Linux Rules!!!
-
Microsoft Sucks. Linux is better. This is true. period. When was the last time a linux company made a "Humman error" (Is what chris maunders calls this incident). Microsoft makes obvious "human" errors. Microsoft needs to turn the company around if it wants respect from me and average consumers. All microsoft is good for is stealing products (JAVA) and modifiying them to create $$$. All microsoft cares about is $$$ not the poor consumers. Linux is better!! If you have arguments you are welcome to e-mail me at najmul@angelfire.com ;)
yes it does ... on the 10% of computers that run it i'll stick with making my living on the 80%+ computers that run windows in one form or another thanks maybe www.religious-wars-for-operating-systems.com is a better place for your views on such subjects? yada yada mostly watching the human race is like watching dogs watch tv ... they see the pictures move but the meaning escapes them
-
Let's make a small discussion out of this one; I have developed for many platforms, including both Windows and Linux. Both platforms have their specific charmes, but I think Windows makes the life of a developer a hell of a lot easier then Linux (or any other unix-wannabe out there). I do agree that, before Windows 2000 came out, Linux was one of the most stable platforms I knew (Although BeOS is in my opinion a little bit more stable). It's a shame the boot-process takes so long, but otoh Windows doesn't boot that fast as well. Actually, why I don't Linux is not because of the platform itself, but the people who have helped creating it, and/or are developing for this platform. They somehow seem to have the insane idea they are creating things no-one has ever done before. And what's this 'opensource'-hype? Ofcourse it's natural you share some of your code with others, and ofcourse you help another developer in need, but why would you want to tell the whole world about that? There are numerous of things I could talk about comparing both platforms (e.g. speed) but I'm actually really curious why you think Linux rules?
>It's a shame the boot-process takes so long, but otoh Windows doesn't boot that fast as well. First of all, I don't want to start a flame-war, so please don't start flaming as I try only to tell you my experiences nothing more, no statement pro/cons GNU/Linux or Win2K here, that's not my point. I think that everyone is free to use what fits his needs best. There is no universal tool for all problems. Free Software means free choice too. So, although Win2K is not free everyone is free to use it, that's nothing I can decide for others. I'd like to show you my Debian GNU/Linux box at home which boots faster than any Linux-distribution out there and also faster than Win2000 on that machine. It's just a matter of configuration. The normal RedHat out-of-the-box tries like Windows to detect a lot a hardware and does a lot a stuff one doesn't need but others might need so it loads them. I am sure that one can tune his Win2K box to boot significantly faster too. That's the only reason why my box boots really, really, fast. Believe it or not.
-
Good lord, who let the Slashbots out?
Somebody forgot to lock the cage after feeding time, methinks :rolleyes:. Seriously, though - isn't this infantile? I can see no merit in postings like this: informed debate is one thing, but this is just childish. Come on guys, grow up. Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd
(andy.metcalfe@lineone.net)
http://www.resorg.co.uk"I used to be a medieval re-enactor, but I'm (nearly) alright now..."
-
>It's a shame the boot-process takes so long, but otoh Windows doesn't boot that fast as well. First of all, I don't want to start a flame-war, so please don't start flaming as I try only to tell you my experiences nothing more, no statement pro/cons GNU/Linux or Win2K here, that's not my point. I think that everyone is free to use what fits his needs best. There is no universal tool for all problems. Free Software means free choice too. So, although Win2K is not free everyone is free to use it, that's nothing I can decide for others. I'd like to show you my Debian GNU/Linux box at home which boots faster than any Linux-distribution out there and also faster than Win2000 on that machine. It's just a matter of configuration. The normal RedHat out-of-the-box tries like Windows to detect a lot a hardware and does a lot a stuff one doesn't need but others might need so it loads them. I am sure that one can tune his Win2K box to boot significantly faster too. That's the only reason why my box boots really, really, fast. Believe it or not.
Believe it or not. I believe you :) Just wondering: do you have any tips about how to improve the bootprocess of a Linux-configuration? (Or even for a Win2k configuration as well?) -- Alex Marbus
-
Microsoft Sucks. Linux is better. This is true. period. When was the last time a linux company made a "Humman error" (Is what chris maunders calls this incident). Microsoft makes obvious "human" errors. Microsoft needs to turn the company around if it wants respect from me and average consumers. All microsoft is good for is stealing products (JAVA) and modifiying them to create $$$. All microsoft cares about is $$$ not the poor consumers. Linux is better!! If you have arguments you are welcome to e-mail me at najmul@angelfire.com ;)
It's so annoying to see and hear crap like this. The truth of the matter is that nothing is better than anything else. Coke isn't better than Pepsi, Ford isn't better than Chevrolet, and C++ isn't better than C. It's all a matter of what you're using the stuff for and who's using it. Linux is very customizeable. Windows isn't. Linux requires me to recompile the kernel every time I want to add support of something major. Windows doesn't. Windows crashes a lot and is stupid. Linux doesn't. Windows has lots more great software. Linux doesn't. You can say shit like this back and forth all day and get nowhere. For _my_ needs, Linux is nothing more than a cute little toy; I wish this weren't true, but it is. However _your_ needs might be completely different so that Linux is the clear winner. So to say something like "x is better than y" as though it were a _fact_ is stupid and immature. Add "at z" to that sentence, and you're finally adding something meaningful. Otherwise, it's all just conjecture.
-
Believe it or not. I believe you :) Just wondering: do you have any tips about how to improve the bootprocess of a Linux-configuration? (Or even for a Win2k configuration as well?) -- Alex Marbus
For Linux: o It might frighten some ppl but you have to compile your own Kernel with only those stuff you need and put as much as you can out to kernel-modules to be loaded at runtime. Enable all optimizations that are not dangerous, I mean there could be some which are marked as expiremental etc. o select only the services, ehm, daemons you need to run at boot-time a lot a distros load HttpD,FtpD,TelnetD etc. by default and most of it can be turned of for a workstation, servers can load them as their boot-time is longer anyway with all those RAID-arrays put in them :) o Don't install Linux completely on just one partition, use at least two like this: first part: /boot 10-20 MB should work for a lot a kernel-images to put there second part: / all you got for Linux. You could optionally create partitions for /var and /usr and /tmp depending on what you do with these directories. o Optionally, try to use some non-RedHat or SuSE distro as they are bloated by default because of them meant for Desktop-users. I use Debian GNU/Linux and it is much more responsive at some points. You could try out SlackWare or some other Distro too but I can't tell you anything about some other distros as I didn't test them out. Speaking of Slackware I just heard it to be speedy and secure by default I'm no expert on Win2K-optimizations but can tell this: o like in Linux turn off as many services as possible to be loaded at boot o try Xteq Setup from http://www.xteq.com for a lot a registry-tweaks that can help you or visit http://www.jsiinc.com/reghack.htm or some similar site for specific issues Hope this helps you :-)
-
I myself have never used Linux. All that I know about it is second hand information. From reading some of the posts here I gether that Linux gives that user the ability to alter the OS to their preference. In my eyes this is a plus. For the everage used I suppose this wouldn't be important, but it isn't necessary to alter the OS in order to use it. But for those of us that would use such functionality it is good to have. My second point is on the open-source. I think someone here said they didn't understand why they would want to do this. I think the main reson for this is so that everyone can contribute and eventually make Linux the best OS. This practice is one of the things that I respect most about Linux because it shows a commitment to the users and not to the money. Of course I respect MS as well. From a business standpoint there is no one that I respect more. I don't believe in businesses working for the consumers. The point of a business is to make money and there is no reason to get upset at them for that. This isn't to say that we have to like, just that we should understand. Next comes the issue of MS doing research to further develope the industry. This reminds me of the saying "it takes money to make money." By developing new technologies, MS isn't trying to further the industry, it is planning for its own future. If they don't develope something like voice recognition someone else will and then MS will be left out. This is the mistake they made with the Internet. They only recovered from that mistake because of the shear brute force they were able to apply. Personally I dislike MS's software. It does crash a lot and to me this means that they didn't put enough effort into it. Secondly, its way too big. The Windows folder on my computer is 719 MB. I've used three computers in my life and the other two didn't have hard drives that big. I think that MS has used the increase of technology to become lazy. Now that most computers are at least 10GB, an OS of 1GB isn't a big problem. I could probably say a lot more, but this is where I'll stop for now.
Next comes the issue of MS doing research to further develope the industry. This reminds me of the saying "it takes money to make money." By developing new technologies, MS isn't trying to further the industry, it is planning for its own future. If they don't develope something like voice recognition someone else will and then MS will be left out. This is the mistake they made with the Internet. They only recovered from that mistake because of the shear brute force they were able to apply. I dissagree. Microsft may research things for them to use (who doesn't), but the end result IS to try to further the industry. Making money may come in at some point, but they are one of the only companies in the world capable of funding such research as they are. I don't know if you've ever been to their Palo Alto research labs, but it is very impressive. They are funding research into hardware advances with other 'filthy rich' companies which will certainly improve the industry for the CONSUMERS. People often forget this side of Microsft when they say 'I hate Micro$ft', but the point is that if it wasn't for Microsft we would without doubt all be using 286's with a command line interface in very limited business usuage. Home PC's would be unheard off accept for the homes of traditonal 'nerds'. Microsoft have brought computers to the people.
-
It's so annoying to see and hear crap like this. The truth of the matter is that nothing is better than anything else. Coke isn't better than Pepsi, Ford isn't better than Chevrolet, and C++ isn't better than C. It's all a matter of what you're using the stuff for and who's using it. Linux is very customizeable. Windows isn't. Linux requires me to recompile the kernel every time I want to add support of something major. Windows doesn't. Windows crashes a lot and is stupid. Linux doesn't. Windows has lots more great software. Linux doesn't. You can say shit like this back and forth all day and get nowhere. For _my_ needs, Linux is nothing more than a cute little toy; I wish this weren't true, but it is. However _your_ needs might be completely different so that Linux is the clear winner. So to say something like "x is better than y" as though it were a _fact_ is stupid and immature. Add "at z" to that sentence, and you're finally adding something meaningful. Otherwise, it's all just conjecture.
I'm glad somebody finally had the sense to write that. Very well put indeed. David Wulff dwulff@battleaxesoftware.com
-
Linux rules what? Are you refering to the world of weird techies (i.e. geeks, nerds, or whatever you want to call them) who like to be able to edit there OS, so created over 150 deritaves which are non-compatible. Just imagine if HTML was the same, wouldn't you just love having to develop for 150 different browsers? Linux may be all very good for small-medium web servers, but for the home user it will never be. Remember that most home users are computer-dumb, and need an easy to use and inituative OS to sue their computers. Inituative (spelt wrong) - you have heard that word before haven't you? It means not taking the Unix source code and trying to copy Windows with it.
Inituative (spelt wrong) - you have heard that word before haven't you? It means not taking the Unix source code and trying to copy Windows with it. I like that come-back to the 'M$ steal other companies work'. Very orignal, yet true :). P.S. The word you were looking for is Inovative, not Inituative.
-
Somebody forgot to lock the cage after feeding time, methinks :rolleyes:. Seriously, though - isn't this infantile? I can see no merit in postings like this: informed debate is one thing, but this is just childish. Come on guys, grow up. Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd
(andy.metcalfe@lineone.net)
http://www.resorg.co.uk"I used to be a medieval re-enactor, but I'm (nearly) alright now..."
Yes it is. This person reminds me of my children when they fight over who's toy is better. It is really a shame that people (children?) do this stuff. I think Linux is a great system. It's not (yet ready for) for the average user, of course, but it is definatly a viable alternative to other UNIX systems.
-
Microsoft Sucks. Linux is better. This is true. period. When was the last time a linux company made a "Humman error" (Is what chris maunders calls this incident). Microsoft makes obvious "human" errors. Microsoft needs to turn the company around if it wants respect from me and average consumers. All microsoft is good for is stealing products (JAVA) and modifiying them to create $$$. All microsoft cares about is $$$ not the poor consumers. Linux is better!! If you have arguments you are welcome to e-mail me at najmul@angelfire.com ;)
Phew, Glad I said that.. -- Alex Marbus (Doesn't have anything else to do @ this time of day - (19:52 local time))
-
Somebody forgot to lock the cage after feeding time, methinks :rolleyes:. Seriously, though - isn't this infantile? I can see no merit in postings like this: informed debate is one thing, but this is just childish. Come on guys, grow up. Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd
(andy.metcalfe@lineone.net)
http://www.resorg.co.uk"I used to be a medieval re-enactor, but I'm (nearly) alright now..."
I think that kind of post is important to Win developers. I know that I, for one, would have tried developing for Linux years ago had it not been for idiot childish posts like that putting me off. Until the Linux community creates a mature environment that embraces and nurtures developers Linux will never really take off. Dave.
-
I think that kind of post is important to Win developers. I know that I, for one, would have tried developing for Linux years ago had it not been for idiot childish posts like that putting me off. Until the Linux community creates a mature environment that embraces and nurtures developers Linux will never really take off. Dave.
I must admit that I hadn't thought of it that way... Thinking about it now, I've never even considered writing for Linux. I wonder why....;P Andy Metcalfe - Sonardyne International Ltd
(andy.metcalfe@lineone.net)
http://www.resorg.co.uk"I used to be a medieval re-enactor, but I'm (nearly) alright now..."
-
Your arguments are a bit silly really. Your argument that MS takes advantage of newer computer resources is the silliest of all. What if MS (and every other company) decided that they should stick with the 8088 and 1.2MB floppy disk as the lowest common denominator. We wouldn't have 1/1000th of the cool stuff we have today. I agree with you that business are in business to make money. But part of that is taking advantage of what comes along. Yes, programmers have gotten lazy, but then that allows them to create so much more, now that they don't have to worry about register allocation and pushing and popping values off the stack. Humans are the worst. Our brains are 1000's of times larger than birds, yet we pretty much do most of the same things. Eat, excrete, reproduce, and build things.
I'm not saying MS shouldn't make use of the newest resources. I'm just saying that this shouldn't be misconstrued as MS making sacrifices for the consumer. It was said that MS has put a lot of effort into developing new technology for the consumer as is they were doing it out of the goodness of their hearts. The reason for them researching and developing is so that they can make more money. I don't say this is wrong, just that they are doing it for themselves and what it will get them; not for us. The benefit to us is just a bonus. As far as lazyness is concerned I just think that MS should have put more effort into an OS that millions of people are going to be using. It's too buggy and too big.