Operating Systems > Linux and UNIX
Why do you prefer *nix?
<Zombie9920>:
Windows and BeOS are true multi-tasking OSes also.
Sure, Win9x has memory leaks..but Win2K and XP don't. Windows NT actually has some *nix technology embedded into the Kernel. Windows NT is practically a user friendly variant of *nix with a decent GUI and mainstream hardware/software support. 90% of the people who bash Microsoft Windows has a low end computer that can't run Windows worth a damn, that is why they choose *nix. Hell, I have tried Mandrake and RedHat Linux and I think thier GUI is awful(hence why it is fast). If you pay attention to it you will notice that the GUI in those 2 OSes were inspired by Windows(they even have a little bar at the bottom of the screen that works like the Windows Taskbar/start menu). I'm not saying *nix isn't bad because it really isn't..but Windows isn't near as bad as the *nix geeks make it out to be. If Windows was so bad then why does it hold over 75% of the market? Windows had to be something to reach such a high stature in the market. People don't buy shit if it isn't worth a damn. Remember, Windows can do everything *nix can do and more.
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
If Windows was so bad then why does it hold over 75% of the market? Windows had to be something to reach such a high stature in the market. People don't buy shit if it isn't worth a damn. Remember, Windows can do everything *nix can do and more.
--- End quote ---
Zombie, I have to say that you are full of shit on almost every count. Why does windows hold 75% of the "desktop" market? 1) marketing, 2) questionable practices with hardware vendors. Windows can only do a small percentage of what *NIX can do (without installing many many tools and apps not included with Windows). And even with the POSIX utilities it doesn't remotely resemble UNIX. Still has brain dead piping, redirection, process/job management. Hell, they don't even include a compiler, gotta pay extra for that!
And the GUIs (Window Managers) that you refer to are only a couple of many Window Managers included. People coming from the dark side might be a little more comfortable with the ones you mention but you have a choice.
[ December 16, 2001: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
<Zombie9920>:
Windows holds about 90% of the desktop market. When you combine Desktops and servers then it holds about 75% of the whole market. In the regular server area more people use Linix over NT because of NTs outrageous licensing fee. In the high end server market(people with Itanium, SPARC, SUN, etc. machines) Unix is usually the OS of choice(Windows XP 64Bit is becoming a little popular, but it has a long way to go before it can overthrow Unix in the High End server market). The server/high end server combination is what throws Microsoft's total marketshare down by about 15%.
voidmain:
quote:Originally posted by <Zombie9920>:
Windows holds about 90% of the desktop market. When you combine Desktops and servers then it holds about 75% of the whole market. In the regular server area more people use Linix over NT because of NTs outrageous licensing fee. In the high end server market(people with Itanium, SPARC, SUN, etc. machines) Unix is usually the OS of choice(Windows XP 64Bit is becoming a little popular, but it has a long way to go before it can overthrow Unix in the High End server market). The server/high end server combination is what throws Microsoft's total marketshare down by about 15%.
--- End quote ---
What the hell do you mean UNIX is the OS of choice for high end architectures? It's the ONLY choice! Microsoft pretty much only runs on x86 these days.
There *is* one OS that will run on nearly every architecture out there and that is Linux. It runs on PPC, x86, Alpha, Sparc, Motorola, etc. We even installed it on our IBM 390 mainframe. If you want a 32 processor UltraSparc, you run Solaris, Windows can't run on it. If you want to run a V-Class HP system you run HP-UX, Windows can't run on it. If you want an IBM RS/6000 you run AIX, Windows can't run on it. If you want SGI you run IRIX, Windows won't run on it. Furthermore, why the hell would anyone want to run Windows on one of those systems???
Linux runs on many of the architectures ranging from AXIS web cameras and palm devices all the way to mainframe platforms.
And you want to build the worlds fastest supercomputer? Use Linux, even Big Blue has resigned to that fact: http://news.zdnet.co.uk/story/0,,t269-s2083758,00.html
And I defy you to find Windows making a machine on this list hum: http://www.top500.org/list/2001/11/
And you just can't have this kind of fun with Windows: http://tux.anu.edu.au/Projects/Beowulf/
[ December 17, 2001: Message edited by: VoidMain ]
gump420:
Hey, zombie. Yeah, I'm talking to you, dumbass. Windows has it's large marketshare because of something called a "monopoly". Or did you fail to realize that since you're obviously living in a box?
Yes, they have the highest market share. No way in hell do they have the best product. And they don't innovate, either; they buy their ideas from somebody else. They have never introduced a new idea to the market that wasn't bought, licensed, or simply stolen from somebody else.
Windows? True multi-tasking? Bull-fucking-shit. Oh, yeah, you can load more than one program at once, but WinNT will not handle, say, a thousand simultaneous web hits with the same grace that *NIX does (assuming, of course, WinNT doesn't crash under the pressure).
Oh, and that part about Windows NT being secure? WHAT PLANET DID YOU COME FROM YOU FUCKHEAD??? Windows does not compare in any way to the security of *NIX.
Oh, and multiuser? This goes back to the security thing. Microsoft sucks at security because they simply DO NOT understand the concept at any level.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version