0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
Curious? Maybe just a personal taste'?
Because nothing is simple in Linux.
The simple fact of the matter is, if you weren't "raised" in the Unix culture, Linux will forever be foreign. You may become fluent but you'll never be completely at home with it.
For a Linux distro to be able to succeed, it has to have the simplicity of iTunes and the marketing budget of the iPad.Sorry, but as it stands Linux will forever be limited to the people who have the time and mental agility to dive in and learn to swim in its depths.
I'm what mist people would call a computer wizard. At work, the other software engineers ask me when they are in trouble. We use Linux exclusively on or servers. Window is or desktop where we us a Linux terminal over ssh and various web browsers.
I like Linux, but windows currently is the superior os. Performance is better in windows 7 than in Linux, both for graphics and multi cpu utilization. (Very few non forking Linux programs can use more than one processor core.) The file system is superior in features with network wide snapshots, access control lists that all software support. It has a better and more stable network file system for office and home than NFS. Various software run as different users, and the currently logged in user is no longer administrator.
Now, all of these problems I can overcome. But what I can't overcome is the fact that I need to replace the kernel regularly in Linux. I could of course choose to hold the kernel at its current version, but how is that for security?
And I can't get my webcam to work, the picture is upside down.
The computer also crash when resuming from hibernation, probably due to the graphics driver not being optimized. So you say that if companies had written drivers for Linux that would not be a problem? The reason they don't is that the Linux kernel require drivers to be recompiled when the kernel is updated. Kernel developers have also chose to say that backward compatability is no priority. It would be very expensive to keep holding drivers current not only for bug fixes.
My background is from Amiga, which is much more similar to Linux technically, so this is not because of "how I was raised".
Linux is catching up, but Microsoft suddenly is on track. Windows 7 they got almost right and they will not fall of the wagon and back to the mistakes of Vista again. The race just got a lot tougher for Canonical and the likes who hope to compete with Windows on the desktop. Linux need not only to be better technically than windows 8 and 9, to gain mark et it must also be simpler to maintain and support for hardware vendors and the damned web camera must work.But I use Linux because I hate to pay my bills, and due to Java applets being so difficult to get working I am unable to login with my bank.
In April 2002 Bill Gates, appearing in his capacity as Microsoft's Chief Software Architect, had given sworn testimony under oath to the US Courts. Gates' testimony included statements that Microsoft Windows was indissoluble and could not be created in cut-down form. Paragraphs 207 to 223 of Gates' testimony indicated that Windows had an entangled monolithic structure, rather than a structure organised in modular fashion
What OS you run on your workstations will be dictated by the applications you need to run, and if the apps you need aren't available for Linux then you have little choice. It's difficult to see why you use Linux on your servers though, when you clearly think it's inferior to Windows. After all, it's not going to be because you can't get the server applications you need for Windows Server, is it?
I can't think of a single area in which windows is superior to Linux. Graphics performance depends upon the graphics hardware and drivers, and because of the DRM stuff that's been included in the windows graphics subsystem since Vista, windows drivers are considerably more complex and have to do far more than their Linux counterparts; this is going to impose a performance penalty rather than a performance benefit. Windows drivers do get more development though, because for the time being many more units will be sold for windows than for Linux.
As for multi-cpu utilisation, the vast majority of clusters run Linux and not Windows. In fact, Wikipedia currently reports that, as of June 2010, of the top 500 ranked supercomputer systems in the world and which are all massively parallel systems, each with several tens or hundreds of thousands of processors, 91% of them run Linux.
In any case, as a software 'engineer', you should already know that there is nothing intrinsic about Windows software that makes it better suited to multi-processing; multi-processing, whether by running separate processes or by multi-threading, has to be designed into the software.
Claiming that the Windows filesystem (I assume you're talking about NTFS V3.0) is superior is also a bit weird.
You haven't said which of the filesystems available for Linux you're comparing it with, but even the old Linux ext3 filesystem had features that Windows has only recently got, with NTFS V3.0, and many of those features are actually implemented in the OS and not the filesystem itself.
Still, you only have a choice of NTFS of FAT, as opposed to the much wider range of available filesystems for Linux, which include features ranging from inherent fault tolerance, to file versioning, to distributed file systems.
Incidentally, application software doesn't need to 'support' filesystem security measures, such as Access Control Lists, because applications do not directly access the filesystem.
I can't see how you manage to think that windows' shares are superior to NFS either, having a significantly higher overhead than NFS due the the bits that MS has had to add to the basic SMB system developed at IBM a couple of decades ago.
You worry about 'needing' to replace the kernel regularly but don't worry about the regular MS security patches you need to apply?
If you were to look a little deeper, the number of security related Linux kernel updates are actually far and few between and most updates are fixes to non-security related features.
If you don't use those features you don't need to update - you do check why you're updating the kernel, don't you? It's nice to know that Linux does get fixes out quickly though, compared with MS, who tend to just sit on them for as long as possible, or failing that, just charge you more money for a 'new' OS, as they did with W7, which is essentially just Vista but with a lot of fixes applied to it.
I didn't notice MS offering refunds for selling you the faulty product in the first place though.
QuoteAnd I can't get my webcam to work, the picture is upside down.As yes - now that tragedy is purely the fault of the OS, and nothing to do with the drivers (that the manufacturer couldn't be bothered to supply). Yes, I am being sarcastic.
QuoteThe computer also crash when resuming from hibernation, probably due to the graphics driver not being optimized. So you say that if companies had written drivers for Linux that would not be a problem? The reason they don't is that the Linux kernel require drivers to be recompiled when the kernel is updated. Kernel developers have also chose to say that backward compatability is no priority. It would be very expensive to keep holding drivers current not only for bug fixes.Why "probably due to the graphics driver not being optimised"? A hibernation issue is more likely
... to be due to problems in the ACPI subsystem, not the graphics subsystem.
It's probably just a language issue, but you can only optimise something that's already working and it isn't the right word to use in this context i.e. where it is not working; optimisation means making something work better than it already does, either to reduce the resource utilisation or to increase performance. As with your web cam problem though, have you tried the support forums for the particular distro you're using? The chances are that, unless you are trying to use a particularly exotic bit of hardware, someone else will have already had these problems and you should be able to find if and how they fixed it.
QuoteMy background is from Amiga, which is much more similar to Linux technically, so this is not because of "how I was raised".I liked the Amiga a lot, but it is nothing like Linux at all. It was micro-kernel based, whereas both Windows and Linux have monolithic kernels, although the Linux kernel is far more modular and structured than the Windows kernel: you can easily add or remove kernel features from the Linux kernel if you wish.
QuoteBut I use Linux because I hate to pay my bills, and due to Java applets being so difficult to get working I am unable to login with my bank. in summary, I think it's actually worth reading what Bill Gates said about the Windows architecture...
But I use Linux because I hate to pay my bills, and due to Java applets being so difficult to get working I am unable to login with my bank.
The vast majority of people are not even aware that there's an option, so preference doesn't really come into it; most people don't choose to run Windows or OSX but just buy the computers they can afford, or like the look of in the case of Macs, and use whatever OS is installed on it when they buy it.