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 was just wondering ,knowing very little, why everone has such a downer on microsoft. I heard about linux at ...

  1. #1
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    15

    Question Windows Vs Linux

    I was just wondering ,knowing very little, why everone has such a downer on microsoft. I heard about linux at college and was wondering why everyone seems to hate windows and office so much. I have windows XP and so far have almost no complaints it does what it says on the box. I don't want to get the back up of anyone but i was just interested to find out why all my lecturers hate them. When asked they don't say much possibly because my college is a microsoft approved training centre Cheers Davie
    Davie

  2. #2
    It's full of stars adrianxw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,831
    Anything sucessful will always have an armada of detractors - goes with the teritory.
    Wave upon wave of demented avengers march cheerfully out of obscurity unto the dream.

  3. #3
    the Corvetter
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    1,584
    There are many advantages and disadvantages of M$ Windows. It takes up a lot of hdd space for one and it can be unstable (I really haven't had problems, but I've heard stories). But, Windows is widely used and you as a user and/or programmer are forced into it. Linux, on the other hand has good mem management and takes up a fraction of hdd space. You have to set your priorities, though.

    Garfield
    1978 Silver Anniversary Corvette

  4. #4
    Hamster without a wheel iain's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,385
    Ive nothing against M$ as a company they are so sccessful because of producing accessable easy to use and effective (admit it) software and because of excellent business management. However their prices are a little steep. But Microsoft made the major steps of bringing computers into the home.

    Linux is free, open source and very very powerful, but the lacks simplicity of use that windows does.
    Monday - what a way to spend a seventh of your life

  5. #5
    the Corvetter
    Join Date
    Sep 2001
    Posts
    1,584
    >> Linux is free, open source and very very powerful, but the lacks simplicity of use that windows does. <<

    This shouldn't be a big problem, especially in a community of programmers. I mean, it is a disadvantage, but nothing to stop someone from using it as a main. You'll just have to learn a little more. No harm in that...

    Garfield
    1978 Silver Anniversary Corvette

  6. #6
    5|-|1+|-|34|) ober's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    4,429
    ahhh... the ever present linux vs. windows question... (see avatar)... i'm a large fan of unix/linux.. but i have to agree with iain in saying that Linux or any brand of unix lacks the simplicity of any M$ product.. the learning curve for a Unix system is much greater than that of M$ systems... if M$ and the eventual creation of Windows as we know it today had not been created, the number of users with home computers, and even some business applications would not be present today.

    But getting back to your main question... everyone loves to hate a winner... it's the ever present quest to find the worst in the best.

  7. #7
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Posts
    29
    I think it all boils down to this. M$ are a huge company. Like any other company, you have to stand on a few toes on your way to the top. ANd M$ have (allegedly) done a lot of toe treading. Its not su much that people hate M$, its more their Business Practaces that we hate.

    Lucky there not a UK based company..... the Gov would have split them up years ago. Just look at our post office, our trains, our film inductry, our phone system...... our........ etc etc !
    --Jock (Bristol Bound)
    http://www.termisoc.com
    http://case.termisoc.com

  8. #8
    Registered User
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Posts
    88
    The reason why I hate MS:

    Office:

    the .doc file format is bull****!
    power point presentations cannot be exportet to a standalone format
    access don't allow me to go deeper! I nearly can only use the Assistents!

    Office needs too much CPU power and RAM. HDD space is acceptable.

    Windows:

    can't see the blue screen anymore! OK, win2k and win xp aren't that bad anymore, but win98 or win nt 4.0 are not really stabil.

    The winapi forces you to do so many workarounds...

    Visual Studio:

    OK, that are cool Tools! OK, MFC is to old and the VC++ is not really near to the C/C++ Standard, but all in all it's good!

    General:

    There are so many security holes!!
    it is EXPENSIVE!!!
    Hope you don't mind my bad english, I'm Austrian!

  9. #9
    Just because ygfperson's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jan 2002
    Posts
    2,493
    Windows is used because it's easy and dependable(e.g., when I learn what it freezes on, I can avoid it). Executables made for windows can be distributed with relitively little fear of compatability problems. Linux/Unix/...bsd don't have compatable executables.

    Linux is used because it's truly dependable(doesn't freeze unless it's a hardware problem), and free. If there's something you want done, linux can probably do it. The compatibility problem doesn't matter when the source code itself is distributed(unless you use redhat's version of gcc).

    For the average person, linux would work just well as windows(imho). Some versions of linux, like redhat, are easy to set up. It comes with a browser, word processor, etc... like windows.

    The primary problem is installing other programs. When the average windows user uses windows, installing is as simple as popping the cd in the cdrom, and double clicking the install/setup.exe(if it doesn't autorun). I have never used a linux cd(i download everything i need), so I don't know if linux has that same feature.
    When I want a windows program(like winamp), i can download the executable, double-click it, and follow the prompts. Installing something for linux is much harder. There are competing types of packages, like debian, redhat, and slackware. I can't remember a good experience using redhat's packages. There are also 'tarballs' for linux. These are cross-distribution, and usually cross-platform. Most of the time all I need to do is ./configure, make, and make install. X Windows(the graphic part of linux) doesn't do this for me, so first-time users might get scared.
    Basically, what is needed for linux to suceed in the every-day world is:
    compatability with almost all the devices Microsoft is compatable with(winmodems are a big problem, due to legal problems)
    a friendlier GUI(something which would keep people from needing to go to the console)
    a way to install tarballs by double-clicking them(I'm not sure,but i think slackware is close)
    a public relations campaign(lots of ads, tux at the super-bowl, etc...)
    a compelling reason to switch
    compatability with existing microsoft excel/powerpoint/word files
    and most importantly:
    a grassroots movement to use open-source software. (People aren't used to getting their products for free, or using software made in someone's spare time).

  10. #10
    A Banana Yoshi's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    859

    Big Rumor

    In 1990(hmmm...), when Win 2.0 first cam out. All the buyers are practically forced to buy Windows for a MSDOS because if you don't buy the Windows, you can't buy a DOS. So this is why M$ is so successful... They make buyers buy Windows.

    Now we are practically "forced" to use Windows.. Photoshop only support Windows and MAC, Winzip only supports Windows, all of my games only supports Windows, my Encyclopedia only support Windows (yeah, M$ product, come with PC), Even the manufacturer only supports Windows!!

    Windows is so successful only because 98% of all the program makers supports Windows!
    Yoshi

  11. #11
    aurė entuluva! mithrandir's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,209
    Companies have to make money. Microsoft feels the need to make a lot, at the expense of quality. I doubt linux will ever seriously take over the desktop market (although IBM and AOL seem to want to do just that with Red Hat).

  12. #12
    Unregistered
    Guest
    the reason i hate micro**** is because it babies you and does not allow you to fully customize your pc... that bull **** when you click on the program files for the first time and windows warns you " DONT GO THERE YOUR STUPID AND NOT A COMPUTER SCIENTIST AND YOU COULD MESS UP!"

    like really who cares... and i have never used a more stable os then openbsd... it is also practically unhackable if a skilled administrator is behind it...

  13. #13
    left crog... back when? incognito's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Posts
    1,427
    Microsoft software is too expensive, and I don't like the way that Windows comes out with a new OS or a second edition of an OS when you've just paid some 200 buck or something for one of their latest OS.
    There are some real morons in this world please do not become one of them, do not become a victim of moronitis. PROGRAMMING IS THE FUTURE...THE FUTURE IS NOW!!!!!!!!!

    "...The only real game I thank in the world is baseball..." --Babe Ruth

    "Life is beautiful"-Don Corleone right before he died.

    "The expert on anything was once a beginner" -Baseball poster I own.


    Left cprog on 1-3-2005. Don't know when I am coming back. Thanks to those who helped me over the years.

  14. #14
    _B-L-U-E_ Betazep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,412
    I don't really think it is a versus for me. I like both. I learn windows stuff because it is popular and will be a good source of income for me. I learn linux because it makes me have to think and is good for many applications.

    The companies are versus eachother. I am not a warrior for either.

    In the immortal words of Geddy Lee

    "If you choose not to decide, you still have made a choice!!"
    Blue

  15. #15
    _B-L-U-E_ Betazep's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Posts
    1,412
    >>>but i have to agree with iain in saying that Linux or any brand of unix lacks the simplicity of any M$ product..


    I don't necessarily agree. There is a lerning curve to windows when you first start, and the GUI in linux is getting to be much stronger and user friendly. (much to the dismay of true linux users) I mean, what do you really need to do... the RPM does your installations for you, many games come as binaries now that self extract and install.

    When I learned windows, I had to pick up dos commands that were foreign to me if I wanted to do some things.

    Then again... people buy books like Windows for Dummies. I don't know... I didn't think that linux was hard after I figured out 'startx'. And several unix courses later... well... I feel like I know what I am doing anyway.
    Blue

Page 1 of 2 12 LastLast
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