Linux Features I Drool Over

JasonOlson wrote:

What are some of your favorite features in the Linux world that you wish you had in Windows? (and I don't want to see any of these "no BSODs" comments, keep it constructive (remember, the right tool for the right job)).

An open kernel source would be nice

But seriously:

• Replacable windowing system and a choice of desktop environments for different classes of users. With Windows it's a "one-size-fits all" solution, not the best due to Windows' nowfound complexity, IMO.
• A true community feel to it, Microsoft is just cold and concrete (well, before C9 )
• A lovable mascot! (no, Rover doesn't come close)
  
• An OOB shell devoid of adverts, and advert-free bundled programs (MSN Messenger, Active Desktop, OEM-branding, anyone?)
• SUDO!
• Stuff
  

JasonOlson wrote:

4) apt-get FTW. The ability to script a series of apt-gets to install libraries and frameworks is just incredibly powerful. While not Linux-specific, an extension to this concept: ruby gems. And Maven in the Java world has incorporated a similar feeling technology. Why in the year 2006, do I still have to go to seperate sites all over the internet to install a suite of products?

yes apt-get indeed...

Oh and the amount of themes available for GTK+ Windows NEVER EVER EVER got this one right, and they only made it worse in Vista. Glass, Basic, and Classic. WTF! Not even Luna (Way to go for backward usability). And you can get theme managers, and shells, and etc, however in order to make your own theme you almost have to hack up an original theme (I've never tried). Linux just provides the framework and lets everyone go for it.

Hell they're even mimicing Windows.

JasonOlson wrote:

3) The grandaddy. The composability of command line utilities in Linux. This is something that I feel Windows _never_ got right. I've seen some pretty incredible Linux administrators that can do all sorts of crazy and complicated stuff by simply piping several commands into each other. True building blocks, I say. On the other hand, PowerShell comes a LONG way of giving us something this powerful on the Windows platform (finally). However, PowerShell isn't really out yet as it's still CTPs and such (I believe? I haven't looked into it for a while).

I always like to link to this article by Joel Spolsky about cultural differences between Unix and Windows. Me, I don't want \the ability to do complex command-line operations. I want a good API, accessible from script or .NET, to be able to do those operations through CODE. PowerShell, from the very little I know, actually gives us both.

Remember, there's nothing inherently better about arcane and intricate chained command-line scripts. They're a MEANS, not an END. The end is being able to quickly and easily write complex batch scripts, and if the environment allows me to do that in VBScript or C# or Boo, that's even cooler - because then I don't have to learn a whole new world for scripting that's seperate from my coding knowledge.

JasonOlson wrote:

1) Being a developer that's getting interested in things like File System development, I love what I've seen so far with FUSE. Especially since there has been a FUSE wrapper written for Mono. Yes, that means you can actually write your own file systems in C# on Linux and mount them like any other file system. I HAVE to try that out .

Here's an example that will let you browse the Mono class library (or at least show you how hard it is to write a file system - hint: It isn't. 

JasonOlson wrote:

3) The grandaddy. The composability of command line utilities in Linux. This is something that I feel Windows _never_ got right. I've seen some pretty incredible Linux administrators that can do all sorts of crazy and complicated stuff by simply piping several commands into each other. True building blocks, I say. On the other hand, PowerShell comes a LONG way of giving us something this powerful on the Windows platform (finally). However, PowerShell isn't really out yet as it's still CTPs and such (I believe? I haven't looked into it for a while).

I don't think you can underestimate this, and the whole Unix Philosophy really is encapsulated with this. I don't think there is much more impressive than seeing a unix fiend write three or four lines of 'script' (from memory) with half a dozen pipes to mark all incoming email as read, copy into a single file, delimit with HTML and remove any emails from a blacklist of email addresses before generating a PS file for printing.

But don't give Linux all of the glory *all* of the UN*X can do this, including OSX.

I don't believe Powershell gives you the same functionality because 'one thing well' seems to be (pardon any offense) beyond the ken of most 'softies, and there is not a collection of simple tools - installed by default - all doing one thing well - I suspect Powershell will result in 101 different implementations of the same bit of script all working slightly differently. 

Unix wrote:

Write programs that do one thing and do it well. Write programs to work together. Write programs to handle text streams, because that is a universal interface.

All hail sed ...

W3bbo wrote:



 

• A lovable mascot! (no, Rover doesn't come close)
  

 

there is always the character someone made up in japan
XP-tan

No. Just please. No. Stop this.

W3bbo wrote:


An open kernel source would be nice

Really? I mean, I've seen the 2003 kernel and aside from curiosity value, I've not noticed much benefit from it.

The things l would like:

• The ability to strip the OS down to what l need, I don't want to reboot an IIS box because of a flaw in OE. I know Longhorn Core is going in that direction but I want more.
• Bit more command line power. Even just including more of the resource kit tools by default would be nice - why would l want to use CACLS when XCACLS is so much better?
• Something like the PAM system for authentication, it's kinda cool the way you can swap out a module and have machines transparently swap from NIS to LDAP or Kerberos or whatever.

Why not download "Cygwin" and insall on your Win32 PC.
It will give you much of the power of the Linux Terminal.

Not really a feature, but an application: Squid. Very nice and fast proxy server and with squid Guard you can easily control who can do what, where and when . 

Recently set up a proxy server in the office where I work, and used a very minimal installation of ubuntu server with Squid on an old P3 system with 128Mb and it runs great.

ewschone wrote:

Not really a feature, but an application: Squid. Very nice and fast proxy server and with squid Guard you can easily control who can do what, where and when .

Windows has ISA, but with a hefty price tag.

ewschone wrote:

Recently set up a proxy server in the office where I work, and used a very minimal installation of ubuntu server with Squid on an old P3 system with 128Mb and it runs great.

Okay, that's another of ISA's failings, steeper requirements, but I'm pretty sure it'll run on a P3/128 with about 100 users fine.

W3bbo wrote:



ewschone wrote: Not really a feature, but an application: Squid. Very nice and fast proxy server and with squid Guard you can easily control who can do what, where and when .

Windows has ISA, but with a hefty price tag.

ewschone wrote: Recently set up a proxy server in the office where I work, and used a very minimal installation of ubuntu server with Squid on an old P3 system with 128Mb and it runs great.

Okay, that's another of ISA's failings, steeper requirements, but I'm pretty sure it'll run on a P3/128 with about 100 users fine.

TBH i never checked out ISA server, probably because of the pricetag . There is another thing I like about linux, is that it's very nice to just edit a few text files to edit a configuration and restart the app and you're done. No need to get familiar with a GUI, wade through a dozen tabs with all sorts of checkboxes etc..  And if you want to have a GUI there is usually one available (for example webmin does a nice job) for most major server apps.

JasonOlson wrote:

Still, to be fair, Cygwin is a GREAT product (at least, in my opinion). I just find it jarring to the whole experience since it's not an "integrated" tool.

Cygwin is really great, but it only tends to be that way as long as you stay within cygwin, i.e. all the tools you use are meant for cygwin. Recently I used cygwin to work with some shell script meant for the Globus Toolkit 4 Java WS Core, which means that besides a bunch of typical GNU tools that were part of cygwin, but also "external" tools such as the Java SDK and Apache Ant. Trust me, when half of your tools wants unix style /cygdrive/c paths and the other half wants DOS-style C:\ paths, good luck setting your JAVA_HOME environment variable so that everyone is pleased. I did manage to get it setup correctly, but it was strictly a case of "I'd better not close this cygwin window and hibernate instead of shutdown until I'm done with this project, because I'm not sure I can do it again."

And yes, I realize it would have been much easier to actually use Linux, but unfortunately my soundcard (Sound Blaster X-Fi) is not supported in Linux and I am rather fond of music while I work.

Powershell offers some really nice possibilities though. I've played a little with the Exchange 2007 beta in virtual machine which includes PowerShell and a whole bunch of Exchange-specific commandlets, and I just love being able to e.g. create a mailbox from the command line like that. Scripting Exchange 2007 is going to be soooo much better than it was with the windows scripting host and ADSI in Exchange 2003 and older.

Good call.

I haven't used unix since my university days, and was never an enormous fan, but here goes....

NB All my suggestions come with the caveat that: Yes, as Windows has a gibillion software developers writing apps for it I'm sure i can configure or install something to resolve this personal niggle but out off the shrinkwrap I prefered the following in unix.

1. Not having to use the C:\My\isnt\this\path\getting\so\long\that\its\making\the\prompt\useless command line prompt.

2. Command line prompts\windows in small, readable, useable font type & size.

3. Intellisense style auto defaulting/prompting command line prompt

.... erm that's about it. Never was a big fan. Was always a more practical type person. Couple of people hooked up the students' union squash court booking system & central library search+booking system to our unix computers. Was a much bigger fan of stuff like that than an OS per se.

Things I hated about using unix.

1. Having to use the f-ing command line prompt for absolutely every f-ing thing I needed to f-ing do... u f-ers. Surely there's an easier way to write/debug code and send email before I die from excessive keyboard typing, I thought at the time.