24 replies to this topic

[inea]

Windows seems to be the operating program that is installed in a lot of computers. And Apple seems to have got a small portion of the market. And Linux seems to have eaven a smallier part. This can be considered a kind of strange. Since Linux is free. And Windows costs a lot more. There are probably many reasons to find why Windows is used more compared to the operating programs of Apple and Linux. Maybe the efforts to get Linux working are too big compare to the price people are willing to pay for their operating program. And Apple costs maybe too much for a lot of people.

Other options people take in consideration are maybe the service provided by software service companies, the availibity of other programs that run on the operating program and the easiness of Windows. Maybe the advertisement and promotion actions of Microsoft are of importancy too.

It seems nevertheless strange that 1 company can earn big profits by products while other companies don't copy the approach and make their own product to sell on the market that seems to offer big revenues.

Edited by inea, 11 October 2010 - 10:31 PM.

[sheepdog]

To you young whipper snappers that grew up using a mouse for a teething ring, you need to understand for us old foggies, it's all about easy. Windows got the jump on everybody, and since it is what most people use it's the easiest for us computer illerates to get somebody to help us when we get stuck. Heck, I don't even know what linux is. I have heard some strange stories about how there are other operating systems for surfing besides internet explorer, but I would be scared to even try them. Fox fire as far as I'm concerned is a series of books.

[rpgsearcherz]

sheepdog, on 30 September 2010 - 02:20 AM, said:

To you young whipper snappers that grew up using a mouse for a teething ring, you need to understand for us old foggies, it's all about easy. Windows got the jump on everybody, and since it is what most people use it's the easiest for us computer illerates to get somebody to help us when we get stuck. Heck, I don't even know what linux is. I have heard some strange stories about how there are other operating systems for surfing besides internet explorer, but I would be scared to even try them. Fox fire as far as I'm concerned is a series of books.

This. No other operating system is as easy to use and user-friendly as Windows. Plus their resources in terms of pure cash are large enough for them to pay off other companies to support them and only them (which is one of the reasons most game companies only support Windows, via DirectX, instead of using OpenGL which is basically the same but is cross-platform).

Due to those reasons alone it really doen't matter how much better any other OS gets; it will never be able to compete with Windows.

[Saint_Michael]

rpgsearcherz, on 30 September 2010 - 02:25 AM, said:

This. No other operating system is as easy to use and user-friendly as Windows. Plus their resources in terms of pure cash are large enough for them to pay off other companies to support them and only them (which is one of the reasons most game companies only support Windows, via DirectX, instead of using OpenGL which is basically the same but is cross-platform).

Due to those reasons alone it really doen't matter how much better any other OS gets; it will never be able to compete with Windows.

Well there was Windows ME and of course Windows Vista in which they were not user friendly and created more problems then there should have been. However, other factors came into play as to why Microsoft has dominated the Operating system business and that includes both hard and software support and the biggest one PC customization. User interface and user friendliness are big factor as well, but if Apple were to open up its OS like Microsoft has then it would be different story.

[rpgsearcherz]

Saint_Michael, on 02 October 2010 - 11:26 PM, said:

Well there was Windows ME and of course Windows Vista in which they were not user friendly and created more problems then there should have been. However, other factors came into play as to why Microsoft has dominated the Operating system business and that includes both hard and software support and the biggest one PC customization. User interface and user friendliness are big factor as well, but if Apple were to open up its OS like Microsoft has then it would be different story.

To most people, ME and Vista were very user friendly as well. For the average user all they need access to is the "Start" menu, their browser, and a couple other programs. There are still a lot of people who prefer Vista over XP/7 for the reason that they are afraid of change.

[mahesh2k]

Quote

Well there was Windows ME and of course Windows Vista in which they were not user friendly and created more problems then there should have been.

I beg to differ. Other than crashing and bugs, windows ME was just like windows 98 in use. Windows Vista was improvement over XP and it was still user friendly. People had no trouble using that.

Speaking of user friendliness-

"/usr/accountname/directory1/ directory 2" is easy to remember and organize than ' C:/" or "d" or "e:" drives ?

requiring internet connection for most of known software from repository is user friendly ? or getting those softwares via dvd or disc is still user friendly ?

and list goes on.

[rvalkass]

inea, on 29 September 2010 - 04:48 PM, said:

There are probably many reasons to find why Windows is used more compared to the operating programs of Apple and Linux. Maybe the efforts to get Linux working are too big compare to the price people are willing to pay for their operating program. And Apple costs maybe too much for a lot of people.

Consider how the average computer user buys their computer. They walk into a shop (or an online retailer) and buy a PC. It is usually loaded with Microsoft Windows by default. To get Apple's operating system you have to specifically go to Apple's shop and buy an Apple device. To get a Linux operating system you have to install it yourself. Most people simply stick with what they're given. Simple as that.

sheepdog, on 30 September 2010 - 02:20 AM, said:

To you young whipper snappers that grew up using a mouse for a teething ring, you need to understand for us old foggies, it's all about easy. Windows got the jump on everybody, and since it is what most people use it's the easiest for us computer illerates to get somebody to help us when we get stuck. Heck, I don't even know what linux is. I have heard some strange stories about how there are other operating systems for surfing besides internet explorer, but I would be scared to even try them. Fox fire as far as I'm concerned is a series of books.

Two days ago I was in a small village on the coast, in the village shop. There were two computers in the corner, for people to pay for internet access and computer use for a few minutes. I was pleasantly surprised, when someone used one of the computers, to see the familiar colours of Ubuntu. I went for a closer look, and that confirmed my suspicions - Ubuntu on these public-access PCs. The woman using the PC was not in the first flush of youth, but said the PC was very easy to use and understand. It is a matter of people not liking change. People who use Linux can find Windows and Apple a pain in the backside. People who use Macs can find Windows and Linux a pain in the backside. People who use Windows can find Macs and Linux a pain, but always find Windows to be unusable

mahesh2k, on 03 October 2010 - 11:30 AM, said:

Speaking of user friendliness-

"/usr/accountname/directory1/ directory 2" is easy to remember and organize than ' C:/" or "d" or "e:" drives ?

requiring internet connection for most of known software from repository is user friendly ? or getting those softwares via dvd or disc is still user friendly ?

/home/rob is a bit easier to remember and type than C:\Documents and Settings\Rob\My Documents

Downloading software from online repositories free and in the background to be installed automatically is much easier than spending 6 months and ~£500 getting a driving licence, buying a car, driving to a shop, buying software on a CD, driving it back, installing it, fighting with the anti-virus software, having a go at installing it again, then leaving the CD on the shelf for years.

[mahesh2k]

Quote

/home/rob is a bit easier to remember and type than C:\Documents and Settings\Rob\My Documents

When all the files are saved in /root/rob then tell me how easy it is organize and remember or type. You are forced to use command line where windows doesn't force you at all. You are forced to use sudo and CLI in 60-70% of managing OS. Besides you can move my documents to e:/my documents or d: my documents in case of windows. is there anything easy to remember path in linux ? NO.

Let's face it, linux still force us to use CLI. Linux has huge dependency issue with libraries and multiple distribution makes offline software installation and distribution difficult.

Quote

Downloading software from online repositories free and in the background to be installed automatically is much easier than spending 6 months and ~£500 getting a driving licence, buying a car, driving to a shop, buying software on a CD, driving it back, installing it, fighting with the anti-virus software, having a go at installing it again, then leaving the CD on the shelf for years.

Assuming that there is fast or moderate speed internet your case is applicable. But internet censorship is on rise and from unlimited plans ISP are shifting to limited data plans. Dialup users still exist so CD and DVD even if remains on shelf for years are worth to keep. Especially when software is commercial people prefer to get CD or DVD for network installation. Many firms keep data safe by not connecting their home network to internet for such type of consumers DVD/CD is important. Sofware repository based OS don't solve those problems and in fact make it harder. Commercial value from those free repository is already seen during recession and people are moving back to profitable platforms.

Linux doesn't have script kiddies ? viruses ? browser spywares ? software doesn't fail or get corrupt while installing ? there is no dependency hell? I didn't expected you to raise this point.

[rvalkass]

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:46 AM, said:

When all the files are saved in /root/rob then tell me how easy it is organize and remember or type. You are forced to use command line where windows doesn't force you at all. You are forced to use sudo and CLI in 60-70% of managing OS. Besides you can move my documents to e:/my documents or d: my documents in case of windows. is there anything easy to remember path in linux ? NO.

Well, files are organised in the same way as any other operating system. So, for example, I have folders such as /home/rob/Photographs and /home/rob/University Work each containing sub folders to organise them further. If I then want to organise the files further (such as separating RAW camera images from JPEGs) I can sort by file type in the file browser. I can also apply other filters and searches.

You are never forced to use the command line for anything. In fact, I mainly use it for running whois queries simply because it's quicker than waiting for a website to load When people use the command line they use it because they find it quicker and easier.

With respect to the "easy to remember" paths on Windows - there is no need for that sort of thing on Linux. I have my home directory on a separate partition. Linux handles that behind the scenes so that the standard path of /home/username always works. I could move the home directory to a completely separate disk and it would still be handled invisibly. There's no need to remember a random drive letter. However, if /home/rob is still a bit hard to remember, you can always create a symlink (shortcut) to it so you can use something like /rob instead.

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:46 AM, said:

Let's face it, linux still force us to use CLI. Linux has huge dependency issue with libraries and multiple distribution makes offline software installation and distribution difficult.

No. No. And no. You're not forced to use the command line at any stage. Software dependencies (which exist in Windows too) are handled automatically by the package management software. Offline software installation is possible and quite popular - see the DVDs that distributions ship out containing their distribution and all available software packages for those with limited/no Internet access.

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:46 AM, said:

Assuming that there is fast or moderate speed internet your case is applicable. But internet censorship is on rise and from unlimited plans ISP are shifting to limited data plans. Dialup users still exist so CD and DVD even if remains on shelf for years are worth to keep. Especially when software is commercial people prefer to get CD or DVD for network installation. Many firms keep data safe by not connecting their home network to internet for such type of consumers DVD/CD is important. Sofware repository based OS don't solve those problems and in fact make it harder. Commercial value from those free repository is already seen during recession and people are moving back to profitable platforms.

Linux doesn't have script kiddies ? viruses ? browser spywares ? software doesn't fail or get corrupt while installing ? there is no dependency hell? I didn't expected you to raise this point.

See above comments about shipped DVDs to answer the first paragraph. Viruses are very rare on Linux systems, and the few that do exist can do very little damage due to the way the OS is designed. Browser problems are just that - problems with the browser, so they exist on any version of that browser - Linux, Apple and Windows. If software, for whatever reason, fails to install then the OS seamlessly rolls back to before the installation started. It is, however, very rare for software installation to fail. And dependency hell pretty much disappeared when package management systems came in - they manage the dependencies for you.

[Baniboy]

Well, if you are really, really, REALLY LAZY (like mahesh2k ), you can always type "~". (mahesh i thought you liked linux). Besides, you can create a folder in ROOT, configure it to be owned and read-write -accessed by user. That should solve your problemo. You can change those things, you know, and all you need to do is to "sudo nautilus" once.
The points of both of you contain generally the same content. That is, it depends on the situation. I don't get why you're fighting over the home folder path. People's memory works in a funny way. After some time it wouldn't matter if it's the standard Windows path or the usual Linux path. Just like after some time you don't read every letter in the word, but just determine which word it is by the overall shape of it. This is actually proven by neurologists, so don't dare to disagree.

And yes, you can make local repositories, and unlike in windows, there is a neat way of doing that, too. You can configure which software you want pre-installed as you install the OS itself. I view customized standard live-cd/usb easier than installing the OS and installing the other stuff afterwards. Also, you can use simple deb-packages on a dvd or usb, too. That won't take care of the dependencies tho. You also have to face the fact that most of the applications being installed right now by normal users for non-commercial uses are downloaded from the internet.

As for user-friendliness, no, Linux is not user-friendly. I know what most are going to say but no. There are several problems that make it not so friendly to the people between the average granny and the computer nerd. The average granny isn't going to find out those problems and the nerd will know how to solve them, but the people in between... they're screwed. Like me

Anyway, in my opinion if you don't want to learn to be able to use something better, you don't deserve better. Just like those people whining about how it's impossible to determine what kind of TV they should buy. If you have no interest in studying the products you're going to buy, don't, but don't whine about it to other people. If windows sucks for you and you're still using it knowing there is something better, you deserve the crashes and the viruses. It's give and take.

[mahesh2k]

Quote

Well, files are organised in the same way as any other operating system. So, for example, I have folders such as /home/rob/Photographs and /home/rob/University Work each containing sub folders to organise them further. If I then want to organise the files further (such as separating RAW camera images from JPEGs) I can sort by file type in the file browser. I can also apply other filters and searches.With respect to the "easy to remember" paths on Windows - there is no need for that sort of thing on Linux. I have my home directory on a separate partition. Linux handles that behind the scenes so that the standard path of /home/username always works. I could move the home directory to a completely separate disk and it would still be handled invisibly. There's no need to remember a random drive letter. However, if /home/rob is still a bit hard to remember, you can always create a symlink (shortcut) to it so you can use something like /rob instead.

Point still remains the same. All the eggs in same basket. "root/directory1" and similar organization about files and folder proves that. You don't get multiple drives in it. File organization is pain when you want to get stuff done. People shouldn't waste time to use hard way of doing things when you can do it easily.

Quote

You are never forced to use the command line for anything. In fact, I mainly use it for running whois queries simply because it's quicker than waiting for a website to load When people use the command line they use it because they find it quicker and easier.
No. No. And no. You're not forced to use the command line at any stage. Software dependencies (which exist in Windows too) are handled automatically by the package management software. Offline software installation is possible and quite popular - see the DVDs that distributions ship out containing their distribution and all available software packages for those with limited/no Internet access.

Software installation, network connection and many other admin tasks require sudo privillages in ubuntu and kubuntu. Many other distros restrict users with CLI prompt and force them to use sudo or for manually installing packages.

Quote

See above comments about shipped DVDs to answer the first paragraph. Viruses are very rare on Linux systems, and the few that do exist can do very little damage due to the way the OS is designed. Browser problems are just that - problems with the browser, so they exist on any version of that browser - Linux, Apple and Windows. If software, for whatever reason, fails to install then the OS seamlessly rolls back to before the installation started. It is, however, very rare for software installation to fail. And dependency hell pretty much disappeared when package management systems came in - they manage the dependencies for you.

Windows has only two dependencies that is .NET framework and Directx. You don't need to update them for 1-2 years if your software supports it. This is not the case with linux each update requires new libraries of g++, gcc and other stuff. People are constantly under pain of dependency hell when two different distros clash- for example ubuntu and mandriva linux both are from different branch of linux management.

Which software company has linux based software sold in DVD and boxes ? Plus linux script kiddies on network are rising more as anti-virus companies are seeing profit in this platform.

Quote

Well, if you are really, really, REALLY LAZY (like mahesh2k ), you can always type "~". (mahesh i thought you liked linux).

Well i like linux, OSX, BSD, Windows and every other OS. I'm not hating linux at all. My point is that when it comes to getting things done, linux offers steep learning curve. It is not at all user friendly. That was my point bani.

[rvalkass]

Baniboy, on 04 October 2010 - 01:32 PM, said:

I don't get why you're fighting over the home folder path.

Because this topic is discussing the use and user-friendliness of free operating systems. It seems that some people see the subtle differences in Windows and Linux folder architecture as a major usability issue.

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:05 PM, said:

Point still remains the same. All the eggs in same basket. "root/directory1" and similar organization about files and folder proves that. You don't get multiple drives in it. File organization is pain when you want to get stuff done. People shouldn't waste time to use hard way of doing things when you can do it easily.

Which is why people use Linux Why should it matter to me which physical hard drive or logical partition my data is held on when I am saving my documents? File organisation is identical on Windows and Linux systems - a tree of folders.

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:05 PM, said:

Software installation, network connection and many other admin tasks require sudo privillages in ubuntu and kubuntu. Many other distros restrict users with CLI prompt and force them to use sudo or for manually installing packages.

When you try to install software on Linux, and root privileges are required, the following graphical dialogue appears:

 sudo-box.png   55.93K   4 downloads

You type your password and carry on. Any Linux distribution aimed at the average home user uses a similar system. One which was copied by Microsoft for Windows:

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:05 PM, said:

Windows has only two dependencies that is .NET framework and Directx. You don't need to update them for 1-2 years if your software supports it. This is not the case with linux each update requires new libraries of g++, gcc and other stuff. People are constantly under pain of dependency hell when two different distros clash- for example ubuntu and mandriva linux both are from different branch of linux management.

I think you'll find .NET and DirectX are both updated far more frequently than that as part of Windows Update. Each update on Linux does not require new versions of g++ and gcc. Two distributions would never clash - you can't install two distributions like that. Furthermore that is not the definition of dependency hell.

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:05 PM, said:

Which software company has linux based software sold in DVD and boxes ? Plus linux script kiddies on network are rising more as anti-virus companies are seeing profit in this platform.

https://shipit.ubuntu.com/ among others

[rpgsearcherz]

@rval -- you brought up a very good point about installations on *nix. It's all one-step.

It's annoying to get a program on Windows and then download, go through all the installation dialog, and then have it say "Oh.. You need this too. Please go to (website) and download it and then restart this installer." And then after that you find another, and another. With *nix it's one click and it downloads anything it needs by itself.

That is MUCH more user friendly than Windows.

[mahesh2k]

Quote

Which is why people use Linux Why should it matter to me which physical hard drive or logical partition my data is held on when I am saving my documents? File organisation is identical on Windows and Linux systems - a tree of folders.

One cabinet with multiple folders is what linux offers.
Multiple cabinet with multiple folders is what lwindows offers.
trying to put all the files in one cabinet and sorting stuff in multiple, from here you can guess the organization of files. How user friendly are things in these two os.

Quote

When you try to install software on Linux, and root privileges are required, the following graphical dialogue appears:

This dialogue nags user irrespective of their privileges and it appears everywhere. Some programs in ubuntu require sudo to run, adept/synaptic is just one example.

With windows, you don't see this screen if you are power user or admin. It only comes during network connection and add/remove programs.

Quote

I think you'll find .NET and DirectX are both updated far more frequently than that as part of Windows Update. Each update on Linux does not require new versions of g++ and gcc. Two distributions would never clash - you can't install two distributions like that. Furthermore that is not the definition of dependency hell.

.NET and DirectX doesn't require constant up-gradation like linux packages. You can go without upgrading them for years. I managed to keep .NET and directx updates for 2 years. G++, gcc requires update every time you update your ubuntu or say whatever your distribution is and that cycle is 4-6 month and twice a year.

Two distribution definitely clash when it comes to package management. Try getting .deb working on mandriva or redhat and you will see package management issues. You will be forced to use alien for that.

I know what dependency issue is, you are mixing it with package management clash.

Quote

https://shipit.ubuntu.com/ among others

I'm talking about commercial softwares like adobe flash and not OS. Cannonical is not shipping any commercial software in DVD box. It's not there because there is less or no profit for commercial softwares.

Quote

you brought up a very good point about installations on *nix. It's all one-step.

Why linux/open source softwares have one-step installation ? This is because they are made within community. Try getting commercial software and you will face the same wizard based installation- the one you see in other OS like OSX, windows. Reason is that some software require user input for settings and with commercial license they don't want user to blindly accept what that software offers. In case of free/open source software installation there is no issue with users accepting TOS/settings etc. as whole platform is free from license and spyware/adware or other system specific issues.

Edited by mahesh2k, 05 October 2010 - 04:14 AM.

[rpgsearcherz]

mahesh2k, on 05 October 2010 - 04:13 AM, said:

Why linux/open source softwares have one-step installation ? This is because they are made within community. Try getting commercial software and you will face the same wizard based installation- the one you see in other OS like OSX, windows. Reason is that some software require user input for settings and with commercial license they don't want user to blindly accept what that software offers. In case of free/open source software installation there is no issue with users accepting TOS/settings etc. as whole platform is free from license and spyware/adware or other system specific issues.

This is a good point but it neglects the fact that many programs on Windows require you to download others before they can be run, whereas on *nix if you are missing a dependent program it is automatically installed. That has nothing to do with commercial vs. free. It has to do with usability.

[mahesh2k]

Quote

This is a good point but it neglects the fact that many programs on Windows require you to download others before they can be run, whereas on *nix if you are missing a dependent program it is automatically installed. That has nothing to do with commercial vs. free. It has to do with usability.

It is not usability issue. It is more of license and distribution and platform issue. .NET framework has weird license that restrict many developers from packaging their content with the environment. UNIX/Linux are completely free in that regard when they release software for their own platform. But when it comes to commercial software on even those platforms they expect us to have libraries before installation. That is the reason some commercial codecs/apps even on linux wants us to have things set before installation.

[rvalkass]

mahesh2k, on 05 October 2010 - 04:13 AM, said:

This dialogue nags user irrespective of their privileges and it appears everywhere. Some programs in ubuntu require sudo to run, adept/synaptic is just one example.

With windows, you don't see this screen if you are power user or admin. It only comes during network connection and add/remove programs.

No, you've got that the wrong way round. On Linux the only programs that require root privileges are those which affect major system settings or install new software. The dialogue therefore appears very rarely - installing software is the only place I see it. And that's good. I want some warning that software is being installed - if that dialogue pops up without me trying to do a task requiring root access, I know something is wrong.

On Windows that screen pops up constantly. On my sister's Vista laptop, for example, the pre-installed HP software that started on login required administrator privileges to run (for no good reason). As did the anti-virus software. And the firewall. And loads of other stuff. In fact, so much stuff requires it that my sister now pays no attention to what the dialogue actually says and just types her password regardless. That has made security and usability worse! If you are a power user or administrator then you are running with constant privileges allowing all sorts of changes to your machine, by any software, without your knowledge. Good luck with that.

mahesh2k, on 05 October 2010 - 04:13 AM, said:

.NET and DirectX doesn't require constant up-gradation like linux packages. You can go without upgrading them for years. I managed to keep .NET and directx updates for 2 years. G++, gcc requires update every time you update your ubuntu or say whatever your distribution is and that cycle is 4-6 month and twice a year.

.NET and DirectX have constant updates and bugfixes from Microsoft - look at the history of Windows Update if you want proof.

mahesh2k, on 05 October 2010 - 04:13 AM, said:

Two distribution definitely clash when it comes to package management. Try getting .deb working on mandriva or redhat and you will see package management issues. You will be forced to use alien for that.

I know what dependency issue is, you are mixing it with package management clash.

Confusing DEB and RPM files should never really happen as the package management software does everything automatically. Dependency hell, for the record is: "I need to install package X. To install package X I need package Y. But to install Y I need X..." and getting stuck in an infinite loop. That doesn't happen on modern distributions any more.

I've got to go off to uni now but I'll be back

[mahesh2k]

Quote

No, you've got that the wrong way round. On Linux the only programs that require root privileges are those which affect major system settings or install new software. The dialogue therefore appears very rarely - installing software is the only place I see it. And that's good. I want some warning that software is being installed - if that dialogue pops up without me trying to do a task requiring root access, I know something is wrong.

If it's for software installation then i can understand it perfectly but it also open for some programs even for execution. Which is not at all right.

Quote

On Windows that screen pops up constantly.

Not true. I only get it when there is any need for installation/uninstallation and network tampering(ipconfig and other settings).

Quote

On my sister's Vista laptop, for example, the pre-installed HP software that started on login required administrator privileges to run (for no good reason). As did the anti-virus software. And the firewall. And loads of other stuff. In fact, so much stuff requires it that my sister now pays no attention to what the dialogue actually says and just types her password regardless. That has made security and usability worse!

I own HP laptop 2007 make and i have this issue with it and all the HP software is installed in it with open nag screens and it is not letting users to modify it.This is issue of OEM edition modification,this type of issue even appears with linux that is why some restriction in canonical is not exist in erd hat or mandriva. You can install plain windows and set the power user to settings that prevents un-necessary nags.

Quote

If you are a power user or administrator then you are running with constant privileges allowing all sorts of changes to your machine, by any software, without your knowledge. Good luck with that.

Not true. Power users still have to use password when they enter critical area other wise there is no issue as well.

Quote

.NET and DirectX have constant updates and bugfixes from Microsoft - look at the history of Windows Update if you want proof.

Security updates are frequent and i don't deny this. .NET and directx doesnt affect the OS installation when new is upgraded and they have no issue even if we don't install updates for 1-2 years. You can work with them without having to worry about upgrading them. New softwares work fine unless there is driver issue with the version of .NET and directx.

Quote

Confusing DEB and RPM files should never really happen as the package management software does everything automatically. Dependency hell, for the record is: "I need to install package X. To install package X I need package Y. But to install Y I need X..." and getting stuck in an infinite loop. That doesn't happen on modern distributions any more.

Mandriva still has this issue of dealing with package from debian and so package management software doesn't always take care of it. So with multiple distros this problem is not addressed.

[DrakeSnow]

In my opinion, Linux is far better, but that is my own thought. I vehemently refuse to impose my beliefs on another member of my own species. Only my cat deserves that kind of treatment.

Then again the only thing my cat cares about in terms of computers in the mouse, either that which used to be sitting next to the system before I switched over to using touchpads or the Xfce mouse that appears on the screen... but he can't see that one!

Mouse yummy.

But I digress.

Computer OS is one thing. I don't really care what OS the new computers I buy (every few years or when I break one) come with, I always find ways to go commando on my OS maker (which usually turns out to be Microsoft) and over-boot and over-write the OS to either Linux or some other UNIX derivative.

Personally, I think OS softwares are all just plain fine. I think that MS will head in a more open direction one day. It might take eternity, but infinity does have varying sizes and eventually MS will open source windows. Even if I have to live a million lifetimes to see the day. I'm patient enough to wait.

Change is constant (Peter Drucker and a few others).

Anyone who does not like change, I hope they are our grandparents. After all, they fought and won the two great wars, they brought our parents and now us into existence. Why should we force change on them? Except no one forces change on another. Change happens. It's constant. And it always will happen. Adaptation and resilience are traits which natural selection (and any creator gods out there) would always favor and approve of.

Regardless of whether you believe in evolution, revolution, creationism, or government overthrow, I think change will happen eventually. This world is headed in a direction of global convergence. Let's all set sail for earth united. It's our penultimate destiny.

Well, that's my opinion. Like to hear yours.

Blessed be.

[mahesh2k]

Quote

In my opinion, Linux is far better, but that is my own thought. I vehemently refuse to impose my beliefs on another member of my own species. Only my cat deserves that kind of treatment.

Then again the only thing my cat cares about in terms of computers in the mouse, either that which used to be sitting next to the system before I switched over to using touchpads or the Xfce mouse that appears on the screen... but he can't see that one!

Ha ha! Hats off to your sense of humor. I literally LOLd at this. Especially on that 'Only my cat deserves that kind of treatment' part in your reply.
Welcome to KS Drake. Have nice time.

[Twitch6000]

mahesh2k, on 04 October 2010 - 03:46 AM, said:

Let's face it, linux still force us to use CLI. Linux has huge dependency issue with libraries and multiple distribution makes offline software installation and distribution difficult.

I am not a linux fanboy, but I have used Linux for years along with many oses. If you are using the right Linux distro you will only see the cli when you want to.

Now if you used something crappy like lets say ubuntu, debain or arch then yes you will probably face the cli alot.

When it somes to free operating systems most are pure crap in some form or another.

Linux for instance is horrible for desktop use. Yet great for servers.

FreeBSD is great for servers,but also horrible in the desktop field.

Windows is great desktop use,but horrible server.

Edited by Twitch6000, 08 January 2011 - 06:45 PM.

[PhoenixGFX]

Open Source Operating systems will never die but won't be any use for an average user. With the giants like Microsoft and Apple, it is hard and will continue to hinder the development and popularity of Open Source Operating Systems.

Now, when you speak about Open Source Software, that is a whole new ball game. I use Joomla which is the best CMS there is. There are alot of other programs that people use that can do almost the same work as the Paid Software out there. One example is Firefox which is the best darn Browser I've ever come across.

On that note, it comes down to the user and his preference...

Open Source Operating NO, Open Source Software YES.

[Iniyila]

Open source software and free software are two different things, sometimes you get an open source software but not for free, some other time you get a free software but not open source so we should not mistake these two approaches. Red Hat is an open source software but it is not free, and its aim is not to be used on desktop pcs however you can use it on a desktop, so here we have an opensource but not free software, but as it is open source so you can get the source code. there are many other free software which are not open source an example for it can be the Yahoo Messenger.

Now for operating system just consider the free web host you are using it right now, if you see in cpanel server is based on linux operating system, i can say many servers in the world are based on open source operating system so saying no to an open source operating sytem because microsoft is existing is not a nice thing to do. i don't talk about mac because who is using that ? really if i have to go for not opensource i will go for windows, who installs mac on a PC or notebook that apple doesn't produced it ? and how do you want install when most of the times they only sell the update.

So here is what i think : if i'm going to my university they i need some software to use, one of them is Matlab and another is AutoCad , i have to use them and i have to give my projects in their specific formats. Autodesk is not producing AutoCad for linux but Matlab has a linux version, if i want to use linux i can do two things: 1.i have to buy those two (Matlab & AutoCad) and i run them in linux through Wine with so much decreased performance and many other problems 2.i can use alternative softwares like Octave as an alternative for Matlab and QCad as an alternative for AutoCad, i should say that none of these alternative have the abilities of the main software (not half of it even).

Which one of those two ways i've mentioned i choose, i will face real problems, so i prefer to spend a little much and get a windows seven (or any other version) to enjoy my life without suffering of inadequate abilities or performance of using alternatives or windows softwares in linux. i have shown you sometimes even with you being interested in open source you can not insist on using it because when it comes to open source many people start to thinking about it being free, this type of thinking will make developers a little not interested in producing a software because the developers are human too and they need to make money for their daily life so they have to do open source things (those that are free) beside their daily work and life and this is the difference between commercial software developers and free open source software developers.

In the end i admit using free operating systems like ubuntu or many other distributions is really enjoyable but sometimes you really cant use then and you have to accept that, but if everything goes into cloud computing then i think windows will not have any advantage over linux and then you will see how linux users grow. now i'm having both windows and linux in my PC and as linux is more secure for surfing web i always use it but for doing my university projects i have to use windows.

[joycerimes]

I use windows because of its easy interface. a newbie can easily adapt to the environment that windows has.

[soniat]

it is easy to use ans also its very popular..........

but i use linux