Register to reply

What OS to use?

by EE4life
Tags: None
Share this thread:
enorbet
#55
Sep14-14, 08:20 AM
enorbet's Avatar
P: 190
Quote Quote by vociferous View Post
<snipped a bunch of utter nonsense because this last paragraph is so revealing of the agenda>

I'll leave you with the story of an IT manager I used to know. I used to ask him how often he updated his Linux servers. His answer was never, because they tend to break when updated. He would just run them until they crashed and required an install, because unlike his Windows and Solaris servers, Linux servers would be constantly borked by updates to the point where it was faster just to reinstall the OS on a dozen servers rather than try to figure out the problem.
Apparently you still have yet to look at the chart on OpSys Market Share as you would have members believe that Linux with a 35% Market Share on Enterprise Servers (compared to 32% Windows) and leaving out the other Unix based balance, and/or the 96% Market Share on Supercomputers, that these multi-BILLION dollar ventures rely on junk that breaks all the time from a simple update. That is utterly laughable.

You also apparently didn't visit CoreOS or look up the nature and value of containers. When all base system incremental updates are disallowed, even viruses and other malware are ruled out as well in any important area. The existing rules and security of a mature OpSys that began in 1969 as a multi-user, networked system are more than sufficient to compartmentalize and handle any incidentals.

This is in sharp contrast to a system that still doesn't allow concurrent users (nor apparently know how to properly handle them) began as a standalone single-user OpSys and only got a TCP/IP stack nearly 30 years after Unix (which Linux inherited from the start) and had user logins with root/admin privileges by default (easily available to any script let alone human hacker) until 2009. These are not my opinions or of some IT guy somewhere of unknown credentials. These are historical facts. I have yet to see one shred of evidence from you. Almost everything is your opinion and/or anecdotal. With your opinion on Linux I find it confusing and doubtful that you really allow Ubuntu anywhere near your PC.

Back on topic: Don't take my word. Don't take anybody's word. It is so easy to see for yourself. Perhaps try -T H I S L I N K-. Even if you're not motivated to download it and boot it, just look at it and see how "not up to snuff" it is. It will likely surprise and delight you, and this is but a portable, temporary system. The full deal is even better.
vociferous
#56
Sep14-14, 12:15 PM
P: 297
Quote Quote by enorbet View Post
Apparently you still have yet to look at the chart on OpSys Market Share as you would have members believe that Linux with a 35% Market Share on Enterprise Servers (compared to 32% Windows) and leaving out the other Unix based balance, and/or the 96% Market Share on Supercomputers, that these multi-BILLION dollar ventures rely on junk that breaks all the time from a simple update. That is utterly laughable.

You also apparently didn't visit CoreOS or look up the nature and value of containers. When all base system incremental updates are disallowed, even viruses and other malware are ruled out as well in any important area. The existing rules and security of a mature OpSys that began in 1969 as a multi-user, networked system are more than sufficient to compartmentalize and handle any incidentals.

This is in sharp contrast to a system that still doesn't allow concurrent users (nor apparently know how to properly handle them) began as a standalone single-user OpSys and only got a TCP/IP stack nearly 30 years after Unix (which Linux inherited from the start) and had user logins with root/admin privileges by default (easily available to any script let alone human hacker) until 2009. These are not my opinions or of some IT guy somewhere of unknown credentials. These are historical facts. I have yet to see one shred of evidence from you. Almost everything is your opinion and/or anecdotal. With your opinion on Linux I find it confusing and doubtful that you really allow Ubuntu anywhere near your PC.

Back on topic: Don't take my word. Don't take anybody's word. It is so easy to see for yourself. Perhaps try -T H I S L I N K-. Even if you're not motivated to download it and boot it, just look at it and see how "not up to snuff" it is. It will likely surprise and delight you, and this is but a portable, temporary system. The full deal is even better.
Look, you're a Linux evangelist. I get it. But your fervor for this particular operating system is impacting your ability to discuss the issue objectively. The topic is operating systems for the end-user on a desktop or laptop, not servers. And yes, from all the system administrators I have talked to, Linux does break much more often than Windows or Solaris. It is widely used because businesses see the higher maintenance cost as a trade off for not having to worry about paying for licenses. Also, most of these companies that are sinking millions of dollars into servers that run linux are not using normal builds. They pay a third party company or someone on the inside to create a custom solution which undergoes extensive quality assurance before any changes are made. This stands into stark contrast with a proprietary solution like Microsoft or Oracle where most of the quality assurance is done by the companies that manufacture the software.

These guys are not just slapping in some distro they downloaded and updating as needed. They typically pay a lot of money to work around the flaws in the quality assurance of the various distros. Some of the big boys actually develop their own distro that is not available publicly.

And you accuse me of using anecdote, but I am the only one that has contributed meaningful empirical evidence. The desktop penetration of Linux has stayed around 1%. If Linux's consumer experience were really on-par with Windows and OSX on the desktop, given it's price, you would expect it to be gaining significant market share. When you cannot give something of value away for free to the average man on the street, that speaks volumes to its quality in the eye of the average consumer. Linux desktops are far too fragmented and the Linux OS is far too rooted in ancient server systems from nearly half a century ago to be successful with end-users. Unless someone fixes these basic flaws, I do not see this changing.

That is all I am going to contribute to this subject. You clearly are a very passionate evangelist. My only suggestion would be instead of talking about why people should be using Linux as a desktop OS (when they clearly are not going to), you should put that effort into some of the problems that I (and others) have identified and fixing them, just as a bit of a rundown:

1) Reliance on the buggy X-windows server.

2) Reliance on the buggy KDE and Gnome windows managers.

3) Fragmentation of both the underlying operating system (e.g. Debian versus Redhat) and the higher end user experience.

4) Poor software installation routines for third party binaries (treating user software like system software, not providing for a central installer for linux binaries similar to what Windows has with .msi packages or OS X Installer.app).

5) Limited or buggy driver support for certain hardware (could use a quality assurance program similar to Microsoft that requires signed drivers).

6) Fragmentation of the user desktop experience. The average consumer does not like to have to relearn anything. With Linux, desktops are fragmented by choice in desktop manager and then further fragmented by how that manager is implemented by the distro. After seeing how users rebelled against the evolution of the start menu in Windows 8, it is clear that end-users do not like having to learn a new way to do the same thing. If Linux cannot offer a new, clean, and consistent desktop experience, it is going to turn off users.

7) Fix the situation with proprietary hardware. Linux needs to license software for doing basic consumer tasks such as playing MP3's, DVD's, and blurays and require that it be included on any new non-volume purchase of a computer with Linux preinstalled. Consumers want to put in a blu-ray and have it just work. They don't want to be forced to download a program that violates federal law to do so.

8) Fix the fragmentation of various underlying aspects of the Linux OS, such as the audio system which has over a dozen implementations instead of a single easy to use one like on Windows or OSX.

These are just some of the major flaws which are obvious to me (and others). Given the state of Linux today, I don't see them being fixed unless some major corporation like Google is willing to sink billions into Linux on the Desktop, probably by pulling a Steve Jobs and building a completely new user experience on top of the existing stable Linux core.
enorbet
#57
Sep14-14, 04:05 PM
enorbet's Avatar
P: 190
@vociferous
OK. One last try. I'm not a Linux evangelist. I have already stated that I'd be happier if Linux stayed more like it used to be, "a mechanic's car" for coders, high level amateurs and hobbyists, rather than trying to become some sort of "free windows".

I have already addressed the other "issues" you list and offered links to show those ideas are either mistaken or out of date. So I'll address the last remaining one which is actually true - the United States' Digital Millennium Copyright Act and how it impacts users. Basically, it doesn't because the law is about copyright protection, which is routinely "broken" by users of all operating systems (with no criminal intent) as well as corporations, who like to use it when it helps them but ignore it when it is "in the way"

Have you ever made a backup copy of a DVD?... not for the purpose of re-selling (which is what the law is trying to prevent), just to insure you don't have to buy another if the kids, or the dog, or some random scratch renders it inoperable? Same law.

Regarding Linux and merely watching legally purchased DVDs it takes one click to download the library libdvdcss and all players just work. Or, for $25 US any Linux user can download and again with one click install Fluendo DVD Player which is compliant and completely legal. Incidentally, for a similar purchase price, there are several companies who sell software for Windows openly on the market to break copyright protection. You might want to ask yourself why these companies are not prosecuted to get a clue as to what the law is actually concerned with.

I respect the right to prosecute those who violate the law for the purpose it was intended to prevent - duplication for the purpose of selling and thereby stealing money from those who worked hard to create the content. Since I have no such intent I have no problem simply watching a DVD I paid for and I never worry that Federal Agents are waiting outside my door to take me off to jail or court.

I am actually sorry you have had some negative experience that soiled your opinion of Linux. I still wonder if you actually use it and why, since you nitpick with minor, outdated or non-existent "faults" but I will take you at your word and wish you luck in the future. After all if nothing else Linux is about options and choices and that includes not using it and choosing something else. Your call. Similarly OP and everyone here is free to make their choices and hopefully they won't do it because of someone who is now proven to disseminate pure FUD, or even someone trying to be objective, but because they tried it for themselves.

The thing here I wonder about most is exactly whom you think you're serving here with all the negativity, other than your own ego. Seriously. To what end? Do you suppose you may prevent someone from some horrible experience? It seems especially ingenuous since you claim to use it yourself. Instead of spending all this energy and effort to knock it down, why not talk about what you like about it that keeps you having it around? At least have some sense of balance.
nsaspook
#58
Sep14-14, 08:39 PM
P: 663
Ok, Windows is the King of the desktop but when you need something that just works what do you use?

http://training.linuxfoundation.org/...inux-migration
“We migrated key functions from Windows to Linux because we needed an operating system that was stable and reliable – one that would give us in-house control. So if we needed to patch, adjust or adapt, we could.”
http://www.techradar.com/us/news/sof...articleContent
And - putting aside the small matter of building the LHC itself - finding the Higgs was done almost entirely with Linux. Indeed, many of the scientists we've spoken to say it couldn't have been done without it.
harborsparrow
#59
Y, 12:01 PM
PF Gold
harborsparrow's Avatar
P: 359
I'd just like to note that, for 15 years, I've been running Sql Server and IIS on Windows servers--and I've had zero crashes or serious problems. So all this dissing of Windows servers is just silly. These days, the Windows servers are really quite, quite awesome. Linux is cheaper for enterprises (I get a non-profit price for Windows) but the claim that Linux is either more reliable or stable, cheaper to administer, or better performing that Windows servers is very "old school" and frankly out of touch.
enorbet
#60
Y, 01:57 PM
enorbet's Avatar
P: 190
Quote Quote by harborsparrow View Post
I'd just like to note that, for 15 years, I've been running Sql Server and IIS on Windows servers--and I've had zero crashes or serious problems. So all this dissing of Windows servers is just silly. These days, the Windows servers are really quite, quite awesome. Linux is cheaper for enterprises (I get a non-profit price for Windows) but the claim that Linux is either more reliable or stable, cheaper to administer, or better performing that Windows servers is very "old school" and frankly out of touch.
Just for the record I went back and read each and every post here and I don't see "dissing of Windows" either Desktop or Servers. The whole concept of "Ford R0X!, Chevy SUX!" is rather a teenage DTB phenomenon, is it not?

OP asks "what os should I use?" and the overall answer, despite a few "out of touch" detractors is they are all good but complex enough to have both advantages and disadvantages at certain applications.

Additionally, OP asked about this mainly for Desktop use. The only reasons that server versions was brought up was at first for Market Share to counter a statement that "Linux breaks all the time" and to point out that advances in one area, such as containers, translate well and almost always get used in the other.

This is true mainly because Linux is not a distribution. Those are just collections aimed at niches. Linux is a kernel and the base kernel code in a SuperComputer is identical to the kernel in a Server, or a home system, or a phone or an automobile. Only what is selected for support is different and this can be exactly because the kernel is OpenSource and can be customized by the End User.

Stating that Windows cannot match this particular feature is not disrespectful. It's just a fact and one that comes with it's own set of benefits and problems. They all have their own sets of these so I will state it again - No one OpSys, not Linux, not Mac, not Windows, stands head and shoulders above the other in all things. One merely has to determine what is most important to him or her and choose accordingly.

Unfortunately there is a lot of misinformation out there and it is best to realize that if someone says for example, "Macs are overpriced" (a very old piece of fud) you can bet they have never used one and give their comments the weight they deserve.
nuuskur
#61
Y, 02:16 PM
P: 6
If you're not into gaming then with linux, such as ubuntu, you can't go wrong. It is much faster, more efficient and much more reliable. It's preference, of course. I prefer linux, because of its simplicity. There is a learning curve if you're coming from windows, but it's worth it.


Register to reply