely run on cedega, let alone WINE. I mean who needs the confusion of owning all those games when with just 8 hours of poking and prodding looking on forums, and digging through man pages I can get CS to run on my pc! Oh the joy, oh the sheer and utter ecstacy of it all! Thank you for totaly dissmissing the very rellavent and valid point that makken brought up and replying to it with a total bubkis. Worthless, Totaly.

-manno

Like I said, if these companies paid attention to open standards this wouldn't be an issue.

 

[manno]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: manno

Even with the KDE and GNOME graphical windowing interfaces, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit a configuration file.

Compare that with Windows where, it's possible -- not likely, but possible -- that you'll need to use a command line now and again, or edit the Windows registry, where, as they like to tell you, one wrong move could destroy your system forever.

ha.... ha... HA!!! I call bullshizzle on that one I have yet to use a Linux distro that did not REQUIRE I use a shell prompt to get it configured correctly.

I bet I could do it.

You're either saying this because you believe it, or you're saying this to get a rise out of me. Either way it's not worth responding to.

opening a text file to configure it correctly.

This isn't fair. You have to open preferences dialogues and stuff in Windows, the text file is the same thing on Linux.

Yes it is because installing most Windows programs doesn't REQUIRE you open those menues to set them up. Yes I understand that this is because windows is sort of a monoplatform, and config files are used because of the vast differences between various distros, it's a solution, but not a good one.

Even the Linux doll of the day Ubuntu (which I like, and am currently using) requires you edit a criptic config file to get samba to work. This guy is full of it.

That's not Linux, it's samba.

It's linux, and it's Samba. Samba requires this because it's being installed on linux, and there is no guarantee that there will be a gui available becuase it's Linux ect. ect. ect.

Again I'm not faulting Linux for this it's just part of the reason that Windows has the edge on the desktop.

And it's totally unnecessary to share files with the majority of OSes out there on PCs.

Not for at least 80% of the computer users I know. Hell I've got my whole immediate family 9 peeps in all using openVPN because they want access to their home PC's without the cost of somthing like Gotomypc. Again I like open source, and I apreciate the fact that you're arguing for it. For a TON of applications the open source movement has made fantastci strides, and I have directly benefitted from it. Linux on the causal user desktop however still has a long way to go.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: manno
You're either saying this because you believe it, or you're saying this to get a rise out of me. Either way it's not worth responding to.

I seriously think I could. Might be a fun project to try...

Yes it is because installing most Windows programs doesn't REQUIRE you open those menues to set them up. Yes I understand that this is because windows is sort of a monoplatform, and config files are used because of the vast differences between various distros, it's a solution, but not a good one.

Then install Windows and whatever software you need without opening a preferences/setting dialogue/window/whatever.

It's linux, and it's Samba. Samba requires this because it's being installed on linux, and there is no guarantee that there will be a gui available becuase it's Linux ect. ect. ect.

It's samba. It has nothing to do with Linux. Blame the samba guys. And there _is_ a cross platform configuration utility that does not require X11 or Linux. Look at swat. I'm sure there are others.

It's etc. by the way.

 

[manno]

How are ATI's drivers that have almost nothing to do with how well Linux does anything, and absolutely no bearing on this thread working out?

well they have to do with how well Linux does gaming for one... How well "Blender" works (all OpenGL UI) Wether it's the Linux comunitie's responsibility or not having a video card and crap drivers for it affects how well desktop Linux works.

[Q}Like I said, if these companies paid attention to open standards this wouldn't be an issue.[/quote]

I couldn't agree with you more. and I wish they would. But as it stands right now and for the foreseeable future they don't so Windows is the better casual user desktop.

 

[manno]

It's etc. by the way.

Oops

But seriously I LIKE LINUX. But I'm not going to put it on anyone else's PC.

 

[Cobalt]

Fact of the matter is that linux is NOT for the common computer user.

 

[Nothinman]

Congratulations, ask me how well my ATI video drivers are working... go on ask me.

That's your fault for buying an ATI card, cry to them about the quality of their drivers. All of my machines that I run X on have nvidia cards for a reason.

WOW CS RUNS ON LINUX!! Oh be still my beating heart I can play a game based on an engine from 1998 on my $1000 computer with a $300 video card. Oh thank God! I may as well toss that coppy of Windows XP out along with my coppies of Rise of Nations, FarCry, Battlefield 2, Dawn of War, and 90% of all other PC game titles out there that barely run on cedega, let alone WINE. I mean who needs the confusion of owning all those games when with just 8 hours of poking and prodding looking on forums, and digging through man pages I can get CS to run on my pc! Oh the joy, oh the sheer and utter ecstacy of it all! Thank you for totaly dissmissing the very rellavent and valid point that makken brought up and replying to it with a total bubkis. Worthless, Totaly.

Christ, take a f'ing pill. I mentioned CS because he specifically cited it as a game he plays.

Yes it is because installing most Windows programs doesn't REQUIRE you open those menues to set them up

Irrelevant, lots of Linux apps don't require editing of any files to work properly. Pretty much every Gnome app is like that, infact most of them store their settings in the gconf xml database which is akin to the registry so you can't just go opening it directly and editing things willy-nilly.

Yes I understand that this is because windows is sort of a monoplatform, and config files are used because of the vast differences between various distros, it's a solution, but not a good one.

No, it's because most Linux and unix users like text files because they're easier to use and understand.

It's linux, and it's Samba. Samba requires this because it's being installed on linux, and there is no guarantee that there will be a gui available becuase it's Linux ect. ect. ect.

Samba runs on a lot more than Linux and most of the people using Samba would be even more pissed of it required that they install X just to configure the thing.

Again I'm not faulting Linux for this it's just part of the reason that Windows has the edge on the desktop.

Yes, you are and IMO the use of text files is an advantage for Linux.

 

[inthell]

i play americas army with linux + ati 9800pro

the graphics look pretty nice to bad the game itself is not that good gameplay wise on linux or windows

 

[timswim78]

I setup SUSE linux on my Ideq/Athlon 64 box a few weeks ago. It was definitely the easiset OS installation ever. (By the way, Windows would not even install on this box because I have an SATA hdd and no floppy).

In addition, a ton of good apps were preinstalled, and it was a piece of cake to switch the ones that I didn't like.

Also, I think that YAST is an easier and more intuitive tool that the MS Control Panel.

 

[makken]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Congratulations, ask me how well my ATI video drivers are working... go on ask me.

That's your fault for buying an ATI card, cry to them about the quality of their drivers. All of my machines that I run X on have nvidia cards for a reason.

My computer came with an ATi card. Can't really do anything about it.

WOW CS RUNS ON LINUX!! Oh be still my beating heart I can play a game based on an engine from 1998 on my $1000 computer with a $300 video card. Oh thank God! I may as well toss that coppy of Windows XP out along with my coppies of Rise of Nations, FarCry, Battlefield 2, Dawn of War, and 90% of all other PC game titles out there that barely run on cedega, let alone WINE. I mean who needs the confusion of owning all those games when with just 8 hours of poking and prodding looking on forums, and digging through man pages I can get CS to run on my pc! Oh the joy, oh the sheer and utter ecstacy of it all! Thank you for totaly dissmissing the very rellavent and valid point that makken brought up and replying to it with a total bubkis. Worthless, Totaly.

Christ, take a f'ing pill. I mentioned CS because he specifically cited it as a game he plays.

I mentioned CS as an example. I could've easily used BF2, Warcraft 3, Farcry, Final Fantasy XI, etc etc. Counterstrike was the first one to pop into my mind at the moment.

 

[Nothinman]

My computer came with an ATi card. Can't really do anything about it.

Then complain to HP or Dell or whoever makes it and I'm sure it has some sort of expansion slots so you can buy a new card if you want.

I mentioned CS as an example. I could've easily used BF2, Warcraft 3, Farcry, Final Fantasy XI, etc etc. Counterstrike was the first one to pop into my mind at the moment.

WC3 and WoW are officially supported by Cedega, I don't know about the others because I don't game very much any more, I tried playing BF2 and FC for a bit at a friend's house though and I got bored pretty quickly.

 

[Sunner]

You're either saying this because you believe it, or you're saying this to get a rise out of me. Either way it's not worth responding to.

I do this fairly often.
I'm a Debian user myself, so I tend to use the command line quite a bit, and I would even if I didn't have to.
We use Redhat Enterprise at work though, and the setup is entirely graphical, and you can setup everything I can think of really.
Not entirely sure about the criterium for "working correctly" though.

 

[nweaver]

had to setup IIS at work that other day for a project (ARRGGHHH). Took me forever to find all the little options and checkboxes to get stuff right. As opposed to my apache install, where there are 2 VERY WELL DOCUMENTED config files to edit.

Oh and for the comment that "I must be the stupidest PC user ever"...

I am dumb because I choose not to use Windows? There have been several articles about COMMON USERS throwing pc's away to fix spyware. Or even a format. Why should a single piece of malware cause me to reformat my drives? That's insanity by design.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: nweaver
had to setup IIS at work that other day for a project (ARRGGHHH). Took me forever to find all the little options and checkboxes to get stuff right. As opposed to my apache install, where there are 2 VERY WELL DOCUMENTED config files to edit.

Oh and for the comment that "I must be the stupidest PC user ever"...

I am dumb because I choose not to use Windows? There have been several articles about COMMON USERS throwing pc's away to fix spyware. Or even a format. Why should a single piece of malware cause me to reformat my drives? That's insanity by design.

2 config files?

 

[mdchesne]

Originally posted by: n0cmonkey

Originally posted by: mdchesne
about the "few applications on linux"... well, maybe once software manufacturers realize how great linux is, they'll stop spending money on developing microsoft progs. once the progs start going linux, people will follow. once people follow, they'll have no need to go back. once that happens, bill gates won't have money to stop the rampaging mobs. once that happens, i shall smack his corpse head with my shoe...like the iranians and the statue of saddam.... I CAN DREAM!!!

Problem: software manufacturers won't be convinced about the quality of Linux until the market moves to it.

exactly. but far too many people still see windows as the norm OS. they grew up with it and think everythign else is either mac or server-type OSes. Hopefully, generation X (our generation people!) will be able to bring sway to the OS world. cause we all know linux is superior (IMO!!! NO FLAME WAR, PLZ!)

 

[makken]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

My computer came with an ATi card. Can't really do anything about it.

Then complain to HP or Dell or whoever makes it and I'm sure it has some sort of expansion slots so you can buy a new card if you want.

Trust me, if i knew how to swap out this video card (if it's even possible) without voiding the warranty, i would've done so already. I'm fairly certain it's integrated to the motherboard, but haven't been able to confirm yet.

WC3 and WoW are officially supported by Cedega, I don't know about the others because I don't game very much any more, I tried playing BF2 and FC for a bit at a friend's house though and I got bored pretty quickly.

Sorry to hear; how well is the WC3 and WoW support though?

 

[Nothinman]

Trust me, if i knew how to swap out this video card (if it's even possible) without voiding the warranty, i would've done so already. I'm fairly certain it's integrated to the motherboard, but haven't been able to confirm yet.

Whether it's integrated or not is irrelevant, there's nothing stopping you from adding another card. Well probably nothing, I know some of the 'business' class machines from HP only have PCI slots, so adding a card that way would almost certainly be a step backwards performance-wise.

Sorry to hear; how well is the WC3 and WoW support though?

I can't say from first hand experience, but I know a handful of Linux users on Ars were playing WoW for a bit so I have to believe it works pretty well.

 

[NaiMan]

is it a good idea to run both windows xp and linux on a laptop?

i just want to learn more about linux.

which version of linux would you guys recommend?

 

[makken]

Originally posted by: Nothinman

Trust me, if i knew how to swap out this video card (if it's even possible) without voiding the warranty, i would've done so already. I'm fairly certain it's integrated to the motherboard, but haven't been able to confirm yet.

Whether it's integrated or not is irrelevant, there's nothing stopping you from adding another card. Well probably nothing, I know some of the 'business' class machines from HP only have PCI slots, so adding a card that way would almost certainly be a step backwards performance-wise.

It's an PCI-E card(if i can even call it a card).
I've been probing around the system and online forums trying to find some idea if I can upgrade the card to something better, but so far, everything indicates that I'm stuck with it.
I've been trying to find an assembly manual and/or service manual that'll detail how to replace all the components, but so far no luck there either. I did find an assemble manual for a sister model (W3A) which I know for a fact does have integrated graphics, so that's no help. It details everything from replacing the CPU to the hard drive, but no mention of video card. However, Looking from the pictures of it, I believe the video card should be right under the CPU or to the left of it. Maybe one day I'll have enough guts to open it up and dig around: http://www.synnex.com/sb/docs/june05/Z63A%20Training.pdf

Sorry to hear; how well is the WC3 and WoW support though?

I can't say from first hand experience, but I know a handful of Linux users on Ars were playing WoW for a bit so I have to believe it works pretty well.

hrmm I'm suprised if everything's working 100%, I'm used to numerous bugs and errors popping up when software is converted from one OS to another.

Edit: BTW, i'll will paypal you $25 if you can figure out a way for me to upgrade my graphics card

 

[Nothinman]

is it a good idea to run both windows xp and linux on a laptop?

If you want to run them, then it makes perfect sense =) But I would highly recommend something like VPC or VMWare because dualbooting sucks and most people end up not booting the "other" OS and just wasting the space.

Edit: BTW, i'll will paypal you $25 if you can figure out a way for me to upgrade my graphics card

Laptops are a completely different beast and ATI pretty much has that market cornered, I had to look around quite a bit before I found a brand/model that I liked that had a card from nVidia. And as an added bonus my notebook will let me replace the video card if I want =)

 

[makken]

I envy you. The only laptop I found (at least at the time of my purchase, dunno about now) that had user-friendly replaceable graphics was the Dell Inspiron 9xxx / XPS model line. Unfortunately, I was looking for something under 15" and under 6 pounds (doens't exactly work carrying a 17" DTR laptop to lectures). the W3V was the most powerful one I could find at the time. The two others I was considering was a Sony S360 (also an ATi card), and a Gigabyte (can't remember the model name), that actually had an nVidia card in it (i think it was the 6200 or the 6400 or something), but the screen turned me off.

My offer still stands though; $25 to whoever finds a way to upgrade the graphics on a W3V