Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
Dispersing the Linux Lies
LunchboX:
I have Lnux and Windows XP. They both work fine, though XP has some problems, like the fact that I have to reinstall it almost every day for one reason or another. To tell you the truth, I would get rid of XP from that computer, but I can't. Some of my software doesn't run on Linux (like my version of Mathematica and Autocad, I have the same problem as you Heywood). When it works though, XP it workable, but it's like comparing a BMW (Linux) to a Ford (Windows). They are both cars, but one is better then another (I know, it's on some site that I found on this forum, but I can't remember the name).
gnomez:
Um, just what are you doing to your poor computer to make it where you have to re-install Windows XP every day? I swear for such smart Linux users some people pretend to be it seems strange that they would have so much trouble with an OS that is nearly idiot-proof. (That doesn't mean XP is designed for idiots; I can make a guest account in Linux to idiot-proof the system so my dumb cousin won't stumble across "rm -Rf /" I haven't had any problems with XP yet. It has been very stable and easy to configure so far. Maybe you need to upgrade your brain?
My beef with XP isn't its quality, it's Microsoft's horrid business moves lately.
PS Hurray for ClearType! My eyes have never felt better
[ March 09, 2002: Message edited by: Garden GNOME ]
gnomez:
quote:My system now has over 17,000 files/folders and I reckon that I'm responsible for about 1500 of those. So BillG & his system authored 15,500 (including files for non-M$ apps to let them 'interface' with win). That seems slightly bloated to me.
--- End quote ---
You call that bad? Do you even know how many trillions of files are in the /usr directory alone under Linux? Someone ought to do an exact count of the number of files in windows and the number in an average linux distribution, but I know from experience that Linux has more files. I'm not saying more files = bad but Linux definitely has a lot of files.
kinky:
i have a box i dual boot... Win2K and SuSE 7.3 ... its an Athlon Tbird 800 with 512mb of PC100 ram a Geforce2 GTS, and a 20 gig ATA66 5400 rpm hard drive...
well i use linux almost always, the win2k is only so i can boot up and run my 2 accounts of EQ at the same time :-P
my linux runs noticably faster than Win2K...
i will agree that windows is ready for people that dont know what to do.. it very simple to set up and does almost everything itself, where in linux you have to do alot of tweaking. linux IS ready for the desktop, it just isnt ready for ignorant users of that desktop.
jtpenrod:
It's *always* the same-old, same-old.
So here we go again:
quote: Myth 1.) Linux is good for old computers.
--- End quote ---
No myths here. I ran a Dell OptiPlex GSa (Pentium II, 232MHz, 32MB RAM, 2.0GB HD) a six year old rig. Last November, I did a full install of Mandrake 8.1 on this machine. This, *despite* the recommendation that Mandrake required a minimum of 64MB, *twice* what I had. I can tell you that the old Dell never ran so well, or looked so fine. The machine performed *better* than when it was running Win 95, with which it came as an OEM install. The one and only problem that I had was with Konqueror. That ran slow due to the lack of memory. So I didn't use it. No problem. Sorry: Mandrake was *very* good for that ol' box.
quote: Linux has quickly snowballed into a gargantuan assortment of apps and bloated libraries that have been stitched together by the slaves of Tux.
--- End quote ---
Oh really? I've since acquired a new system that I have set up for multi-boot: Win 95, Mandrake, Red Hat, and QNX. So I did some checking with the df program to see how much disk space everything was taking. Here are the results:
Win 95 - 1.8GB
Mandrake - 2.086GB
Red Hat - 1.233GB
Mandrake takes up the most space as it's my main OS. Mandrake runs the GRUB bootloader, E-mail clients, Browsers, and Star Office. I have none of this on the Red Hat parts, nor do I store the bulk of my files there. I'm using Red as a development platform for GNOME, so naturally there's not as much there. The Mandrake parts are just somewhat larger than Win 95. However, I don't have *any* of the MS Office apps, I've also used IEradicator, so Internut Exploiter is gone, since I don't connect to the 'Net from a wide-open Win 95 - there is no anti-virus apps, no Web browsers of any sort, no E-mail clients. At the absolute *worst* Linux is no more bloated than Win 95.
quote: Myth 3.) Windows is bloated
--- End quote ---
Look at what I've already said. That old Dell would be considered a mainframe by the standards of twenty years ago. And yet, I couldn't've used it to send an E-mail across town with Win XP on it. Why? Because the ol' Dell isn't powerful enough! Win XP hogs vast amounts of real estate on the HD, uses RAM like a hog, contains more bells and whistles and other crap than any ten people could ever use. Windows is horribly bloated since Win 95 was the last good idea they ever had. How do Win 98, Win 98SE, or Win ME *really* differ all that much from Win 95? Every few years Macro$uck comes along, makes a few minor changes, throws in more crap, and tries to convince us that the same old thing is really something grand and glorious. Bloat is the unavoidable, inevitable outcome.
quote: To end, if you want to get some work done, don't use Linux, you'll spend all your time tweaking it and waiting for slow assed programs to load, I know Windows costs money but its not that expensive and besides Linux is only free if your time is worthless
--- End quote ---
Tell me, just where can I get these "slow assed" programs? I sure didn't find any on the Mandrake or Red Hat CDs :eek: OK: perhaps Linux doesn't boot up as fast as Winders. Here, it's kind of hard to compare as I can set Linux to boot up in either graphical mode or text mode, I can set it up to go into Run Level 3 or Run Level 5. Whatever you choose, you'll either speed it up or slow it down. And, of course, fast booting is a definite advantage in an OS that crashes often as you'll be booting it a lot.
quote: I would get one but I don't want to re-buy all my commercial apps I have for windoze
--- End quote ---
I get *tons* of apps, all for free. There's precious little freeware for Winders.
[ March 10, 2002: Message edited by: jtpenrod ]
[ March 10, 2002: Message edited by: jtpenrod ]
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version