Why Linux Can't Be And Not Equal To Windows Linux = Windows

[killerbichon 0]

It comes down to: Games or No Games.If you want to play games, you need Windows. There are some games for linux but the majority of games out there are for Windows (unless you want to play a console). If you don't need to play games, Linux is a great alternative. Windows has slight advantages in other areas:1. Easier to use. You need to know what you are doing with Linux2. Microsoft Office (Necessary for work sometimes)3. Microsoft Exchange (I separate this out from office because shared e-mail calendaring groupware is still immature on Linux.)4. Ease of finding support.All of these advantages can be overcome by knowledgable computer users. The Games advantage cannot.

[realthor 0]

It comes down to: Games or No Games.
If you want to play games, you need Windows. There are some games for linux but the majority of games out there are for Windows (unless you want to play a console). If you don't need to play games, Linux is a great alternative.

Windows has slight advantages in other areas:
1. Easier to use. You need to know what you are doing with Linux
2. Microsoft Office (Necessary for work sometimes)
3. Microsoft Exchange (I separate this out from office because shared e-mail calendaring groupware is still immature on Linux.)
4. Ease of finding support.

All of these advantages can be overcome by knowledgable computer users. The Games advantage cannot.

yes, games still lack support in linux but the most important ones can be run through cedega , TransGaming's flagship Linux portability product and i've hured they run better than on windows due to better allocating and accessing memory. Try that and then perhaps you'll change your oppinion. I'm not a great gamer but i use computers for business purposes and web design so linux is great for me.
And i spare those hundred dollars for a win licence for some beers...hehe;)

[elrohir 0]

sorry for coming in late; I had to comment on killer*BLEEP*on's post:

Windows has slight advantages in other areas:1. Easier to use. You need to know what you are doing with Linux

You need to know what you are doing in Windows, as well. You are just used to doing it. The Linux way is different and therefore to your mind harder. Hello? That's what the original quoted article was about!

2. Microsoft Office (Necessary for work sometimes)

Open office? Does the same, saves in .doc format. Has done for years, ever since it BECAME open office - and I assume that even as Star Office it had some of the same stuff.

3. Microsoft Exchange (I separate this out from office because shared e-mail calendaring groupware is still immature on Linux.)

"shared e-mail calendaring groupware"? I will admit that it is not very compatible with the windows solution, but I think it is time to stop centring things on this Windows Way. The Unix mailspool works fine on all unix based systems. If there is a system who doesn't support it, that would be Windows.

4. Ease of finding support.

I'm afraid that the Open Source communty beats the crap out of Windows there. And then stamps on the corpse, cuts it up in little bits and feeds it to Bill Gates. With Windows, you can try the konwledge base... rarely any help there... You could try calling (I would rather die) the support line and test their knowledge. From the stuff I have seen from people around me, the support is support for the kind of things you shouldn't need any help with in the first place. And with Open Source, the first thing you do is go to the distro's forums. And that generally solves it, since the people there are users just like you, who know what they are doing, and do what they are doing because they want to give back to the communities that helped them onto their feet.
If it doesn't you go to the people who developed the software's site, and need look no further. I haven't ever had a problem that couldn't be solved. How often do you hear that about Windows?

I also have to salute realthor for his post. Driver issues? What the hell? No sofware? Have you windows slaves heard of Synaptic? I doubt it... MS would never let you know about something that nice untill they copied it. A pity for you that they can't due to their closed source mania.

Synapcit enables you to download and install thousands of software packages developed by various people from all over the place. With HALF the repositories enabled, I have over 19,000 programs available - everything from chess games to drivers for NTFS to web servers to PHP 5. Really, it makes the software management of windows look a teeny bit pre-historic.

[Magic1492 0]

I prefer Windows mainly because of the fact that I can use Windows for everything out of the box. Linux requires alot of configuration, but because it can be configured to however you want it, it is very flexible unlike Windows. Linux will never be for your grandmother, but if you know what you're doing, it can be pretty powerful.

[elrohir 0]

Many distros, like linspire (see 'g0dd4m fuzkcfcae ret4d'd ristro') have the aim of acting like windows. Or at least, easing the user into linux setting from a Windows environment. I think I will stand by saying that if users had started with linux rather than windows, they would find windows just as confusing as the windows migrants find linux, if not more so. Customisation does take a little tinkering, but it doesn't HAVE to be done. Gnome works pretty nice 'out of the box', and a lot of the people who use KDE think that is nice as well. even as it comes with the system.Linux is not hard. it is different. One you know how to use it, it work flawlessly (most of the time) and well. Not to mention being open source...

[fffanatics 0]

Even though i am a Linux, Mac and Windows user I can point out many reasons why Linux wont ever be like Windows. Most of the time, these reasons have nothing to do with the user base. Instead, the problems come from vendors and corporate developers. Venders do not release many if any drivers for Linux based systems. This forces some developers (skilled and unskilled) to write drivers for these devices that do not always work with all of the versions of linux nor do they always provide full functionality of the hardware. Plus, these take time to be released so brand new hardware might not work. As for developers, since Linux is open source and will always be that way, there is no profit made by writing software for it. All it does it get your name out there and possibly provide you with a little bit of income off of advertisments. Many professional softwares take years to create with large teams of developers and this is hard to collaborate in Linux when the developers are all around the world with their own adjendas and no one picture being the actual picture of where the product is to go.

[Marrow 0]

Hi All,There are several reasons why Linux can not be as popular as Windows is. I think mainly the concept of its birth tells it all. it was made by developers for developers.For example lets look at one of the most important features of windows: the automatic hardware detection. Like someone ahs pointed on it before, you simply plug in a flash disk, and voil?, it works. Nothing to do with it. But how it works for linux: you plug it in, check the sdX slots, and if you found it, you mount it to the filesystem. this is not user friendly. Don't get me wrong, this post is made on a Debian Linux, so I like these features. I like to know what is happening under my hands, and I am mostly also curious about the why.But because most people use only the basic programs in a computer (e.g. Office, internet), they require an idiot proof user interface.Besides, there are some Linux distributions, which intent is to make it as similar in look and usage to Windows as possible. I am not sure this will help, because in my opinion, for this they would need to give up (at least partially) the very concept of Linux.But maybe it is worthy... What do you think?I have read the previous posts, and there were some paragraphs regarding to Vista. Can someone let me know more about it? I little of it. I have seen some skins, some demos, and heard about some features, but that is all. Is anyone more informed than me? I am sure you are. Give me a hand with this

[abhishek 0]

When I first bought my computer it came with pre-stalled windows. At that time I did'nt know anything about using a PC. I learnt using it by just trying out everything, whatever I liked and eventually learnt most of the things in a few months. But still I did'nt know what an OS was. I just thought computer was computer thats it all computers work same way. After that I learnt about different OSs and other stuff, then tried linux with the same computer newbie attitude, tried out everything I thought of and I equally know linux(only one particular distro) as much as windows. It makes no difference. I just want an OS.Linux !=windowsBut Windows = OS and LINUX = OS

[websitebusiness101 0]

For me Linux and Windows are a bit similar, although there are obvious differences (ie open source in Linux's case). Linux seems to be reasonably good coding wise, but the prob IMO would the lack of programs tailored for it (considering it aint a major OS)... Although I do like the Lindows hybrid.

I love windows I'm so used to it I know some people say its similar in a way to linux I just can't see that, I am so satisfied with windows

Notice from serverph:

removed unrelated link. please stay on topic. review Xisto forum rules & TOS.

[hesham 0]

In the same way, well-meaning Linux newcomers make suggestions about making Linux more like what they're used to. And they get nowhere, for all the same reasons. Linux and Windows might both be used for the same purposes, but so are a car & motorbike. That doesn't mean you can swap directly from one to the other, and it doesn't mean features can or should be swapped directly from one to the other.

[badea 0]

No No I think Linux is better in networking and web servers than windows

[robocz033 0]

I agree with almost everything here that shoots down windows. they monopolize everything. although they are cheap and pretty much the most common os, that does not make them the greatest by any means. infact, i believe that almost every os trumps them because windows is too easy that a monkey could learn it, and with ease comes painfully long steps for users who know what they are doing. by elimiating that, and making the user learn, an os maker gains an advantage in all the peoples minds who actually know what they are doing.Take OS X, for instance. they were the first, and by far stil the greatest, but the only reason windows is ahead is because it was built for people who didnt know what the hell they were doing. its a completely new-user related os. and because it attracted people for being so, software companies went with windows for the most money. however, now OS X is coming back and linux is not far behind...And with linux, its an overall great os. perfect for stable users who know what they are doing. although it takes time to learn because most people are adjusted to windows, it becomes easy with use, just as windows did when you first used it (although for me, it came naturally)And because of all of that, windows was able to gather a crowd, monopolize, and dominate everything...yes everything...

[srujanlive 0]

I agree with what you are saying, but if this TPM chip gets activated it will change the way we use our computers. it will only allow what the controllers want us to do with our computers.
Look I have been a computer engineer for over 16 years and I have also taught computer sicence I have seen the controllers change the way computers are used and what we can use them for through these years. this is just another way for them to slowly control any computer they want!

Think about this!
If Microsoft forces all thier venders to install Vista in all of thier computers, like Dell, Hp, and others this will give Microsoft a great advantage of control, maybe they don't care about Linux but with this chip they can even prevent Linux from being installed on any of their computers.

Maybe no more Duel Booting, because Linux won't be able to access vista's encrypted hard drive.

I think Linux is great but if Trusted Computing has full contol over the user we all lose Linux included!

Image if vista was installed on a computer then you wanted to install Linux maybe you would get a new hard drive oh! wait, the TPM chip won't let you install it!

I don't think we need hardware control! whats next! control over what we can watch! wait, they already have that is called HD DVD and other encryptions.

Microsoft will certainly not do anything like that because the PC s are meant to be upgradable usable as per one's desire. Otherwise people would simpoly buy macs because with their parallelize feature they allow dual booting with Vista. Anyways Microsoft would not have many supporters. Also companies like Dell are already offering desktops preloaded with Linux. So there is definitely a market there. And it can only grow bigger. On the other hand Microsoft continues to make enemies. And few would ever agree to shut Linux out.

[elrohir 0]

Microsoft will certainly not do anything like that because the PC s are meant to be upgradable usable as per one's desire. Otherwise people would simpoly buy macs because with their parallelize feature they allow dual booting with Vista. Anyways Microsoft would not have many supporters. Also companies like Dell are already offering desktops preloaded with Linux. So there is definitely a market there. And it can only grow bigger. On the other hand Microsoft continues to make enemies. And few would ever agree to shut Linux out.

Microsoft certainly will. They already have. You can't upgrade components after installing the WGA, for example, because modifying the system counts as installing it on a separate system, even if it is not actually re-installed.

People would not "simply buy macs", because the most part of Windows users have absolutely no idea what an operating system is, let alone how to install one (which they have to do to get the dual boot on the Mac, right?).

Microsoft does not have supporters. They have sheeple. Anyone who is actually knowledgeable enough to have an opinion on Windows must have tried something else, so they at least have something to compare it to, right? And most people I know who have tried something else for more than a few weeks have stayed with it.

Dell is buying licenses for SuSE from Novell, but due to Novell being @$$r4p'd by Microsoft, the deal goes via M$ rather than directly between Dell and Novell. This is one reason Novell is hated by a large and growing number of people. M$ is making money from Dell selling Linux pre-installed.

 

Personally I think that M$ is an incredible company, no matter how evil they are (Yes, I hate them with a passion). They have taken a hostile situation and are making money from it. They got the "deal" with Novell quite some time before Dell started all the fuss about selling Linux pre-installed, and they are now gaining money from their "competing", as far as anything open source can be said to compete, operating system gaining users. And they don't even have to provide support for it.

 

 

More related to the thread, Linux != Windows simply because Linux is not trying to be Windows. The goal of most Linux distributions is to present a realistic alternative to Windows, and most of them are better - just because something better than something else can't be identical to that which it is better than. Again, I link to http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm .

 

-E