MS Bashers, why does windows suck?
- Thread starter yhelothar
- Start date
I don't know what they'll say...but I'm always amused by those people who can't get it to work correctly even though they claim to be computer experts. I have no problem doing so, maybe they just suck 
Originally posted by: Rainsford
I don't know what they'll say...but I'm always amused by those people who can't get it to work correctly even though they claim to be computer experts. I have no problem doing so, maybe they just suck
:thumbsup:
I wouldn't say it sucks but i have no use for it whatsoever, not on my Powerbook or any of the different servers or desktops i run (on more than half of them Windows wont even install so.).
I prefer other OS's for security, stability and functionality reasons.
I prefer other OS's for security, stability and functionality reasons.
All systems suck. Some just suck less. And the ones that suck less, suck less to you. It's all opinion based, so here ya go:
True.
True.
True, but less necessary on most Windows systems.
It makes no sense to me. It's all about big programs with features out the wazoo. I prefer smaller programs that are much more limited when used individually. A lot of the programs on a *nix system are powerful in a limited way, but can be used together to do some wonderfully powerful things.
The text editors installed by default are horrid. vi is so much more powerful. I still hit esc in notepad...
The registry is an obfuscated piece of junk. Simple text files are much more convenient for configuration.
The help system is big, slow, and rarely provides me with the information I'm looking for. The man pages for my *nix of choice are quite good. There are FAQs, and how-tos available. As long as you have done your homework and use the rules of nettiquette, asking questions get you answers quickly.
Windows is confusing. To work on a hard drive, I have to right click on the "My computer" icon, go to manage, select disk drives or something and work from there. To get networking properties, I go through half a dozen dialogues. Finding a way to add a user still confuses me.
Doesn't come with an SSH client. Not that downloading Putty and winscp is tough, but they include a browser they might as well include an SSH client.
Event viewer's logs are usually worthless. I'm sure there is a way to export and import them, but I don't know it off hand. And if I had to move a disk to another machine to get to the event viewer so I could find the problem, I'd have to play around for quite a while to figure it out. Syslog's easy text based logs are much easier, and make more sense. Plus I can easily do remote logging.
Unmounting my USB pendrive is overly complicated.
The shell is ugly (all of the standard ones). I don't like the task bar. The system tray is ok at best.
No virtual desktops. How can people use only 1 or two desktops? I use ~7 typically.
Running programs remotely has never seemed to work properly (if at all, it's been a while since I tried).
Where's perl?
Why is my main drive called C: (actually E on my system, not sure why though :|)? Why is the second drive called D: (actually C: on my system, not sure why though :|)? It would make more sense to put that second drive in the tree under the first drive.
Why are all the programs installed into individual folders?
No native X11?
I do like EFS though.
True.
True.
True, but less necessary on most Windows systems.
It makes no sense to me. It's all about big programs with features out the wazoo. I prefer smaller programs that are much more limited when used individually. A lot of the programs on a *nix system are powerful in a limited way, but can be used together to do some wonderfully powerful things.
The text editors installed by default are horrid. vi is so much more powerful. I still hit esc in notepad...
The registry is an obfuscated piece of junk. Simple text files are much more convenient for configuration.
The help system is big, slow, and rarely provides me with the information I'm looking for. The man pages for my *nix of choice are quite good. There are FAQs, and how-tos available. As long as you have done your homework and use the rules of nettiquette, asking questions get you answers quickly.
Windows is confusing. To work on a hard drive, I have to right click on the "My computer" icon, go to manage, select disk drives or something and work from there. To get networking properties, I go through half a dozen dialogues. Finding a way to add a user still confuses me.
Doesn't come with an SSH client. Not that downloading Putty and winscp is tough, but they include a browser they might as well include an SSH client.
Event viewer's logs are usually worthless. I'm sure there is a way to export and import them, but I don't know it off hand. And if I had to move a disk to another machine to get to the event viewer so I could find the problem, I'd have to play around for quite a while to figure it out. Syslog's easy text based logs are much easier, and make more sense. Plus I can easily do remote logging.
Unmounting my USB pendrive is overly complicated.
The shell is ugly (all of the standard ones). I don't like the task bar. The system tray is ok at best.
No virtual desktops. How can people use only 1 or two desktops? I use ~7 typically.
Running programs remotely has never seemed to work properly (if at all, it's been a while since I tried).
Where's perl?
Why is my main drive called C: (actually E on my system, not sure why though :|)? Why is the second drive called D: (actually C: on my system, not sure why though :|)? It would make more sense to put that second drive in the tree under the first drive.
Why are all the programs installed into individual folders?
No native X11?
I do like EFS though.
Originally posted by: virtualgames0
I have no problems with all the problems you have...
Guess it takes a nerdy programmer/network admin to be annoyed with windows..
Not at all. I'm not a nerd. Even if I was doing something else, I'd still feel the same way about Windows.
Originally posted by: virtualgames0
I have no problems with all the problems you have...
Guess it takes a nerdy programmer/network admin to be annoyed with windows..
No, but having to go through a multitude of steps to do something very simple is boring and irritating.
It depends on what you are using your computer for i guess, to me, windows just doesn't make sense.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No BSD.
BSD users don't need instructions.
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No BSD.
BSD users don't need instructions.
If that were true, people wouldn't spend countless hours making sure the man pages and FAQs were up to date and relevant. We don't need extra instructions maybe, because the ones we have are so good.
1) Filled with security holes
2) Expensive Licencing agreements
3) You have less control over what you can do in Windows then let's say...in Linux
4) File archiecture in Windows is far less secure then in Linux (I'm not talking about security holes here, just security in general)
5) Linux can stay up running for months while Windows...has issues staying up that long (for 99 percent of the boxes I've come across)
I could probably list more if I wasn't so damn sleepy
2) Expensive Licencing agreements
3) You have less control over what you can do in Windows then let's say...in Linux
4) File archiecture in Windows is far less secure then in Linux (I'm not talking about security holes here, just security in general)
5) Linux can stay up running for months while Windows...has issues staying up that long (for 99 percent of the boxes I've come across)
I could probably list more if I wasn't so damn sleepy
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No BSD.
BSD users don't need instructions.
If that were true, people wouldn't spend countless hours making sure the man pages and FAQs were up to date and relevant. We don't need extra instructions maybe, because the ones we have are so good.
That was what i meant.
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
No BSD.
BSD users don't need instructions.
If that were true, people wouldn't spend countless hours making sure the man pages and FAQs were up to date and relevant. We don't need extra instructions maybe, because the ones we have are so good.
That was what i meant.
I figured, I just like stressing the fact that the BSDs are probably the best documented systems available.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
When the hardware isn't dying, my 2k3 box stays up quite well.
When you don't have to reboot it after visiting Windows Update you mean?
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
When the hardware isn't dying, my 2k3 box stays up quite well.
Oh I believe you
My Windows box stays up quite well too for a few weeks...but eventually everything bogs down
I swear that the only box which I've had successfully running for a long while (last uptime was 134 days running) was actually my mandrake 9.1 box. The only reason that box goes down due to power failures.
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
When the hardware isn't dying, my 2k3 box stays up quite well.
When you don't have to reboot it after visiting Windows Update you mean?
There haven't been any updates recently requiring a reboot. I had to reinstall it the other day because of a bad hard drive, and of course I have to reboot it after the initial update, but it was running fine before that. Don't remember it asking me to reboot for quite a while.
It isn't an increadibly loaded system though. Dual Athlon 2400+, 512MB ram. It just runs distributed computing clients, backs up DVDs, serves files, backs up files, downloads, uploads, etc.
Originally posted by: Jero
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
When the hardware isn't dying, my 2k3 box stays up quite well.
Oh I believe you
My Windows box stays up quite well too for a few weeks...but eventually everything bogs down
I swear that the only box which I've had successfully running for a long while (last uptime was 134 days running) was actually my mandrake 9.1 box. The only reason that box goes down due to power failures.
The 2k pro boxes at work get rebooted 2-3 times per day. There isn't enough ram in the systems (1GB), and some of the programs are a bit wonky.
My BSD boxes stay up constantly. When I ran Linux on a machine or two, it was almost as good as the OpenBSD boxes. And my iBook almost never gets rebooted. I usually have 90+ days of uptime on that old POS.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
When the hardware isn't dying, my 2k3 box stays up quite well.
When you don't have to reboot it after visiting Windows Update you mean?
There haven't been any updates recently requiring a reboot. I had to reinstall it the other day because of a bad hard drive, and of course I have to reboot it after the initial update, but it was running fine before that. Don't remember it asking me to reboot for quite a while.
It isn't an increadibly loaded system though. Dual Athlon 2400+, 512MB ram. It just runs distributed computing clients, backs up DVDs, serves files, backs up files, downloads, uploads, etc.
Isn't it interesting that the only reason you would need to power down a linux box is for either
hardware failure (nothing you can really do about those), power failure (even ups doesn't last forever)
or a kernal upgrade?
everything else can be stop and restarted =)
As for windows, once your system resources go down, it's hard to bring them back up without a shutdown.
Originally posted by: Jero
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Klixxer
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
When the hardware isn't dying, my 2k3 box stays up quite well.
When you don't have to reboot it after visiting Windows Update you mean?
There haven't been any updates recently requiring a reboot. I had to reinstall it the other day because of a bad hard drive, and of course I have to reboot it after the initial update, but it was running fine before that. Don't remember it asking me to reboot for quite a while.
It isn't an increadibly loaded system though. Dual Athlon 2400+, 512MB ram. It just runs distributed computing clients, backs up DVDs, serves files, backs up files, downloads, uploads, etc.
Isn't it interesting that the only reason you would need to power down a linux box is for either
hardware failure (nothing you can really do about those), power failure (even ups doesn't last forever)
or a kernal upgrade?
everything else can be stop and restarted =)
As for windows, once your system resources go down, it's hard to bring them back up without a shutdown.
I do kernel updates all the time on my BSD boxes, so my uptimes are kind of pitiful lately.
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
Originally posted by: Jero
Originally posted by: n0cmonkey
When the hardware isn't dying, my 2k3 box stays up quite well.
Oh I believe you
My Windows box stays up quite well too for a few weeks...but eventually everything bogs down
I swear that the only box which I've had successfully running for a long while (last uptime was 134 days running) was actually my mandrake 9.1 box. The only reason that box goes down due to power failures.
The 2k pro boxes at work get rebooted 2-3 times per day. There isn't enough ram in the systems (1GB), and some of the programs are a bit wonky.
My BSD boxes stay up constantly. When I ran Linux on a machine or two, it was almost as good as the OpenBSD boxes. And my iBook almost never gets rebooted. I usually have 90+ days of uptime on that old POS.
Actually, I'm quite a fan of BSD myself. I'm slowly loving BSD over linux.
I just LOVE /usr/ports =)
In fact for my next setup, I plan on using Linux as the gateway, firewall, file server, web server, print server, domain name controller, ftp server and who knows what else...
and I'll also have a bsd box as a file server for nfs usage...
I want to be as versitile as possible and learn as much as I can as system administrator.
- Dec 11, 2002
- 18,409
- 39
- 91
Yes so longer uptime...
and even more security..
Anything else? :roll:
When I used linux, I had to restart FAR more. Sure I didn't have to restart the entire operating system, just restart x, but that's basically the same thing as rebooting to me, because I have to close all my programs.
I had to restartx just to change resolutions... :disgust:
and even more security..
Anything else? :roll:
When I used linux, I had to restart FAR more. Sure I didn't have to restart the entire operating system, just restart x, but that's basically the same thing as rebooting to me, because I have to close all my programs.
I had to restartx just to change resolutions... :disgust:
TRENDING THREADS
-
Discussion Zen 5 Speculation (EPYC Turin and Strix Point/Granite Ridge - Ryzen 9000)- Started by DisEnchantment
- Replies: 25K
-
Discussion Intel Meteor, Arrow, Lunar & Panther Lakes + WCL Discussion Threads
- Started by Tigerick
- Replies: 22K
-
Discussion Intel current and future Lakes & Rapids thread- Started by TheF34RChannel
- Replies: 23K
-
News NVIDIA and Intel to Develop AI Infrastructure and Personal Computing Products- Started by poke01
- Replies: 398
Facebook
Twitter