Notices
Results 1 to 30 of 30

Thread: The Relative Merits of LINUX V other operating systems.

  1. #1 The Relative Merits of LINUX V other operating systems. 
    Guest
    WARNING! This is a very tongue-in-cheek thread of an alternative subject!

    Can we duscuss the relative merits?

    I maintain that Linux has nothing to merit it, it has an abnormally high execution rate, is difficult to learn as a language, and the documentation is mostly rubbish and not at all reflective of reality.

    Linux is flawed in that it basically starts from DOS which if you like starts from a single point of origin. All operating systems do this, they cannot just start up on their own.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    i think theres a few people who have converted to linux because of small issues they've had with other operating systems, some have been persuaded that linux is far better but have returned back when they realise there were too many issues involved in staying with linux :-D


    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Guest
    Yeah I agree I think some of them found that the more beautiful aspects of linux simply get hidden away or shrouded and never seen again. There are also many different versions which does not help, there is no central core an (ouch!) another thing is that it demands so much of your time re-reading all the guff. 8)
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    what also annoys me is the attitude of some linux users, if their happy with that system thats fine, but its the constant bad mouthing of the major operating systems and they make out theres something wrong with you if you not interested in their choice

    If i wanted to move across to linux, i would have done it already :-D
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Guest
    Yes, it's also got a very dodgy pedigree, started after most of the other systems, it simply stole many of their fundamental process and the only real difference seems to be the agressive user interface. :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    I think it'll disappear over time. its best to stick with an operating system that works in the real world and is adaptable to the needs of the user
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7 Re: The Relative Merits of LINUX V other operating systems. 
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    WARNING! This is a very tongue-in-cheek thread of an alternative subject!

    Can we duscuss the relative merits?

    I maintain that Linux has nothing to merit it, it has an abnormally high execution rate, is difficult to learn as a language, and the documentation is mostly rubbish and not at all reflective of reality.

    Linux is flawed in that it basically starts from DOS which if you like starts from a single point of origin. All operating systems do this, they cannot just start up on their own.
    One word for linux: bloatware. Linux suffers directly from bloatware, and isn't supported by anything (you literally have to specially program it so it supports it. Adding to more bloat). You might as well just write your own in C rather than use linux.

    Not to mention the documentation. The documentation on linux is highly scattered as well, as you said, "rubbish". Unfortunately, even though windows becomes more bloated bloatware with each release, it's still better than linux. That says something about linux, and it's not good either.

    I'd also like to mention linux distributions that "mimic" windows. ...whats the point? It's linux, not windows mime. Not to mention all of those distributions run far slower than windows, and take up insane amounts of RAM and CPU power just to run.

    End result: Linux isn't worth the time and loss of productivity to learn. Ever.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8 Re: The Relative Merits of LINUX V other operating systems. 
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht
    One word for linux: bloatware. Linux suffers directly from bloatware, and isn't supported by anything (you literally have to specially program it so it supports it. Adding to more bloat). You might as well just write your own in C rather than use linux.

    Not to mention the documentation. The documentation on linux is highly scattered as well, as you said, "rubbish". Unfortunately, even though windows becomes more bloated bloatware with each release, it's still better than linux. That says something about linux, and it's not good either.

    I'd also like to mention linux distributions that "mimic" windows. ...whats the point? It's linux, not windows mime. Not to mention all of those distributions run far slower than windows, and take up insane amounts of RAM and CPU power just to run.

    End result: Linux isn't worth the time and loss of productivity to learn. Ever.
    My experience is that trying to add anything to linux is next to impossible, it just does not seem to be able to link to anything, stubbornly refusing to behave as other operating systems. Yes it supports almost nothing new you try to add to it. It should be wiped off the face of the earth.

    CC :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9 Re: The Relative Merits of LINUX V other operating systems. 
    Forum Professor captaincaveman's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2006
    Posts
    1,377
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    WARNING! This is a very tongue-in-cheek thread of an alternative subject!

    Can we duscuss the relative merits?

    I maintain that Linux has nothing to merit it, it has an abnormally high execution rate, is difficult to learn as a language, and the documentation is mostly rubbish and not at all reflective of reality.

    Linux is flawed in that it basically starts from DOS which if you like starts from a single point of origin. All operating systems do this, they cannot just start up on their own.
    One word for linux: bloatware. Linux suffers directly from bloatware, and isn't supported by anything (you literally have to specially program it so it supports it. Adding to more bloat). You might as well just write your own in C rather than use linux.

    Not to mention the documentation. The documentation on linux is highly scattered as well, as you said, "rubbish". Unfortunately, even though windows becomes more bloated bloatware with each release, it's still better than linux. That says something about linux, and it's not good either.

    I'd also like to mention linux distributions that "mimic" windows. ...whats the point? It's linux, not windows mime. Not to mention all of those distributions run far slower than windows, and take up insane amounts of RAM and CPU power just to run.

    End result: Linux isn't worth the time and loss of productivity to learn. Ever.
    yeah couldn't agree more jeremyhfht. you would be better writing your own rather than conform to the restrictions of linux. And the documentation makes no sense at all, it could have been written by a monkey for how useful it is

    It seems like its more bothered about inflickting damage and taking people from other operating systems than it does on solving the inherant problems that it has itself
    CAPTAINCAVEMAN


    I ANSWER TO NO-ONE - The wonders of athiesm

    that which does not kill us only postpones the inevitable
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Guest
    Here's an example of typical sales talk.

    Quote Originally Posted by unbunto.com
    Ubuntu is a complete Linux-based operating system, freely available with both community and professional support. It is developed by a large community and we invite you to participate too!

    The Ubuntu community is built on the ideas enshrined in the Ubuntu Philosophy: that software should be available free of charge, that software tools should be usable by people in their local language and despite any disabilities, and that people should have the freedom to customise and alter their software in whatever way they see fit.

    These freedoms make Ubuntu fundamentally different from traditional proprietary software: not only are the tools you need available free of charge, you have the right to modify your software until it works the way you want it to.

    Ubuntu is suitable for both desktop and server use. The current Ubuntu release supports PC (Intel x86), 64-bit PC (AMD64), UltraSPARC T1 (Sun Fire T1000 and T2000) and PowerPC (Apple iBook and Powerbook, G4 and G5) architectures.

    Ubuntu includes more than 16,000 pieces of software, but the core an desktop installation fits on a single CD. Ubuntu covers every standard desktop application from word processing and spreadsheet applications to web server software and programming tools. Read more about
    Funny old word that 'should'


    As far as I can see one usually pays a high price eventually for using Linux, 'usuable in their local language' means no support or understanding when you do, and the 'freedom to customise' goes against all the other documentation unless you are a guru/or some sort of high priest.

    What should be and what is are often to completely different things. Anybody had any experience of this particular sect of Linux?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Forum Ph.D. william's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wherever I go, there I am
    Posts
    935
    Howdy,
    I'm going to have to disagree with you all. I'm typing this message from Linux.

    Surely, Linux is not as user friendly as some of the rest, but it has its advantages:

    1. It's free.
    2. If you do science, it has many of the features one uses regularly such as;
    a. Software compilers (C, C++, Fortran, Java, and a few others)
    b. It has a LaTex compiler!!! This is the standard for scientific papers.
    c. It has the capability to switch "workplaces" so you don't have a cluttered screen.
    d. Secure-shelling to another workstation is pretty simple.
    3. It's free.

    I have my laptop partitioned - one with Linux, and the other with Windows. And my desktop is a Mac. There are things I like and dislike about each.

    For the general user/internet-surfer/media-player/what-have-you, Linux can be a nightmare and I would probably recommend Windows or a Mac, but if you do science, either Linux or a Mac is the way to go.

    Cheers,
    william
    "... the polhode rolls without slipping on the herpolhode lying in the invariable plane."
    ~Footnote in Goldstein's Mechanics, 3rd ed. p. 202
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by william
    Howdy,
    I'm going to have to disagree with you all. I'm typing this message from Linux.

    Surely, Linux is not as user friendly as some of the rest, but it has its advantages:

    1. It's free.
    2. If you do science, it has many of the features one uses regularly such as;
    a. Software compilers (C, C++, Fortran, Java, and a few others)
    b. It has a LaTex compiler!!! This is the standard for scientific papers.
    c. It has the capability to switch "workplaces" so you don't have a cluttered screen.
    d. Secure-shelling to another workstation is pretty simple.
    3. It's free.

    I have my laptop partitioned - one with Linux, and the other with Windows. And my desktop is a Mac. There are things I like and dislike about each.

    For the general user/internet-surfer/media-player/what-have-you, Linux can be a nightmare and I would probably recommend Windows or a Mac, but if you do science, either Linux or a Mac is the way to go.

    Cheers,
    william

    1) I beg to differ old chap, yes it is free but in the long run your system will be all but destroyed if you allow linux to totally overtake your system.

    2) Science and Linux do not go hand in hand, indeed linux often tries to defend itself by suggesting it knows the science before you do!

    a) Bears no resemblance to Linux whatsoever.
    b) I can't imagine that Linux would ever have anything to do with Laytex!.
    c) The 'multi-ID' feature and ability to dissappear at will is far more of a disadvantage than an asset.
    d) All shelling by linux has so far proven very destructive!.
    3) So is the common cold and righ to breath other peoples pollution!

    You will find in the course of time if you have truly accepted Linux that it will eventually destroy your own operating system, dump it! now!.

    I prefer to do my science without using an operating system, I use the basic machine, which loads from a single point, singularity if you like.
    As to MAC I cannot comment, other than it is just another operating system to me.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Ph.D. william's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wherever I go, there I am
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by Megabrain
    Quote Originally Posted by william
    Howdy,
    I'm going to have to disagree with you all. I'm typing this message from Linux.

    Surely, Linux is not as user friendly as some of the rest, but it has its advantages:

    1. It's free.
    2. If you do science, it has many of the features one uses regularly such as;
    a. Software compilers (C, C++, Fortran, Java, and a few others)
    b. It has a LaTex compiler!!! This is the standard for scientific papers.
    c. It has the capability to switch "workplaces" so you don't have a cluttered screen.
    d. Secure-shelling to another workstation is pretty simple.
    3. It's free.

    I have my laptop partitioned - one with Linux, and the other with Windows. And my desktop is a Mac. There are things I like and dislike about each.

    For the general user/internet-surfer/media-player/what-have-you, Linux can be a nightmare and I would probably recommend Windows or a Mac, but if you do science, either Linux or a Mac is the way to go.

    Cheers,
    william

    1) I beg to differ old chap, yes it is free but in the long run your system will be all but destroyed if you allow linux to totally overtake your system.

    2) Science and Linux do not go hand in hand, indeed linux often tries to defend itself by suggesting it knows the science before you do!

    a) Bears no resemblance to Linux whatsoever.
    b) I can't imagine that Linux would ever have anything to do with Laytex!.
    c) The 'multi-ID' feature and ability to dissappear at will is far more of a disadvantage than an asset.
    d) All shelling by linux has so far proven very destructive!.
    3) So is the common cold and righ to breath other peoples pollution!

    You will find in the course of time if you have truly accepted Linux that it will eventually destroy your own operating system, dump it! now!.

    I prefer to do my science without using an operating system, I use the basic machine, which loads from a single point, singularity if you like.
    As to MAC I cannot comment, other than it is just another operating system to me.

    Oops! For a second there I thought we were talking about "Linux".
    "... the polhode rolls without slipping on the herpolhode lying in the invariable plane."
    ~Footnote in Goldstein's Mechanics, 3rd ed. p. 202
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Guest
    Linux - Hell no!

    That's just a corruption of Unix A far better solution for engineers.

    Or there was an early system I wrote to take full advantage of the PC's protected mode operation which I called PROTEX32. It allowed engineering control programs using an IEEE bus (instrument controller susbsystem) to run at full speed. Because it completely avoided task switching (every few milliseconds) and ran with Assembler drivers, and Pascal or C interface programs, it allowed realtime data processing on Intel 486DX 66 processors in the early 1990's, Unfortunately it is the property of the Company I then worked for, and was finally replaced about 2 years ago. Sometime ago I did a search for Protex32 on the net and found references but soon realised that someone else had coincidentaly chosen the same name for their masterpiece. Since I wrote much of the code at home (and was suitably rewarded for that) I do have the final version on an archive disk somewhere.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Senior profahmfaw's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Posts
    328
    a simple information you have to know:
    1- The pentagon super computer work with Linux system.
    2- The cinematic tricks in many films were made by Linux like: star wars and terminator 2 and silicon graphics workstation.
    3- The cart wich landed on Mars (Pathfender) was working by Linux.
    4- NASA use Linux for its computers
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Guest
    How does the American government reconcile that?
    They have been using Microsoft all these years, and shouting about how bad UNIX is and the evil it can spread throughout the internet, and you say they use it?

    What proof do you have for this?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by william
    Howdy,
    I'm going to have to disagree with you all. I'm typing this message from Linux.
    In that case, you've already wasted so much time getting linux to work for you that of COURSE you're going to defend it. Otherwise you'll have to accept the reality that linux is a waste of time.

    1. It's free.
    That's an advantage? That's like saying eating out of a garbage can is better than buying food because it's free.

    2. If you do science, it has many of the features one uses regularly such as;
    a. Software compilers (C, C++, Fortran, Java, and a few others)
    b. It has a LaTex compiler!!! This is the standard for scientific papers.
    c. It has the capability to switch "workplaces" so you don't have a cluttered screen.
    d. Secure-shelling to another workstation is pretty simple.
    A) DevC++ = best compiler you'll ever find. And it has an IDE. Not to mention it's "free" and works on windows...so...yeah. It uses both C and C++, Java's compiler you can download, and the same goes for fortran (as well as a "few others).

    B) Za? What KIND of scientific papers?
    C) So does windows...only it's not called workplaces. Although I may have misunderstood. In any case, you can also download a "patch" to accomplish the same feat in windows.

    3. It's free.
    So is dumpster-diving. However is it really worth all the bacteria and viral infections that will most likely result? Not to mention the SMELL...

    For the general user/internet-surfer/media-player/what-have-you, Linux can be a nightmare and I would probably recommend Windows or a Mac, but if you do science, either Linux or a Mac is the way to go.
    what kind of "science" are you talking about?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Forum Ph.D. william's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2006
    Location
    Wherever I go, there I am
    Posts
    935
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht
    Quote Originally Posted by william
    b. It has a LaTex compiler!!! This is the standard for scientific papers.

    B) Za? What KIND of scientific papers?
    Hi Jeremy,
    My initial post on this thread was due to a misunderstanding of the term Linux.
    In case you are referring to Linux and not "Linux," check out this website;
    http://xxx.lanl.gov/
    It is the initial stop for all scientific papers. Click on your topic of interest and click on any of the papers you want. You are given the options [abs, ps, pdf, other]. If you click "other," you will most likely find the LaTex source. Actually, I have never seen anything other than LaTex.

    If you were referring to "Linux" and not Linux, then scratch what I said above.

    Cheers
    "... the polhode rolls without slipping on the herpolhode lying in the invariable plane."
    ~Footnote in Goldstein's Mechanics, 3rd ed. p. 202
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Guest
    Ah! My mistake! I was referring to Linux alone. Not "Linux". In fact I've never heard of it O.o....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  21. #20  
    Guest
    Quote Originally Posted by Jeremyhfht
    Ah! My mistake! I was referring to Linux alone. Not "Linux". In fact I've never heard of it O.o....

    Never heard of it?

    Where have you been, you must at least have an opinion on Linux, the way it's evil is spreading throughout the world, demanding ever higher execution rates, I thought everybody was aware of it's core an other not so nice aspects.... :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  22. #21  
    Guest
    Erm, wait...which one is the shitty Linux that YOU talked about, and which one is the one he talked about?

    I thought Linux was the shitty thing being discussed and "Linux" was what william was talking about...since william was talking about that scientific OS..thing...grah! *brain implodes*
    Reply With Quote  
     

  23. #22  
    Guest
    Jeremy read the first line of the first post, then my previous post then it ought to all be revealed!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  24. #23  
    Guest
    Yeah, it's about linux OS. Which is what I responded about, the general dumbassery of most linux distributions. Unless there is something regarding Linux I'm not farmiliar with...I'm also unfarmiliar with the term "Tongue-in-cheek"
    Reply With Quote  
     

  25. #24  
    Guest
    So, another aspect of Linux I find highly underirable is it states that when you have finished with it there is somehow more to come, and even better than what you had earlier experienced in using it, one such promise of it purporting to supply endless 'extra goodies' is nothing more than a ploy to attract customers who are either not using any OS at the moment or one that you might be unhappy with, as caveman said, many of these 'waverers' inevitably return to their original OS.

    J, you can google "Tongue-in-cheek" and look at the wiki definition.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  26. #25  
    Guest
    EDIT: wrong thread.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  27. #26  
    Guest
    [
    Reply With Quote  
     

  28. #27  
    Guest
    oops. Damnit that was the wrong thread. Sorry, but I can't delete it.

    My cognitive ability is limited today. Sick and all. in fact it was entirely the wrong forum!
    Reply With Quote  
     

  29. #28  
    Guest
    sounds like you are also drinking out the wrong bottle as well! :wink:
    Reply With Quote  
     

  30. #29  
    Forum Isotope (In)Sanity's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2004
    Location
    Mesa AZ
    Posts
    2,697
    Well, when it comes to servers I'll take anything Unix based over Windows based. I'm a network admin and have to deal with both. Windows works fine, it's just impossible to actually fix anything is it goes wrong. Linux at least I have a chance to open the hood up and start messing around. Windows is the welded shut version of a car.

    When it comes to networking the BSD kernels have it. Microsoft announced a while back that they were going to start using the BSD TCP/IP stack. If you don't understand what a TCP/IP stack is then you really have no business discussing an operating system.

    As far as bloat goes, any OS can be bloated. I've installed working servers in less then 50 MB. I even have servers that run on flash drives.

    Bottom line, to each their own.

    This forum runs on Linux
    Pleased to meet you. Hope you guess my name
    Reply With Quote  
     

  31. #30  
    Guest
    It does?! Oh well, that's it, the forum is tainted. Leave now and expel the demons from the horrible OS!

    And what linux distribution is that? It's smaller than any I've seen.
    Reply With Quote  
     

Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •