:p Linux Is Better Than Windows :P

[cinemove 0]

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

Linux, and I moved this to the proper section of the forums.xboxrulz

[Alegis 0]

Good to hear that you're enjoying your OS. Bear in mind other's have their reasons to enjoy theirs, so in case you want a fair poll you'd better try not to show your choice too much as well as denigrating those that choose other than you.My only problem with avid linux fans is their cries of superiority and frowning down on the heretics using some corporate software. Free and open-source stuff is good, enjoy it - but try not to parade.

[richierich1m 0]

linux is free but not very userfriendly while windows is very very userfriendly but with a very high price tag and thats the only big difference, linux hosted servers form 90 % of current internet due to its stability and security features and thats where windows cannot ever reach because most of hackers target windows to hack because of its wide usage ,linux has also very less software compatibility while windoes has a wide range of sofwares for different purpose compatible to windows

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

However, you must first define what user-friendly is. Proponents of command line interface users find Linux very user-friendly.xboxrulz

[qwijibow 0]

linux is free but not very userfriendly ... windows is very very userfriendly

Great for users.... but what if you are a developer ?
Windows is horribly developer un-friendly.

I have wasted countless hours because of windows broken / badly designed API's.

A few Examples...

BROKEN:
1) WinMain(HINSTANCE hInstance, HINSTANCE hPrevInstance) (https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms633559.aspx)
Stupid me... i assumed that hPrevInstance was a handle to the previous instance of the application...
Nope.. regardless of how many instances are running, this variable is ALWAYS null... it even states that its broken in MSDN.


IN-CONSISTENT STANDARDS...
2) LoadLibrary() https://msdn.microsoft.com/en-us/library/ms684175.aspx
Most win32 api's take standard path notation ( "/Documents/Folder/File.txt" )
They also accept non standard, crazy double backslash notation... ( "\\Documents\\Filder\\file.txt")

Portablilty being important, i was using good old standard forward slashes,
But for no real reason, the LoadLibrary function is special, in that it cannot handle slashes, and MUST take double back slashes..

This took ages to resolve.

3) DLL's !!!!

lets say shared.cpp is a c++ source file...
in most operating systems, to compile it as a dll, you just add "-shared -PIC" to the compiler options. and -soname myDllname to
the linker options.

you dont need to change the .cpp file at all.

in windows, chaning shared.cpp into a dll from a normal .exe means painstaking going through all the code, adding __cdcecell(dllimport)
and dllexport to all the relevant parts. and if that program installs any global headers, you have to do lots of pre-processor juggleing
to make sure dllexport flip over to dllimports depending on if they are being #included from the dll project, or a project that intends to load
the dll.

4) Let me access the underlying hardware !!!!

I wrote a small 2d game engine for an embedded machine that can run windows or linux.
it has a good cpu, but no graphics acceleration, and memory is precious...

for graphics, in linux, i map the framebuffer memory into the application address space, and write pixels to it directly.
the rendering code is only a kew kilobytes.

for graphics in windows.... ohhh no, no framebuffer access for you... i have to use DirectDraw ( now intergrated into Direct3D )
And how many megs of dist space does Direct3d take ??? i dont have the fugures with me... but its a lot of wastefull redundant
code just to blit a few sprites to the screen.

[mtnbluet 0]

"linux is free but not very userfriendly while windows is very very userfriendly"

I disagree, and it is not so much that I like Linux, which I do, but please take a look at Xandros Linux. You can download it from here:
http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

It looks and acts so much like windows except for different but similar names. Instead of a Start button you have a Launch button and instead of a Recycle Bin you have a Trash icon and so on and so forth.

[vhortex 1]

linux is free but not very userfriendly while windows is very very userfriendly but with a very high price tag and thats the only big difference,

Linux is way very userfriendly, windows sucks for hanging without any valid reasons.
Install KDE on linux or use Ubuntu, things will be much easier, dont judge linux as the pure command shell.

The only problem you will have with linux is adding new drives or partition /drive letters since they require some extra work. On windows they all instantly appear then disappear without giving you any clue why.

***********
Windows have successfully reinstalled the blue screen of death on Vista after successfully removing it from win2003. Win2003 have black or gray screen of death.

linux hosted servers form 90 % of current internet due to its stability and security features and thats where windows cannot ever reach because most of hackers target windows to hack because of its wide usage ,

There are far more tools and exploits targeted to linux that are written daily but cannot exist for glory to stay more than 3 months that it cannot win a fair share of popularity, linux can patch the holes way faster than you can recite mississippi 10 times backwards .

Windows, the holes always work and will work by changing something in the exploit code after windows fix the problem. M$ wants you to buy the next version in order to fix all and get a new set of bugs.

linux has also very less software compatibility while windoes has a wide range of sofwares for different purpose compatible to windows

80% or more in the future of windows program can now work on linux using emulators and translators. I am using outlook express on my fedora.

P.S.
Post #1 is bias..
Edited April 27, 2007 by vhortex (see edit history)

[ethergeek 0]

Great for users.... but what if you are a developer ?Windows is horribly developer un-friendly.

AMEN to that! You didn't even address the exorbitant costs of the development environments for windows though...and I don't want to hear about "express versions" form anyone...you *can not* develop software that you intend to market with those crippleware versions; they're intended for learning only. If you want to sell windows software, prepare to pirate or pony up some kickbacks, er, i mean... license fees to micro$oft.

The only problem you will have with linux is adding new drives or partition /drive letters since they require some extra work. On windows they all instantly appear then disappear without giving you any clue why.

Actually this works fine on my Gentoo box. The drives pop up almost Mac-like on my desktop thanks to the automounter and hald. I do however refuse to drag partitions to the trash though to unmount them...whoever thought THAT up needs to be shot in the kneecaps.

[ethergeek 0]

I am using outlook express on my fedora.

Why not just use Thunderbird? It's way better than OE...

edit: I thought the board would automatically merge this post with my last one...sorry.
Edited April 27, 2007 by ethergeek (see edit history)

[wutske 0]

Hmmm, no . I'll explain why.1) Even tough it's better than a few years ago, the hardware support is still terrible. I've run Linux on several machines, and even tough the pc's where fast enough, linux felt slow. Graphic drivers are even worse. nVidia is on the right way, but AMD has a long way ahead.2) Software, it's still hard to find linux alternatives for every program I use. Yes, I could use wine, but wine doesn't not always work, wine can't perform miracles, wake up ! The next problem is that I need some windows-only programs for school (mostly simulation) and I don't want to switch between linux and windows everytime I need to work for school.3) Too hard, the learning curve of linux is too steep. I must say I like the command line, but it's just to hard for everyday usage. This is the major problem with linux, most programs still require you to use the command line and that has to change before linux can become popular. If one would make GUIs for every command line tool I'd be more eager to switch.4) Dual boot, it's nice, it's handy, but it's a b*tch too. Dual boot means 2 environments where you can change your data. That means I'll have be able to synchronise my data. Since linux can't safely write NTFS (especialy Vista-NTFS) and Windows can't safely write EXT3, that means I'll have to make a FAT32 partition, this means a terrible loss of space. On a single partition, empty space can be used by anything, on a seperated partition, the unused space can only be used for data ...5) Too much time. Getting linux up and running the way you want it takes a lot of time, especialy because of 3).This is of course a view from someone who used Windows for a very long time and linux for a much smaller amount of time, I guess the more linux view would be completely the opposite of what I've just said . Still, most linux users are too arrogant, they seem to live in their own world and don't want to admit their linux world isn't perfect and they do that by shitting on microsoft. I prefer to stay in the middle, linux has it's advantages (powerfull, advanced, cheap to get and safe) but so does windows (easy, safe (if configured well) and wide spread (=great software + best driver support)).So this is my view on linux vs. windows. Maybe on day I'll switch, but definately not today.

[Chesso 0]

1. Windows has the largest user base.2. Windows has the most, and most useful (OVERALL) software.3. It is not that hard to develop in, considering I use Win32 Assembly, C/C++, Object Pascal, Visual Basic + the standard web development affair, and concerning desktop level programming, cannot live a day without using the Win32 API, I think I know a thing or two.The Win32 API has bugs (guess what so does linux's backbone *shock horror*).Define ease of use? Go look at the sales/use of corporate MS software, and the use of practically no-cost linux and you tell me LOL.People still pirate windows (but why, they could have linux? or others).I personally hate the command line interface, when I can click buttons, when I want to pick something up I use my pointer (hand), not write or call out jibberish to have it come to me .And yes I suppose I vote for Windows, there's nothing I feel can beat it *overall*. I guess some people don't always want to re-invent the wheel or use a different wheel, when the old wheel is still working.

[Sten 0]

Although I like Linux alot (though mostly only fedora) i still use windows as my mane operating system.Linux just doesn't provide what I need and most things on Linux are a hassle. But most of those things on windows are made easy.So for now i think ill stick with my windows operating system. Linux is ok but yeah.Ill vote for windows.

[trinifawk 0]

I have Ubuntu linux on my laptop and desktop PCs, and I dual boot with Windows XP Pro. Even though I love the fact that Ubuntu is free and will always remain free, I can't stop using windows. I don't know what about the windows OS that keeps me in it, but it seems like everything works on it. I think that if I had more patience and technical knowledge, I would be able to run linux for more than a few hours at a time.There are so many drivers available for Windows that aren't for linux, but I love the fact that I can't ever get a virus or never have to reinstall or spend hours upon hours trying to remove a virus or even reformatting... but yeah... windows is for me, for now.