|
As I was curious to know why people brag about Linux' "performance & Stability".
A Windows7/8 OS is really no match for a well built Ubuntu PC? My friends say In Linux , Applications never crash. I guess a well written App would never crash on any OS. Or Windows is really bad on this?
How many of you spend time with Linux desktop as much as you do with Windows. Someone who is equally using both the OS are more qualified to comment , brag, flame.
I surfed the web to find the answer.
So this never really happens in Linux?[^]
Linux don't need drivers? [^] - This is misleading , how come every unknown- future hardware can be packed into the kernel core?
Btw, Windows also support most of the existing hardware by default, I think this can't be counted as a plus for Linux. Both are same here.
Starting to think people post kid pics in their profiles because that was the last time they were cute - Jeremy.
|
|
|
|
|
This argument has been going ever since ... same as Mac is better than ...
Neither product is "better", which is a very subjective argument. I worked on Linux in my last job and it did what we required. I also worked on Solaris: the same, Windows: the same, etc. None was better than the other, each had a job to do and did it.
Veni, vidi, abiit domum
|
|
|
|
|
(Sorry Richard - pressed the wrong "reply" button) 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
Quote: Btw, Windows also support most of the existing hardware by default, I think this can't be counted as a plus for Linux. Both are same here.
Still I am able to use my old HP scanner on latest Ubuntu but not on Windows 7 or 8.
However, roughly speaking, the two OSs are too different to make a reasonable 'reliability' comparison.
Veni, vidi, vici.
|
|
|
|
|
Just to add my twopence worth:
Windows is better. For some things.
Linux is better. For some other things.
MacOS is better. Again for some things.
iOS is better than Android for...well give me time...some things. Probably.
Those things don't really overlap (as MS has had shouted at it since it released WIN8), so the OS's can't really be compared in any meaningful way, unless the environment and usage is also considered.
Have you any household kit with runs on Linux? I do. Would I try to use household kit running Windows? No - it would be too expensive in terms of hardware (and software licence) to be in the ball park.
Would I replace my desktop OS with Linux? No. Because my apps wouldn't crash, simply because most of 'em wouldn't work without me faffing a lot behind the scenes to get 'em up and running.
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: iOS is better than Android for...
... Connecting to itunes.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
I knew there was something! 
The only instant messaging I do involves my middle finger.
|
|
|
|
|
OriginalGriff wrote: iOS is better than Android for...
...not collecting malware.
...not fragmenting a market.
...having a consistent interface.
...developing apps (if you like to get paid).
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
Mike Mullikin wrote: ...having a consistent interface.
Hahaha, you trickster!
This joke made my day! 
|
|
|
|
|
I said iOS was better (ie. more consistent), not perfect (ie. totally consistent) and I stand by my opinion.
Use any iOS device with a specific OS version and it is consistent from device to device. Android functionality will differ drastically on the same OS version depending on whether the device came from Motorola, Samsung, Google, Asus, Amazon, etc...
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
What happened to the desktop?
I must be getting old, didn't get the memo the desktop is dead and the phone is the new desktop!! ^^
Then I will say Windows Phone is more consistent! 
|
|
|
|
|
What about the desktop? My comments were directed towards the iOS vs. Android comparison. Nothing more...
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
|
And anyway, who cares about consistency?
mmm.. ho yeah maybe IT support in big company... but the consumer? not really!
|
|
|
|
|
Super Lloyd wrote: but the consumer? not really!
Unless they happen to own more than one Android device... 
Government is not reason; it is not eloquent; it is force. Like fire, it is a dangerous servant and a fearful master. ~ George Washington
|
|
|
|
|
I think you'll find when people talk about Linux 'performance & stability' they are usually talking in context of a server OS rather than a desktop OS. In that arena there are some use-cases where Linux spanks Windows handily; and I've seen some Linux farms where you smack your forehead and say "why?" 
Linux desktop apps crash all the time. Throw in the odd quirks of individual Linux desktop environments and things can get even more spicy. That said it's 'horses for courses' and a lot of people like working in Linux.
I would argue that neither OS is "better", just different and better suited to different tasks.
That site you linked is a bit of a worry for many reasons.
Even some of the HTML looks a bit suspect. Apparently written at a time when embedding image data in HTML streams was in... 
I'd treat it as 'out dated' at best.
|
|
|
|
|
Why Linux is Better ... All the drivers are already included in the Linux kernel, the core of the system, and that comes with every single Linux installation
LOL!  Morons.
|
|
|
|
|
I had wanted to try Linux but could not find the driver for my video card. So never used it after the install as I would prefer to have more than half a screen of text.
|
|
|
|
|
I remember the very first time I tried to use a Linux installation. Must have been somewhere around 2000.
Spent around 40 minutes trying to get a mouse driver to work before I gave up and wiped the disk.
Back in those days Linux could happily fry your CRT if you weren't careful.
What fun
|
|
|
|
|
I agree mostly with OG.
However what I also would like to point out.
It really depends on what you are using your computer for. If your just browsing the web you're fine with Linux.
But how many professional/business applications do you now that are supported on Linux? Replace MS Office with Open/LibreOffice? -> Yeah, the documents look EXACTLY like the orignal... Are you playing games on the computer? -> have fun with the indie games...
Switching to Windows when you need application x? I don't think that it's very productive if you have to boot windows 5 times a day because you need that certain program for doing y. I want one OS for all. And if it starts to slow down investing 1 day per 2 years reinstalling Windows is not that big of a deal in my opinion.
I admit I haven't used a Linux OS for 2-3 years now, so I don't know if this is still true, but last time I used it I can't really say that the Graphical UI felt very responsive, in truth I felt it was rather sluggish from the start (like a windows after 5 years ). In addition there is a lot of hardware where you won't ever find a Linux driver for. Support is always Windows and probably MacOS.
Linux is probably best for the old and the weak computers where you can't do a lot anyways 
|
|
|
|
|
Nicholas Marty wrote: Linux is probably best for the old and the weak computers where you can't do a lot anyways
Where "old" = >18 months, and "weak" - less than 4GB physical memory.
Maybe I'm strange, but I always want operating systems that allow me to use hardware and resources, not that consume most of it.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
It may be just me but I want operating systems that make use of the hardware and may consume some little part of it instead of not making use of the resources at all.
|
|
|
|
|
I can only partly agree with that.
I don't, for example want the OS to make use of interface devices (mouse/keyboard/monitor/etc), I want it just to enable me to use them, but it will obviously need disc and memory space -- but it should consume as little as possible; just enough to enable me to use the machine.
"Wow-factor" OSes need not apply.
I wanna be a eunuchs developer! Pass me a bread knife!
|
|
|
|
|
Nicholas Marty wrote: But how many professional/business applications do you now that are supported on Linux?
Tons of them. How many do you know that aren't?
Nicholas Marty wrote: Replace MS Office with Open/LibreOffice? -> Yeah, the documents look EXACTLY like the orignal...
Nevermind crossover, or wine. The new MS office supports the open document format. I acutally open Libre docs in windows office and it does just fine. Also, you can get online document suits now that will handle this stuff. Some clients of ours use google docs for our ms office stuff all the time.
Nicholas Marty wrote: Are you playing games on the computer? -> have fun with the indie games...
Not exactly true. I used to be very good at setting up games in wine. Especially now with mono. There are other options as well, if you know the tools available to you.
Nicholas Marty wrote: Switching to Windows when you need application x? I don't think that it's very productive if you have to boot windows 5 times a day because you need that certain program for doing y. I want one OS for all.
You should look into some of the available virtualization tools. This is not OS specific either. You should at least know the tools available if you want to do these types of things. Even in mac i have seen visual studio icon get double clicked and run in a vm as if it were a native application.
Nicholas Marty wrote: In addition there is a lot of hardware where you won't ever find a Linux driver for.
I've not seen this as the case. I used to run linux on bleeding edge hardware all the time. I have had to compile some drivers, and use some beta's, but I've not ever seen hardware I couldn't get working. Also, the linux kernel has grown in both it's own source, and community support, in the last few years. Might have something to do with MS contributing as well.
Elephant elephant elephant, sunshine sunshine sunshine
|
|
|
|
|
There are a couple of reasons for that:
1. once upon a time Windows was pretty crap, Linux was crap too, but IT HAD potential, look, I can modify the kernel!
Since then Microsoft had a security and performance initiative and performance and security of the latest Microsoft OS is outstanding...
2. Never under estimate the emotional power of recompiling your kernel.
Once people do that, they know they are THAT close to have a winner in the OS war. Make way for their OS!!!
3. An open source OS is quite a good source of innovation, Kindle, MacOSX! (from FreeBSD), Android handsets, Steam box, where all things enabled by open source OS!!
It allow tinkerer to power devices beyond what they could have done with Windows....
4. Finally you have to recognize you have to thanks all those silly competitor's claim for making Windows the outstanding product that it is today! 
By that I mean MS is doing a good job at competing, not so much at innovating on its own. A good example is Windows Mobile vs Windows Phone, C# vs Java!
modified 25-Sep-13 7:39am.
|
|
|
|
General 
News 
Suggestion 
Question 
Bug 
Answer 
Joke 
Praise 
Rant 
Admin 
Submit an article or tip
