what is the point of Linux?

[lxskllr]

IMO the thing that would help linux get over the hill for the average user is getting it so apps that are not in the repository are easier to install. With Windows it's click click, next next next and done. With linux it depends on the app or plugin, but I can tell you now getting certain browser plugins into this linux mint I'm testing out have not been cool to do at all. With windows I go out to filehippo and grab the version I want and I'm running it in seconds. Don't get me wrong I love linux for many things, I support lots of ubuntu web servers and they are work horses that just never go down. But for an average user there is still a lot of pain in software land. Now of course if it's in the repositories it's simply awesome!

Perhaps... That was one of my early complaints when I first switched, but it's turned out to be not such a big deal. Being able to install things from anywhere is double edged sword. Yea, it can make things easier, but it also makes it easy to install malware. I evaluate how much I really want something if it isn't in the repos. When I was on Ubuntu, this was my thought process...

I want appX
Check repos - usually it was there. Not there?
Look for a substitute. Doesn't exist?
Do I REALLY want it? Yes?
Look for a precompiled binary from a trusted source. Doesn't exist?
Check for ppas. Don't exist?
Compile from source

That may sound complicated, but computers are complicated machines. You have sanity checks the whole way where you can back out of pwning yourself. If you end up compiling from source, it really isn't that hard. If you can read, and follow easy directions, it's a simple process. If you aren't willing to do that, you don't want appX as much as you thought you did.

 

[Puddle Jumper]

Linux is a great server os but I've never had a good experience trying to use a linux distro as a desktop os. Even with all of the progress Ubuntu has made towards being noob friendly I still run into far more issues on it than I do on Windows and I've generally found cross platform applications to be far more troublesome on Linux too.

I'll admit that I seem to be terribly unlucky with encountering issues with Linux no one else ever seems to but seeing as it's happened every single time I try and give linux a serious try I'm sick of it at this point.

 

[Eureka]

Actually, we can see where the potential came from. Mac OS is built on a UNIX base.

The thing with Linux is that it's not an operating system, but rather a family of them. For the average user, Linux would be ideal because it's light and simple. It just needs some polish (which Apple did and which is why their Mac OS is so successful). For PC gaming the king is still Windows, but for everything else Linux is actually a rather strong competitor.

OP sounds like arguing for the sake of arguing. Operating systems are tools. If it doesn't fit your need, don't use it. It's as simple as that; there's a point, but OP doesn't see it.

 

[Jodell88]

The thing with Linux is that it's not an operating system, but rather a family of them.

Linux is a kernel and that's it. Other applications are brought together to form an operating system. This is why in theory, we can take out the Linux kernel and put something else in such as HURD, or what Debian did with using a BSD kernel with a Linux userland in their kfreeBSD project.

 

[TheSlamma]

Perhaps... That was one of my early complaints when I first switched, but it's turned out to be not such a big deal. Being able to install things from anywhere is double edged sword. Yea, it can make things easier, but it also makes it easy to install malware. I evaluate how much I really want something if it isn't in the repos. When I was on Ubuntu, this was my thought process...

I want appX
Check repos - usually it was there. Not there?
Look for a substitute. Doesn't exist?
Do I REALLY want it? Yes?
Look for a precompiled binary from a trusted source. Doesn't exist?
Check for ppas. Don't exist?
Compile from source

That may sound complicated, but computers are complicated machines. You have sanity checks the whole way where you can back out of pwning yourself. If you end up compiling from source, it really isn't that hard. If you can read, and follow easy directions, it's a simple process. If you aren't willing to do that, you don't want appX as much as you thought you did.

I'm talking about end users, I'm assuming you just skimmed my post as you seem to be indicating it towards me instead? but hey all good

You say they are complicated devices and I agree 100%, MS and Apple have been working to ease that complication and that is why they are successful. The point I was trying to make was expecting John Doe to compile something from source so he can do his job (not just wants,) but NEEDS is a challenge linux faces at getting onto the systems of typical users. Again, I like it, I have no problem with it, but if Apples genius bar is packed every day and their system is cake to use, then those same users will struggle to compile from source.

 

[Jodell88]

You say they are complicated devices and I agree 100%, MS and Apple have been working to ease that complication and that is why they are successful. The point I was trying to make was expecting John Doe to compile something from source so he can do his job (not just wants,) but NEEDS is a challenge linux faces at getting onto the systems of typical users. Again, I like it, I have no problem with it, but if Apples genius bar is packed every day and their system is cake to use, then those same users will struggle to compile from source.

The compiling from source thing is a difficult issue indeed. The package manager your distro uses is also a major factor. If it was required that I compile software on a .deb or .rpm based distro, I wouldn't want to do it. On some distros, the compilation of software is almost as easy as getting the package right from the package manager.

 

[lxskllr]

I'm talking about end users, I'm assuming you just skimmed my post as you seem to be indicating it towards me instead? but hey all good

I was talking about end users too. My point was GNU/Linux puts up barriers to people autopwning themselves, but those that wish to bypass that can do it with little difficulty. There's a limit to how easy things can be made without sacrificing important features. Apple past that point awhile ago, and MS is catching up. The elimination of freedom isn't a acceptable trade off for "easy" just because people won't learn trivial tasks on a computer.

As far as needing programs goes... If you need AutoCAD, then you're SOL. You need to be running Windows. If you're Suzie Secretary, everything you /need/ should be built in. It may not work exactly the same as other products you've used in the past, but it works; you just have to learn. "I'm not good with computers" isn't an acceptable excuse for anyone that needs to use them at work. If they can't use computers, they need to find a new occupation. That just as ridiculous as a carpenter saying "I'm not good with hammers". That guy should be fired, as should anyone else who won't learn the tools of their job.

 

[TheSlamma]

I was talking about end users too. My point was GNU/Linux puts up barriers to people autopwning themselves, but those that wish to bypass that can do it with little difficulty. There's a limit to how easy things can be made without sacrificing important features. Apple past that point awhile ago, and MS is catching up. The elimination of freedom isn't a acceptable trade off for "easy" just because people won't learn trivial tasks on a computer.

As far as needing programs goes... If you need AutoCAD, then you're SOL. You need to be running Windows. If you're Suzie Secretary, everything you /need/ should be built in. It may not work exactly the same as other products you've used in the past, but it works; you just have to learn. "I'm not good with computers" isn't an acceptable excuse for anyone that needs to use them at work. If they can't use computers, they need to find a new occupation. That just as ridiculous as a carpenter saying "I'm not good with hammers". That guy should be fired, as should anyone else who won't learn the tools of their job.

I agree with this

 

[mv2devnull]

What's the point of Linux over Windows 7.

Is this a case were the Chewbacca defense shines?

What's the point of $FOO[0] over $FOO[1]?
FOO[] = { "fashion", "simple practical clothing (cf. Mao, China)" };
FOO[] = { "motorsports", "public transportation" };
FOO[] = { "Paris Hilton", "gay marriages" };

Hmmm, no -- that made no sense. :|


As the name says, "package management" manages. It makes operations like "uninstall" more consistent. It decreases amount of conflicts. It helps getting required dependencies. Does every Java-application installer tell that you miss Java from your Windows? Do they automatically install it for you? Can you say "no"? What is left behind, when you uninstall a package from the OS that you like? What should be left behind?

Compiling from source can be easy or a pain. That depends on the source, not on the OS. Sure, some distros do install development tools by default, but that is only one step. Windows is not one of those distros, is it?

Point, click, done. Quick, easy, and looks like a great idea at first. Now, lets reveal that you probably did think of installing to Windows, and I did think of shooting oneself to the foot.


Back to management. I did install a program. Lets call it "Emacs". Developers of Emacs had compiled a binary for Windows, so installation was almost usual.

Now, the developers publish a new version. Both binary for Windows and a package to repository of my Linux distro. What do I need to do? On Linux the OS upgrades the app. On Windows I have to notice that there is an update, and redo installation. Some apps do implement an "update checking" though, so they automate part of the process for themselves. Does it make sense that every package should (re)implement same functionality and run their own checker-process in the background?

Oh my, did I just imply that someone should provide a single utility to handle updates? That one should make One Ring to rule all? That having more than one OS, country, political party, company, and type of music is bad and wasteful? Nothing is as twisted an evil as good intentions.


Closing argument:
There is no point "over" Windows 7. There is no point of something being better or worse. There is, however, a point that more than one different "application ecosystem" do exist. There is a point that having alternatives and a freedom to choose is a good thing.

If one was looking a reason why Linux would be superior to Windows; there is no such thing. Remember, that historically humans have chosen inferior alternatives over and over again.

 

[sourceninja]

I'm talking about end users, I'm assuming you just skimmed my post as you seem to be indicating it towards me instead? but hey all good

You say they are complicated devices and I agree 100%, MS and Apple have been working to ease that complication and that is why they are successful. The point I was trying to make was expecting John Doe to compile something from source so he can do his job (not just wants,) but NEEDS is a challenge linux faces at getting onto the systems of typical users. Again, I like it, I have no problem with it, but if Apples genius bar is packed every day and their system is cake to use, then those same users will struggle to compile from source.

The whole "Install a app not in the app store/repository" is a problem that is going away on it's own. I predict that in the next 5-7 years you won't be able to install a app in windows or osx that is not in a app store (without rooting your OS and violating your TOS and warrantee).

 

[teh_pwnerer]

well thanks for the replies but it doesn't seem to be worth the hype to me. There is a bunch of different versions but even Ubuntu doesn't have support for all the games or programs.

 

[Barfo]

well thanks for the replies but it doesn't seem to be worth the hype to me. There is a bunch of different versions but even Ubuntu doesn't have support for all the games or programs.

Well duh? you came to this forum to have people convince you to switch to Linux? and then you dismiss their arguments or reply to them with stupid remarks...ok dude.

 

[cl-scott]

On every computer forum I frequent people rave on about Linux. I don't see the hype.

99% of games are not supported on Linux.

Even for things like browsing the internet, music, or watching movies I see no reason to go Linux.

I don't buy the "it's more secure" comments about it. The only reason it's more secure is 90% of the market share use Windows. No hackers care to waste time on Linux or Apple.

So what is so great about it? Do people just like how it looks? Because it's not like you can't overhaul the look of Windows.

What's the point of Linux over Windows 7.

Most of those same arguments could be made about Mac OS X. Also, the security argument sounds great on paper until you phrase it a different way: security is directly correlated to market share. It's the exact same argument, but it shows the absurdity of the argument rather plainly.

I do not understand people who cannot simply be happy with something because they like it, but instead need the approval of others before they can like something. It's really very simple: Does Linux work well for the tasks that you consider important? If yes, great, use it and be happy. If no, then use something else and be happy. The only person whose opinion matters here is yours. So maybe the real question we should be asking isn't what's the point of Linux, it's who are you trying to convince, yourself or others?

 

[Jodell88]

Most of those same arguments could be made about Mac OS X. Also, the security argument sounds great on paper until you phrase it a different way: security is directly correlated to market share. It's the exact same argument, but it shows the absurdity of the argument rather plainly.

I do not understand people who cannot simply be happy with something because they like it, but instead need the approval of others before they can like something. It's really very simple: Does Linux work well for the tasks that you consider important? If yes, great, use it and be happy. If no, then use something else and be happy. The only person whose opinion matters here is yours. So maybe the real question we should be asking isn't what's the point of Linux, it's who are you trying to convince, yourself or others?

:thumbsup:

 

[teh_pwnerer]

Well duh? you came to this forum to have people convince you to switch to Linux? and then you dismiss their arguments or reply to them with stupid remarks...ok dude.

stupid remarks? how so?

90% of games are not available on Linux. Fact.

There also many popular programs not available on Linux. :thumbsdown:

I have never ran a server so how can I compare it to Windows 2008? Maybe Linux is better or not...

Linux is better because it's open source... Ok that's great, but I don't develop anything or have any interest in playing with the OS.

Linux is better for programmers? You can program just as well on Windows and you don't need a powerful PC to run visual basic or python. I think the hype is for programmers is that you can buy the $45 raspberry-pi to mess around on.

 

[ViRGE]

Behave yourselves, gentlemen...

 

[mv2devnull]

90% of games are not available on Linux. Fact.

open source... Ok that's great, but I don't develop anything or have any interest in playing with the OS.

First, open source is about being free to use as you wish, not about developing anything.


Second, how do you count? All the java/flash-based little games mainly targeted for mobiles and browsers, don't they run on almost every platform (except some consoles)? Are they really less than 10% of all games?

Third, as dominant as Windows is for gaming, there are (console) games that have never been ported to Windows. Furthermore, older generation of games tend not to run on Windows 7 conveniently or at all.

Linux cannot run all games, but neither can Windows, OSX, or consoles. A fact, but is it significant?


Entirely unrelated question: What does "not worth the hype" mean? I thought that "hype" means same as "much ado about nothing". If so, then by definition every hype is worthless to begin with. Where was that hype that made you inquire about Linux? What did it claim?

 

[jsedlak]

Linux is FANTASTIC.

But there is no Visual Studio, and no Photoshop.
And sorry, but nothing else even comes close to those two.

We often talk about killer games for a platform/console. These two are the killer desktop applications for me.

 

[sourceninja]

stupid remarks? how so?

....

Linux is better because it's open source... Ok that's great, but I don't develop anything or have any interest in playing with the OS.

Linux is better for programmers? You can program just as well on Windows and you don't need a powerful PC to run visual basic or python. I think the hype is for programmers is that you can buy the $45 raspberry-pi to mess around on.

Now I'm sure your just trolling.

"I don't program, BUT I know what programmers need!"

 

[sourceninja]

Linux is FANTASTIC.

But there is no Visual Studio, and no Photoshop.
And sorry, but nothing else even comes close to those two.

We often talk about killer games for a platform/console. These two are the killer desktop applications for me.

I'm not a artist, so I can't comment on photoshop, however I find VS to be a near abomination to programming. I can't stand IDE's of that complexity. Development tool decisions should be left up to the developer who is heading the project. Arguing VS vs 'insert tool here' is like arguing the merrits of apache over nginx over lightttpd.

 

[Jodell88]

Meh, I think a Mod should close this thread.

 

[pauldun170]

stupid remarks? how so?

90% of games are not available on Linux. Fact.

There also many popular programs not available on Linux. :thumbsdown:

I have never ran a server so how can I compare it to Windows 2008? Maybe Linux is better or not...

Linux is better because it's open source... Ok that's great, but I don't develop anything or have any interest in playing with the OS.

Linux is better for programmers? You can program just as well on Windows and you don't need a powerful PC to run visual basic or python. I think the hype is for programmers is that you can buy the $45 raspberry-pi to mess around on.

For people like you...you are right. What's the point of Linux?
Hell whats the point of Mac or Windows.
You could probably get by with a smart phone and an xbox.
At most you'll need something to write homework assignments.

Whats the big deal about linux besides it being free?
Not much really. It sucks as a desktop. No cohesiveness, shitty design decisions, crappy applications etc etc. It sole purpose is to give a segment of the IT community a nice elitist feeling in the gonads because "They can rock a command line like its 1980"
Its hipster chic in the tech industry.

"With Linux you can run it on old hardware and customize it"
Shut up...stop being a cheap asshole, donate your 10 year old pentium and buy a new computer already. No one is impressed that you still have the computer that back in the day you installed AOL on and spent nights masturbating to free porn while downloading wav's of you favorite songs directly of website. I commend you on being able to load up linux and a webserver on it but come on now....your not doing anything with it besides impressing yourself.

"Linux is secure"
Linux simply isn't a target because hackers dont want to waste time testing hacks on a pain in the ass system that only a small % of people use.

"Free apps!!! Free apps!!"
If I can find one that doesn't have a shitware level greater than 25%...never mind. There are plenty of great apps that have about 1000 loc or less that are awesome.

"Linux is stable!!"
Sure...that's why my desktop is locked up and not responding to keyboard input. Hello my power switch on my stable Linux distro.

Oh yeah almost forgot.
Its the only platform I want to see on a server build sheet unless that server directly supports Microsoft ecosystem.

Having finished my minor venting I will say this.
Once you have spent months on google searching for "how-to"s and "best apps" and forums and reading books and collecting cheat sheets....
You can end up with a nice desktop that blows away both Windows 8 and IOS.
then you rock that for a couple of months until some new distro comes out and you start from scratch.

 

[Jodell88]

For people like you...you are right. What's the point of Linux?
Hell whats the point of Mac or Windows.
You could probably get by with a smart phone and an xbox.
At most you'll need something to write homework assignments.

Whats the big deal about linux besides it being free?
Not much really. It sucks as a desktop. No cohesiveness, shitty design decisions, crappy applications etc etc. It sole purpose is to give a segment of the IT community a nice elitist feeling in the gonads because "They can rock a command line like its 1980"
Its hipster chic in the tech industry.

"With Linux you can run it on old hardware and customize it"
Shut up...stop being a cheap asshole, donate your 10 year old pentium and buy a new computer already. No one is impressed that you still have the computer that back in the day you installed AOL on and spent nights masturbating to free porn while downloading wav's of you favorite songs directly of website. I commend you on being able to load up linux and a webserver on it but come on now....your not doing anything with it besides impressing yourself.

"Linux is secure"
Linux simply isn't a target because hackers dont want to waste time testing hacks on a pain in the ass system that only a small % of people use.

"Free apps!!! Free apps!!"
If I can find one that doesn't have a shitware level greater than 25%...never mind. There are plenty of great apps that have about 1000 loc or less that are awesome.

"Linux is stable!!"
Sure...that's why my desktop is locked up and not responding to keyboard input. Hello my power switch on my stable Linux distro.

Oh yeah almost forgot.
Its the only platform I want to see on a server build sheet unless that server directly supports Microsoft ecosystem.

Having finished my minor venting I will say this.
Once you have spent months on google searching for "how-to"s and "best apps" and forums and reading books and collecting cheat sheets....
You can end up with a nice desktop that blows away both Windows 8 and IOS.
then you rock that for a couple of months until some new distro comes out and you start from scratch.

You are ignorant, extremely ignorant.

 

[Barfo]

stupid remarks? how so?

90% of games are not available on Linux. Fact.

Yeah so? no one ever uses that argument when speaking about the advantages of Linux vs Windows, so that's a moot point.

stupid remarks? how so?

I don't buy the "it's more secure" comments about it. The only reason it's more secure is 90% of the market share use Windows. No hackers care to waste time on Linux or Apple.

What's the point of asking for arguments if you're going to dismiss them just because you don't "buy" them? There are technical reasons why Linux is more secure than Windows, you can google them if you like. But the security through obscurity argument is also true, and what is wrong with that? would you rather cruise the streets of Baghdad in an inconspicuous vehicle, or a new Cadillac with American flags painted all over?

Linux is open source ok. That maybe is great for developers, useless to me or an average computer user.

More willful ignorance. Everyone benefits from open source software, it's not that hard to see it.

I think you're just trolling.

 

[pauldun170]

You are ignorant, extremely ignorant.

am not