Windows Vs Linux

This is a discussion on Windows Vs Linux within the A Brief History of Cprogramming.com forums, part of the Community Boards category; I see no reason not to try both and decide where you fit in best (especially now that modern Linux ...

  1. #16
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    375
    I see no reason not to try both and decide where you fit in best (especially now that modern Linux distros can run virtually all Windows apps - my fav is Suse 7.3). www.demolinux.org is a great download. It is a preinstalled linux (with many feature cuts mind you) that you just boot off the CD and tada, play with it. It doesn't touch your hard drive, so no worries. Just power down, eject the CD and it is uninstalled (in no particular order ). It really just gives you a feel for Linux and Star Office, and will run slow because it is off the CD and a "hot filesystem" that doesn't use the hard drive even for swap space... and it doesn't come with Wine so you can't run Win apps [edit: I think], but it does let you play with all the other Linux habitats.

    Big download, but stable. Never has cut me off midway yet.
    Allegro precompiled Installer for Dev-C++, MSVC, and Borland: http://galileo.spaceports.com/~springs/

  2. #17
    ....
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Groningen (NL)
    Posts
    2,386
    >Windows is so successful only because 98% of all the program >makers supports Windows!

    From a marketing point of view, you could turn the point of view as stated above to: since Windows is so popular many makers will support it!

    Most people who use a computer, use it for doing things like administration, word processing, databases, spreadsheets, planning and that kind of stuff. And as long as the computer is doing that, they're satisfied. And if the computer is doing something wrong (it crashes), then they will simply call the help-desk.

    Most people who don't like Windows or Microsoft in general are people who are someway involved in computer technology, because of their profession, hobby or study. But such people usually have some more knowledge about the OS's in the world. The average computer user doesn't know about OS's like Linux, Unix, FeeBSD and all those other non-Microsoft OS's.

    Since the number of people involved in computer technology is much less than the number of people who isn't, marketeers go for Windows.

    By the way, when just doing word processing, e-mail, spreadsheets etc., Windows is okay in my experience. Only when doing some more technical things, I prefer some other OS. Mainly Linux or some other RTOS.

    So I do not necessarily hate Windows, but I agree with Jock, it's the marketing practice of Microsoft that I hate. But I guess marketeers of other company's are the same as Microsoft's marketeers, only not as succesful as Microsoft's marketeers.

    I don't like marketeers, they think that they know what I like. They think that their inventions are good for me. They say things like "the consumer doesn't want that" or "the consumer needs this" etc. I really hate that!

  3. #18
    Registered User zahid's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    532
    M$ is like USA vs Rest of the world in the sense of OS market (number of users).

    In present you have no other better way.
    For programmers Linux is the best. I like to code in linux .. there are lots of other reasons already explained over there.

    E-commerce (financial transection) & online application, where security of data is the first priority in an open environment.
    [ Never code before desk work ]
    -------------------------------------:-->
    A man who fears Nothing is the man who Loves Nothing
    If you Love Nothing, what joy is there in your life.
    =------------------------------------------------------= - I may be wrong.

  4. #19
    In The Light
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    598

    converted

    howdy,
    in 1980 something a very nice looking gal took MSDOS 5.? off my machine. i fought and screamed and cryed... dont put that windows stuff on my box just leave me alone.
    well here i am 20 years latter and i was right. it sucked then and it sucks now. in fact i within the last 20 minuts had M$ XP tell me it was impossible to install on this box. (AMD Athlon 750, ASUS K7M MB, 256MB ram, 20GB HDD, 32 MB video etc) so i had to go back to my Red Hat partiton to write this message.
    if you recall - im dating my self here - command line loads of all apps in dos. autoexec.bat & config.sys as long as your arm youll know what i mean.
    Linux is pretty clean now. and the apps are getting better by the day. look at KDevelope and compare it to Borland Builder.
    as far as complexity goes ill say two words NO REGISTRYS(sp) in linux you can get to and mod any system setting from the command line try that in windoze.

    Oh SH__ im ranting again -- SORRY.

    M.R.

  5. #20
    Banned Troll_King's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    1,784
    Oh sure, Cobol and Unux are the way better than Windows programs, that's the reason why every large corporation on earth uses Cobol and Unix, because it is superior, it has nothing to do with costs of upgrading technology.

  6. #21
    ....
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Groningen (NL)
    Posts
    2,386
    >Oh sure, Cobol and Unux are the way better than Windows >programs, that's the reason why every large corporation on >earth uses Cobol and Unix, because it is superior, it has nothing >to do with costs of upgrading technology.

    I think you should make a difference between companies. An accountant company requires other technology than a software developing company does.

    I've heard that in financial applications, Cobol is used a lot. Though here in the Netherlands many financial companies are turning to C++ and Java and some other higher level languages.

    But I've looked around at several companies involved in embedded systems for some years now, and I've never seen Cobol. It's all C, assembly, C++ and also Java is getting more important.

    I agree with using Unix-like OS's. For doing software development, it's much better than Windows.

  7. #22
    Unregistered
    Guest
    people seem to forget that unix powers most of the webpages and servers arround...

  8. #23
    Registered User f0ul's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    37

    M$ v Linux

    I do think the Anti MS debate is less about technology and more about business.

    Microsoft have made their fortune by making a product, telling everyone how great it is, and then, when a new product comes out telling us all how poor the old one was and how the new one really will do the stuff they promised the first version would do - and it still didn't!!

    The other aspect of M$ is that they bundle software to kill the compertition, and buy technology that they can't do themselves - think Netscape, Hotmail, ReadPlease2000, Visio and a hundred other little apps that make up XP.

    But the one thing I so hate M$ for is their Licences - especially CAL's - how dare they charge me for accessing a Windows server using Linux or even a MAC!

    It seems to me that M$ and Bill Gates is the IT industry's equivilent of Henry Ford - and he said somthing along the lines of " Ford is successful because we make stuff that is good enough!"
    I don't want to belong to any club that'll accept me as a member!

  9. #24
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Location
    Vancouver
    Posts
    2,220
    I wonder how many suicides for which Windows is responsible...

  10. #25
    B26354 Deckard's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    633
    I don't hate Microsoft, but I do prefer Linux. One critique I can make of Windows is their decision to deviate from some international standards. This is not always a bad thing, as their implementation of Server Gated Cryptography (SGC) was pretty slick. However, their implementation of TCP makes me wonder if they need a large banner in Redmond that reads: "Remember - FIN ACK FIN ACK".

    One thing I really appreciate in Linux is the enormous potential to learn so many details about everything it touches. Windows encapsulates the gory details, delivering ease of use. Linux allows you complete control over your system, which means you had better know your stuff or have a lot of patience.

    I'm not holding my breath for a Linux dominated desktop market, and I'm not too worried about it. I don't believe Windows or Linux can be all things to all people.
    Jason Deckard

Page 2 of 2 FirstFirst 12
Popular pages Recent additions subscribe to a feed

Similar Threads

  1. windows .dll vs. linux .so - global static objects
    By pheres in forum C++ Programming
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: 11-23-2010, 01:29 PM
  2. Thinking of upgrading to linux...
    By Yarin in forum General Discussions
    Replies: 37
    Last Post: 07-24-2009, 12:40 PM
  3. Build linux on windows
    By baash05 in forum Linux Programming
    Replies: 6
    Last Post: 02-19-2008, 10:12 PM
  4. Why can't Windows run Linux binary executables?
    By Kleid-0 in forum Tech Board
    Replies: 30
    Last Post: 12-04-2005, 11:44 PM
  5. Linux and Windows Duel Boot
    By The15th in forum A Brief History of Cprogramming.com
    Replies: 7
    Last Post: 04-26-2002, 05:59 AM

1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21