Thread: Windows-Linux Comparison

Originally Posted by happyclown

I've found lack of drivers to be a sore point with linux.

I love Windows. I can actually get work done instead of having to read man pages or having to hack endless configuration files.

*turns towards Redmond and bows*

You know I think that is quite funny as I have that exact problem with Windows. I can take a laptop that *came* with Windows on it, a new (not upgrade) legal paid-for copy of Windows and install it in the laptop. In *every* case basic things like networking, USB, video and audio do not function and I need to chase down drivers on the web. With any recent linux like Ubuntu all the drivers are there and everything *just works*, even to finding and installing printer drivers for network printers....


I do not apologize though for enjoying the education I got for free....smart is better than dumb.

Originally Posted by jeffcobb

I do not apologize though for enjoying the education I got for free....smart is better than dumb.

But please do apologize for being clueless.
You cannot be very smart if, as you say, Linux taught you so much about computers, but you have constant problems with drivers under Windows and don't deal with it very well. I can happily say I'm smarter than you. I can handle driver issues on both operating systems. And I have been a Microsoft user since DOS 4 or 5. You know, I dumb according to you, but still smarter than you. Weird.

Or maybe very smart Windows users (you know, professional programmers, nobel prizes, scientists, software architects) also have problems with Linux drivers and don't know very well how to deal with it? In that case you could also be smart, being that smart is not a function of what operating system you use, neither how you handle it, or wether you choose to pay for your education or get it for free. Or you could still be clueless because you somehow think Linux provides you some kind of higher smartness that Windows users can't achieve.

I'll put in my two cents and just throw some things out here.

First off, I don't agree Jeff, you can usually find the .inf driver files for just about anything...It's linux that has so-so support for devices as a whole.

The distros I've tried come with a lot of the stuff I want out of the box....my list of programs to install with a fresh install of windows is nearly three times what it is on linux, and thanks to my good friend apt-get, I just run my little install script to take care of that small amount. No hassle.

Using linux does require a more intimate understanding of computers and sometimes programming though. Windows is pretty easy-mode.

The only thing that kept me away from linux for so long was not being able to find equivalent programs. Once I found everything I needed, "I never looked back." You can do just about anything with free software. I use GPL'ed CAE software like code_saturne instead of $20,000 FLUENT for fluid simulations and it works great.

The argument about windows being non-free isn't really a good one, it's almost always bundled with your comp, sometimes it's even cheaper...this ASUS laptop I'm using right now was cheaper with XP than with Xandros. I only paid for a copy of windows once and I don't have any pirated copies. I've gotten copies along with computers and from school.

I like and use both, but prefer linux.

Edit: Not to go off-topic, but apple sucks. I'm so tired of the stupid commercials comparing macs to pcs when they're both pcs, they're just comparing mac os x to windows. If you really like mac os x thats your thing, but for the most part it's the same trendy retards who walk around with ipods who end up buying macs. They're just a fashion item.

Originally Posted by jeffcobb

I do not apologize though for enjoying the education I got for free....smart is better than dumb.

Erm... using Windows does NOT cost money. Sure, buying it might... but there are Linux distros that cost money. And there are free, legal ways of getting Windows (past versions perhaps).

Originally Posted by whiteflags

I am also interested in the answer to this because I am almost convinced that you aren't taking something into account. If you have a subscription to something that entitles you to releases, that's cool, but that isn't free. It may even be that your school (or perhaps your government if not the school) pays the price. In economics there is no free lunch.

I didn't say it was free. I said I get it for free.
I get it via MSDNAA.

Originally Posted by whiteflags

Are you guys too cool to use the help menu? I've never once announced, "I don't want to read!" proudly. Any GUI can be consistent but that's not really what matters.

I can't communicate this better than actually going into my experience as a user I guess, so I'm sorry if this beleaguers the point. Using things like IRC, not everything is completely intuitive in the client (for me), but rather than irrationally deciding I can't use IRC ever I read the help files. I more often than not turn to my help files when I need to decide how to use a feature, or if something can be done. I feel like you're trying to compare help documents.

Rant at me if you want, but I don't like browsing through help files to find what I want. Some of us are lazy. Deal with it.
A computer is a tool--one I want to be able to use without hassle.
Just like I don't want to read through a manual to get my TV working properly, I don't want to read through manuals and help files to get my computer working properly.
I know, I know, a computer is much more complex than a TV, but it doesn't change the facts.

Originally Posted by bithub

The last time I had a driver issue with Linux was over 5 years ago. Just out of curiosity, what drivers have you found Linux to be lacking in?

For brand new hardware, drivers always come out for Windows first, then Linux later if you're lucky. I couldn't find Linux drivers that worked for the ICH9R Raid on my motherboard.

Originally Posted by zacs7

What a pointless thread, seriously. Ideally you should only be comparing the kernels.

Unless you run some programs on top of the kernels, you have nothing but a big paper-weight. In which case Windows and Linux would be exactly the same, they'd both boot up.

Yeah. I'm surprised anyone is surprised over Linux common issue with drivers. I bought 2 weeks ago an HP OfficeJet J4580 All in-One from, well, HP. No fax on RedHat 5.5 Enterprise, despite HPLIP. One can argue, it's Linux. Check your hardware and your distro before buying it. And I agree. But whether or not there are issues with drivers on Linux, I think there's only one possible answer. And that's ok. It doesn't diminish the operating system in any way, considering how most of these drivers come to be.

...

One thing on the issue of Installers...

Installers for Windows aren't really that great. There's surely an advantage in convenience that can only be matched by a few Linux distros more advanced package management systems. But the thing that annoys me about windows installers is that I'm captive of the oftentimes moronic decisions of the software makers in terms of what goes where.

When I installed Windows 7 some months ago, I naturally moved my projects here. One of these projects is the PBEM I'm working on. After installation on a user machine, It's some 100 files, including server, client, 2 databases, user files and a series of DLLs that hold the game engine and rules. And its not finished.

Now, I never used Vista. I moved from XP to Windows 7. And while under XP there were already special user folders rules, they weren't enforced (there's no UAC in XP), so I didn't bother much. All it took me was around 1 hour, to learn through MSDN all I needed to learn about special folders, their locations and their purpose in order to guarantee a correct installation of user, local and roaming files on any Windows 7 machine despite it being networked or not, on a domain or not, with UAC or not. 1 hour.

Yet, a lot of windows software, commercial most of the time, is still being shipped with the most absurd disrespect for proper file access rules under Windows Vista and 7. And Windows installers do not allow me any choice other than accept this. There's no excuse. The information exists, it is easily available and it's rather simple to understand. Yet, software is still being shipped that doesn't follow it.

Linux on the other hand has the advantage that packages are in fact an open architecture which I can change if it contains bad decisions inside (and boy, does it happen!). So even in the presence of a package management system like YAsT or Synaptic which allows me to install applications as easily as on windows, I also have the ability to correct decisions by the package makers.

So on the matter of installers, Linux all the way!

I wasn't saying that Windows users are dumb or that I am anyones genius; rather that Linux requires you to learn and not be dense about some things, all relating to your investment (your computer) and I cannot say that is a bad thing. A very small price to pay in order to have all of my software for free for life. I don't have a problem with that. As for the Windows driver problem, I was simply trying to illustrate that the driver problem has turned on its ear and that your average Linux distro supports more stuff "out of the box" that the paid-for Windows CD/DVD. Its not that I couldn't figure out how to solve the Windows driver problem, I was just irate that I had to chase down drivers on the Internet in order to get it to function as a simple basic computer. Here at Casa Cobb we have a good dozen servers, half as many laptops and half again as many other devices and Linux supports them all out of the box. IOW with a zero-cost CD I can go from bare-metal to fully functional computing, complete with office suites, graphic tools and most importantly to everyone here, a full suite of development tools in 20 minutes flat. Then I can legally take that disc out, pop it into another machine and do it again. Lather, rinse, repeat.

Perhaps I worded the phrase Smart is better than dumb in haste but I do stand behind my opinion that *willful* stupidity is inexcusable. All of my machines are supported by Linux with little to no configuration because I took the time to learn (there is that 'education' thing again) what my hardware was and what was supported before I bought.

To those who do not wish to learn, Windows is for you. For those who have a lot of money to devote to software, Windows is for you. For those who wish to learn and do so on a budget, Linux is for you. It is not better than Windows anymore than Windows is better than Linux. It is up to the individual. For some, Mac is the only option that is right for them. For me, with a wife who is a geek too, is interested in technology and how things work, who likes to pick things apart, open source is a veritable heaven. One thing that Windows will never touch is how malleable Linux is WRT how many places it goes. Because I took the time to learn how my OS works, I also know how my ereader works, how my routers work, etc.

For those who complain that they had some device X and Linux didn't support it, I am reminded of the Henny Youngman joke about "doctor doctor it hurts when I do this!!" Doctor: Then don't do that. IOW if I have a choice between two printers, Windows (or more to the point manufacturer) only supports one and the other is supported by both, I go where I have support. Its not a matter of doing without anything; it is more of a matter of making smart choices and supporting those who support you.

And I seriously don't miss having to run all the malware/virii stuff that Windows demands but that is more of an indictment of our society than anything else.

Originally Posted by zacs7

Erm... using Windows does NOT cost money. Sure, buying it might... but there are Linux distros that cost money. And there are free, legal ways of getting Windows (past versions perhaps).

Using Windows doesn't cost money; Buying it does. So does having to pay for most of the apps you use. Even those make come with a few minor-point upgrade or two but after that the Vendor will be there with his/her hand out again. And don't get me started on registration codes/numbers/copy protection...that stuff I don't miss at all.

rather that Linux requires you to learn and not be dense about some things

But it's really a false idea you have there. A common misconception Linux users with barely any knowledge of Windows (because that's the only explanation I can find) have about Windows.

Instead what happens is that Windows allows for an easier entry level. And even that is debatable, given how many newcomers to computers or experienced computers users with no knowledge of Windows have difficulties when first facing Windows. The exact same thing can be said about Gnome or distros like Ubuntu. They too foster what you seem to call a dumbed down version of a computing experience. And there's nothing less dignifying about this, since computers are meant to be used. And meant to be used by as many people as possible, including your granny who surely doesn't want to be bothered with sh, or the secretary who just needs to a spreadsheet and a text processor.

When you decide to explore your environments however, Windows and Linux share a common set of challenges. There's no particular distinction between both operating systems in absolutely anything other than technical concepts. None is easier, none is harder, none is better built, none is worse built. They are Jack and John. Jack's an arsehole sometimes and John can be a moron too. But both are great buddies you can hang out with. I have and I don't regret it.

Gosh! I'm so tired of this BS mumbo jumbo. The world is not black and white. It's not because one operating system is good, that the only possible answer to other operating systems is them being bad. The world is made in many shades of the color purple.

Definitely windows has a massive advantage over linux for drivers. If you want to use, eg, a webcam with linux, you'd best pick one off a supported list, otherwise you are just rolling dice.

Originally Posted by Elysia

Rant at me if you want, but I don't like browsing through help files to find what I want. Some of us are lazy. Deal with it.
A computer is a tool--one I want to be able to use without hassle.

I totally understand this attitude in my friends who are not programmers, who I never try to pitch linux at. They use windows and it works fine for them, why would they want to change?

Coming from a programmer tho, to me it just sounds totally head-in-the-sand ignorant. Like, most people who drive cars are not interested in tuning the car, most of them aren't even interested in changing the oil or air filter, and that's fine (I guess) but if represent yourself as someone who works on cars and is involved in their development, you need to take an interest in their use above and beyond just getting the thing into gear, turning the wheel appropriately and deploying the parking brake. That may even include taking an interest in more than one kind of vehicle.

Of course, this may overly idealistic if your "career path" consists of following the instructions you are given by your superiors so you can collect a paycheck. Something tells me Mr. Bill Gates did not have this attitude tho (even if he does employ lots of such people), or he'd just be an accountant somewhere today instead of what he is.

On the other hand, that means I'm implying windows is better for the majority of the general public, which I think is true. On the other other hand, I wasn't a programmer (or, as far as I can remember, even particularly interested in computers) when I got into linux and I thought it was great right away (I guess that is a minority of the general public).

Originally Posted by Epy

Edit: Not to go off-topic, but apple sucks. I'm so tired of the stupid commercials comparing macs to pcs when they're both pcs, they're just comparing mac os x to windows. If you really like mac os x thats your thing, but for the most part it's the same trendy retards who walk around with ipods who end up buying macs. They're just a fashion item.

Hmmm. A couple years ago my mom, who is in the "majority of the general public" category I just referred to, wanted to replace her laptop and decided (not sure where she got the idea) that she'd like a Mac better. So she bought a macbook and AFAICT she really does like it better and find it easier to use, and she apparently intends to stick with Apple in the future. I've barely ever used them but it makes sense to me, as does the philosophy of making both the hardware and the software (if you are using a proprietary model). They're freaking not cheap tho.

Originally Posted by Mario F.

But it's really a false idea you have there. A common misconception Linux users with barely any knowledge of Windows (because that's the only explanation I can find) have about Windows.

I did hard-core Windows development for close to 10 years before letting it go for more intellectually stimulating pastures. Hardly what I would use to describe "barely any knowledge of Windows". I have been through the WOSSA training, the undocumented APIs, the "cooperative multitasking", all of it. I still have my Petzold manual around here somewhere. So if you wish to try to be insulting, make an effort to do so at something more than the playground level.

I just wanted to point out a misconception you apparently had. Another that you had (and what you quoted from my message) is that I am arguing that Windows is $$ and Linux is $0.00. Linux exacts a charge like Windows does. The difference is that where Windows hits your pocket book and enforces it through registration/license codes, Linux takes payment through education if you are a user and the GPL if you are a programmer. This sadly is above the fray in this discussion. Driver issues don't exist *for me*. Software availability exists *for me*. Having an OS that was designed by programmers and not a marketing department works *for me*.

Originally Posted by jeffcobb

I did hard-core Windows development for close to 10 years before letting it go for more intellectually stimulating pastures. Hardly what I would use to describe "barely any knowledge of Windows".

Sorry, but I find that hard to believe. It's just not possible for someone who "did hardcore windows development for close to 10 years" (sic) to then turn around and try to convince anyone else Windows does not foster knowledge or whatever else you are trying to imply.

So if you wish to try to be insulting, make an effort to do so at something more than the playground level.

Ok. You are full of bull and strike me as yet another idiot who after 2 months on these boards tries to pass an expert on all matters including those you clearly show a lack of understanding. In short, you really sound like a poser.

I just wanted to point out a misconception you apparently had. Another that you had (and what you quoted from my message) is that I am arguing that Windows is $$ and Linux is $0.00.

There's no misconception here. You are arguing over that. But I never said you were wrong or right. I don't even care. Instead I was talking about your dumb concept about what makes someone smart and someone dumb.