In what way is Linux superior to Vista?

Hello Arup,
People complained about vista because of compatibility issues due to quite alot of new under the hood changes which were definatly needed. such as moving most of graphics drivers to user mode so if the driver crashes it can recover.
If Microsoft had created a brand new file system for windows 7 there would be compatibility issues again and windows 7 wouldn't hit enterprises for the same reason vista hasn't.

maybe windows 8 will add a new file system and maybe finally get rid of the registry.

so far I haven't found a Linux distro I would want to use everyday.

 

Don't even try........Linux Kernel inferior to Windows, LOLOLOL! no media player in Linux with DSP........man I think I have heard enough. Compiz runs fine even with basic Intel G series built in video chip, try enabling Aero with that and see the system go into a tizz.

http://widefox.pbworks.com/Kernel Comparison Linux vs Windows

Read about Linux and Windows kernel.

Its no use trying to understand this kind of thinking, I just rather let it be.

 

Too bad........I and many others have found not one but quite a few which would suit me for my daily work which includes programming, audio editing, video editing and even day to day stuff like video confrencing etc. Of course I don't do games. OTOH, not one Windows apart from XPx64 have come close to endearing me and even XPx64 has paled in front of newer Linux distro releases.

You need to get out of the Windows mindset to find Linux. Ironically people do that when they get Mac.

 

HeyArup,
the main problem is that I haven't found a desktop environment i like.
Gnome and kde are ok but I dont like them that much tbh
XFCE looks majorly dated and to simple.
if you use a unix type operating system (that isnt OSX) your pretty much stuck with the above desktop environments and I don't really like them.

I like package managers,I like the stable reliable fast kernel. I like that linux is free etc but if i cant find a desktop environment I like enough I wont use it everyday.

 

Hi Lodore

KDE is going more toward OSX look, for me its a moot point, I stick to Gnome as its functional for me and I am used to the top and bottom bars, I keep the bottom bars set to auto hide. I don't need any eye candy and keep compiz turned to default which works out fine for me.

 

I can see you know nothing about kernel architecture and design. Yes, they are both monolithic kernels in a strict academic sense, but to say the NT kernel is more "modular" is silly. Even if what you said was true, the Linux kernel is still superior for one important reason: anyone can view the code and modify it. And the Linux kernel has more developers.

Aside from the drivers being closed-source, I think the Nvidia drivers are quite good on Linux. It's ATI that has crappy Linux drivers.

As for Aero, Google DWM and you will see all kinds of complaints about how much RAM and cpu time it uses on Vista. And it's features are nowhere near that of compiz-fusion.

Your last sentence above is contradictory. You say "Linux gets slow over time like any OS" and then say "the package manager alleviates this problem." How can you have it both ways?

And the number of programs installed won't have much to do with it. The reason Windows is so slow after about 6 months of use is because of that completely fatuous invention known as "the registry." Linux has no registry and also has a default filesystem that is much less prone to fragmentation issues. This is not to mention that the average Windows machine is chock full of malware/crapware and viruses which also contribute to its slowing down over time. I read a while back that the average time to infection once a newly installed XP machine is first connected to the Internet is 16 seconds. And if you think AV software protects you, think again. Even the AV software companies admit that AV software is at BEST only 75% accurate, while many other experts have said it may be only 20% accurate in detection.

And as for development, Linux has free compilers and IDE's that are of the same quality of those that would cost money on Windows.

 

Yes, that's true - it happened to me once for an older Ubuntu version. On the other hand, if you have a separate /home partition you can always do a fresh install of the new version and easily mount the existing home partition. That's absolutely hassle-free with the exception that you have to newly install some apps not included on the CD to have everything as before.

 

I was once a Linux fan - I had read a book on Richard Stallman's influential work with the (or rather starting the) free software movement, and I began using Ubuntu. The main reason I used it was because of the fundamental freedoms offered by GNU/Linux: the freedom to run the software and use it for any purpose, and the freedom to view/modify and redistribute its source code. However, I simply switched back to Windows after years of using Ubuntu because of small annoyances I had - like having no media player with DSP support. You have to understand that in the end, users simply don't care about the freedoms; most users aren't geeks and hackers (in the traditional sense of course).

I find it surprising that you would launch a personal attack upon me simply because I disagree with the design of Linux. What I meant by NT being modular was that it is clearly separated into components (object manager, process manager, security, transaction manager, etc.) and has a very clear design. I disagree that Linux is superior in design (which was what I was talking about) because you have source code available; that does not impact upon the design of the kernel. I also do not see why the fact that Linux has more developers is important to my points.

True, although I hate wobbly windows .

alleviate: "to make easier to endure; lessen; mitigate"

If programs don't write to the registry, then what does? It doesn't simply inflate out of nowhere, and Windows doesn't simply keep on adding data to it until your hard drive blows up.

That's because there are basically no viruses and malware for GNU/Linux .

Um, who uses anti-virus software anymore? They slow down your computer (especially disk access). Go with HIPS software.

You're assuming that I'm either anti-GNU/Linux or anti-Windows. That's simply not true - GNU/Linux is good for some things, Windows is good for others. Windows is not simply a piece of crap designed by "Micro$oft" Corporation. The guys who originally designed Windows NT (like Dave Cutler) were geniuses.

 

Are you suggesting that my argument is completely devoid of any sense? It also looks like there is a media player on GNU/Linux with DSP support (according to your statements), but I can't find it. Could you help me with this?

I've read that and it's very interesting. Why wouldn't you even attempt to understand it? How can you argue your position without understanding these things?

 

VLC supports DSP, all you select is /dev/dsp if your card supports it.

Due to your blanket statement about Torvalds and Unix in general, every system today runs on Unix variant and not Windows, do some studies before making such sweeping remark. Also take a look at what Hollywood today uses to make its movies.

http://www.linuxmovies.org/

About HIPS protecting Windows, thats a misnomer, for an average user HIPS sucks and is downright foolish, for years I ran Windows with various HIPS, as long as I was using it, it was OK, give it to a 3rd person, he or she won't have the foggiest on what to do with the various prompts. AV is still an essential part of Windows, its even recommended by MS.

As for registry in Linux please read this.

http://www.freeos.com/articles/3102/

By the statement about understanding, I meant that when your mind is already decided on Windows, its just futile to even talk about Unix even though its far ahead of Windows in technical terms. Its just like arguing on religion.

 

No you're not. That's what you wanted to do, and that's why you're here...

 

I agree. And using terms like "Linux groupie pool" proves that the intent was to flame.

 

Classic definition of TROLL.

 

I think we are driving ourselves away from the original post. We should get back to the topic of conversation.

 

I was referring to something like Winamp's DSP studio - you can write your own sound processing routines.

What does that have to do with anything? The fact that Hollywood uses GNU/Linux for film processing doesn't have any relation to my argument - that the NT kernel is better than the Linux kernel. It seems like you are using blanket statements.

For the average user GNU/Linux is not good enough. It's simply too hard for the average user to find Windows-like software

I wasn't talking about the registry in GNU/Linux because there is no registry (except for maybe GConf).

I haven't "decided on Windows". I have already said that GNU/Linux is not superior to Windows in all areas as you have previously suggested.

 

NT is better? Really? Is that why UNIX/Linux has the dominant market share on mission critical servers? Is that why Linux runs on 389 of the world's top 500 supercomputers? (Windows only runs on 2 of the top 500). I guess you know more about OS kernels than those pesky PhD's that oversee these machines?

Really? Most Linux distros already come with software for just about every application, and if one needs more, one can merely open up the package manager and search. It's very simple actually.

LOL. Gconf is not a registry. It is a text file. Linux doesn't have a registry, period.

I cannot help but think you are being sarcastic with this whole thread. You must be. Please tell me it is so.

 

See now you are being a classic Windows troll, you make assumptions without substance even when you have been offered substantial documents and proof on the various technical aspects but you keep chanting NT is superior mantra over and over again. The Hollywood reference was to bring into perspective the widespread acceptance by the leading multimedia industry on earth. The fact that they embraced Linux goes to show the potential and versatility of Linux alone. Did you read the kernel comparisons link that I posted or you just sidestepped it and are being argumentative just for the heck of it. Or is that site beyond your realm of understanding?

As for your DSP plugin, well unlike Windows world, you get all in LINUX world, from the compiler and source code, so if you have basic knowledge of compiling, go ahead and make one for yourself if its all that important for you or better, ask anyone in Linux forum, most of them would be glad to make one for you.

There is plenty of software to use in Linux and in fact all the distros come loaded with them unlike in Windows. Windows like is the biggest nonsense around when what you are looking for is an alternative that will do what the so called Windows software does. Btw, Avidemux, Handbrake et al are all Linux software ported to Windows and they are among the favorites of the encoding crowd. But if at all you need to use Windows software on Linux, today's WINE allows you to do just that and with ease. Can I run Linux software on WINDOWS...........NOOOOOOOO, only now did the folks at Redmond see any sense to add support for Open office document format when in Linux we have had no such issues and have been able to run majority of Win stuff with ease.

Why is the dumb registry stuck on your windows head, even by admissions of Windows programmers they grudingly admit the inferiority of the Registry system vis a vis Mac and Lin. gconf is a text file somewhat like .INI in older Win which is what they should have stuck to.

GNU is free, its not complex, distros like Ubuntu, SuSE, PCLOS, Mint etc. make it easier to install and run even for a novice user. As I said in the beginning, your mind is made up and like religion, its totally closed quarters.

You haven't decided on Windows, you are hardwired to it. Just face the fact and why do you bother coming down the Linux thread just to defend your precious NT OS? I see some big sense of insecurity here. Go start a I hate GNU/LINUX threaed in WIN forums.

 

Your accusation that I am a "classic Windows troll" is completely ridiculous. All you have been doing is grouping me with the group of Windows supporters and using personal attacks against me. I do not wish to do the same to you, and instead I want to have a conversation about operating systems in a neutral and friendly way.

There is no best operating system. GNU/Linux will not dominate because of Microsoft's anti-competitive behaviours. However, just because Microsoft is doing that does not mean that any and all products produced by them are crap. I am not saying that Windows is the best operating system. I do not believe Windows as a whole is better than GNU/Linux, and in fact the Windows userland sucks infinitely more than GNU (I hope you appreciate the difference between GNU and Linux). I do however believe that the NT kernel is superior to Linux.

I have read that article several times before you mentioned it to me, and you are simply making assumptions. The main problem I have with Linux is its lack of ACLs in kernel space and security auditing (which is what I care about). There's also a bit of work needed in interrupt handling and I/O. You can read about these in the article you mentioned. Aside from that, Linux is pretty good (but still needs a bit of work to catch up to NT) - it has a wider range of supported processors.

Do not think of me as an idiot; I have years of experience with C, x86 assembly, C#, and various other languages. However, I do not have any experience in sound processing (and I doubt you would either) like most people.

I completely agree with this. GNU/Linux does have some great encoding software (my favorite is mencoder). However, you are just going to skip over what I just said because you believe I am a Windows fan, which I am not.

(Ignoring the personal attack...) gconf is not "a text file somewhat like .INI". It is based on a hierarchy of XML files. Obviously structured XML is better than just plain old INI, so no, Windows should not have stuck to INI files. The registry is not fundamentally bad, but Microsoft has seriously screwed it up with its CLSID references (in HKCR) and other PITA things.

I could say the same of you (your mind is made up on GNU/Linux). I do not hate GNU/Linux and I often use it for many tasks unaccomplishable in Windows. The problem is that novice users don't care about the advantages you have cited. They don't care about large-scale Hollywood-sized media processing and they don't care about hacking the kernel. They want to stick to Windows, the OS everyone knows about and the OS which is forced on them by OEMs (or rather Microsoft). I believe it is going to be a very long time before GNU/Linux is adopted by end users, but it's going to happen.

What Microsoft needs to do is to rethink the Windows OS (userland); get rid of the current userspace, CLSID hell, etc. and use the NT kernel to build something better.

Again, you are just assuming that I must be either a Linux fan or a Windows fan (and Linux hater). That is completely wrong.

 

Check my signature, unlike you, I am not stuck in a groove. You are now changing colors, first you declared the Linux kernel to be inferior to NT, no programmer would ever say that. Also if you are a programmer, brining in DSP fetch calls is a non issue in Linux, I have seen first year Comp Sc. students bring about DSP plugins for Linux using Faust, Q and Super Collider. So since you claim you have an IT background, it should be cakewalk for you using inferior GNU compilers.


You still haven't either read or comprehended the kernel comparison link or else like a broken groove, we won't be having this conversation.

 

You are making completely unfounded assumptions. I am not changing colors, I'm simply getting you recognize that people do not have to be either Linux fans or Windows fans, which is what you think. You are not backing up your statements about the kernels with any evidence. You are simply telling me to read the article, which I have done many times more than you have. You are ignoring the valid arguments I have presented and focused on minor issues (like my problem with DSP plugins). A simple Google search leads to a paper about Faust, Q and Super Collider which is clearly what you used to make yourself authoritative. My question is this: if it's so simple, why hasn't anyone done it yet? I find it surprising that not one GNU/Linux user would want a media player with sound processing support, yet Winamp has many hundreds of them. I'm aware that XMMS has DSP support, but it simply doesn't have the media management capabilities of Banshee and Quod Libet.

Do you think Mark Russinovich is a programmer? He is one of the many programmers who think the NT kernel is superior to Linux (Google it).

 

If you have read the article, then I have backed up my take on the Kernel, I am not responsible for your comprehension quotient. Thats your onus.

I work with Super Collider and google is a tool for your likes who need to learn about programming languages for DSP plugins, before I mentioned it, you were lamenting the fact that there is no DSP plugin for Linux. Do check the VST website and you will find not one but multiple of VST DSP plugins in use by industry professionals. You are just too blind with your blind bias to see any of that.

Mark Russinovich is a MS developer, he is a paid goon of MS so obviously he needs to pitch his boss's crud, wouldn't you if you were an MS employee, what credibility is there in that.

So far every effort has been made by myself and others to explain the inherent benefits of Linux kernel versus Win but now we know where the your opinion is coming from, its not yours, its the trash from Mark Russinovich.

For the last time, read this if you can and form your own opinion http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Comparison_of_Windows_and_Linux

 

Ugh, I'm tried of arguing with a person who believes all Microsoft employees to be supremely evil. I implore you to spend a few hours reading over MSDN blogs, etc. - Microsoft employees are just as friendly and knowledgeable as your average Linux hacker. They are not simply there to promote Microsoft's products. You seem to have the impression that all products by Microsoft are pieces of crap, but that's not true. Sure, they have a lot of crappy products like IE, MSN/Windows Live, WMP, etc. but you must recognize that some really smart people (no, not Bill Gates) designed NT back in the 90s.

 

Therein lies your fallacy, Linux is free and not paid, so the credibility factor of someone talking about it is totally different from a paid employee of MS. Btw, do some reading about NT http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/OS/2, its based on total rip off of IBM's OS/2, NT is nothing new. Yes people like Mark Russinovich are not promoting their boss' OS when they make asinine statements like Win Kernel being superior to Unix when 80% of world's Supercomputers use Unix He is peddling it, clear and simple.

As for MS programs, I like and have used Visual Studio, its one of MS's high points just like their Windows 2003 OS and XPx64, however, I get the same VS features for free on my inferior Linux distro so I save the money and get myself the hardware which you see in my signature.

 

And believe me M$ backed up a truckload of money to get Mark Russinovich & his partner to work for them. M$ even made Mark one of 12 in the world titled Fellows of M$ or some such made up title. And of the 10 of thousands of employees he was only the 12th to be so honored. Plus that truckload of money. You should have read some of the articles Mark penned before he was an M$ employee. Quite in a different vein, I assure you.

 

Yep, classic example of a techie whore and there is plenty of them around, They will change their stance in a second provided they are funded adequately. This kind of phenomenon is rampant in academic circles. Every food producing lobby have their pet academics to pump up with funded studies of dubious nature. Same goes for IT.