Coffeehouse Thread

63 posts

OS Fanatics

Back to Forum: Coffeehouse
  • User profile image
    rjdohnert

    Read it here

  • User profile image
    Tyler Brown

    Thats a really good post. I agree with everything he's stated. I haven't meddled with any other operating systems much, but I have experienced first hand the zealotry that can come from the alternate operating system fan base. Then again, haven't we all Wink

  • User profile image
    Maurits

    Personally I'd like a car with

    • tires
    • a steering wheel
    • a hood I can open
  • User profile image
    manickernel

    Well as long as we are using the car analogy. In the 70's Japan went from a joke to a major market player in an industry dominated by American automakers in 7 years. Why? They made a good product that fit demand and was very reasonably priced. Today other auto makers such as KIA do the same.

    What I don't get is this. Linux is free. We keep hearing that ad-nausem. And it is so superior and does everything and much more than Windows. If this was true then in a market economy one would think it would have wiped out Microsoft. Hell, they have had almost 10 years already.
     
    Of course then the fanatics counter that everyone is being hookwinked, and retire in the righteous knowledge that they are so much smarter than everyone else.... but also sure that they will one day be seen as liberators of the ignorant masses.

    Yep. It is right around the corner.

    http://www.fool.com/News/mft/2005/mft05042930.htm

    Edit: Hey, you can open the hood on a FIAT

    Oh, and another thing. Opening the hood on today's vehicles does little good unless you have a lot of expertise and expensive diagnostic equipment. I would argue this is easier to come by with MS. (speaking as a sysadmin)

    As a developer, let's see you go in a redesign and modify the crankshaft and fuel injection on the fly, and keep it it top tune...

    Actually I did have an Opel once that I bored .30 over to make pistons from a Pinto fit since I couldn't get OEM.

  • User profile image
    Maurits

    manickernel wrote:
    in a market economy one would think it would have wiped out Microsoft


    In the web server market, Linux/UNIX is doing a pretty good job of wiping out Microsoft.

    http://news.netcraft.com/archives/web_server_survey.html

    The image “<a href=http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/04/overallc.gif” cannot be displayed, because it contains errors." src="http://news.netcraft.com/archives/2005/04/overallc.gif">

    (I have my own private speculations about the reasons behind IIS's drop in popularity between early 2002 and the present.)

    The workstation market is another matter.

  • User profile image
    Bogusrabin

    If you say "Linux is better than Windows" - you are called "a zealot".
    If you say "Windows is better than Linux" - you are called "an evangelist".

    If you write programs on Linux - you are called "a hobbyist".
    If you write programs on Windows - you are called "a developer".

  • User profile image
    Maurits

    What if I hooked up the NetCraft survey to the Alexa rating and came out with a breakdown of web server popularity by total percentage of hits?

  • User profile image
    manickernel

    Beer, we have seen this and it is bogus. Over 50% of Foetune 500 companies run IIS. And in business primarily Netscape, IIS, and IBM webservers are used. Having zillions of instances of Linux on geocities is of little consequence.

    EDIT: The primary market penetration for Linux today is against installed UNIX systems. It runs on i386 (cheaper platform) and in my view the OS has developed further and faster than SCO, Solaris and AIX. (No knowledge of HP-UX). That's why IBM and Sun and HP are all offering Linux as part of thier strategy. This is a market MS had very little success of capturing, but that will change in the near future and I think Linux will be on the defensive there as well.

  • User profile image
    Rossj

    Bogusrabin wrote:
    If you say "Linux is better than Windows" - you are called "a zealot".
    If you say "Windows is better than Linux" - you are called "an evangelist".


    Yup. Too true. There is zealousy on ALL sides. If you think only users of alternative OSs are zealots then you are sorely mistaken.

  • User profile image
    Manip

    Beer28 wrote:
    that you can do on linux that you can't on win, from changing and making your own window manager UI with XML,


    But can Linux change the UI with an INI file? No?

    Last time I checked Windows XP is completely skinnable...
    and the format the changes are stored in is immaterial.

    Beer28 wrote:
    to loading and unloading devices and drivers dynamically with a simple command,

     
    You don't need a command on Windows... The sub-systems
    handles that.



    There are lots of Linux nuts who spend their days spouting what can only be described as right out lies about the Windows OS and the platform that goes alone with it.

    Just yesterday I linked to ">http://www.microsoft.com/downloads/details.aspx?FamilyId=8B081F3A-B7D0-4B16-B8AF-5A6322F4FD01&displaylang=en&hurl=822302674291609C18B64FFECECD9180"> this in a #Linux channel (on topic at the time) and they decided to call Outlook * , the file format it uses easily corruptible, insult NTFS and basically spout out a loud of stuff that wasn't even true in Windows 95 let alone any of the NT based systems.

    It saddens me that these kinds of people are so closed minded they won't even try a system they call so poor. I think frankly this is partly why Linux is failing on the Desktop, it is too out of touch with the current users.

    I currently have running here, one Mac OS X 10.3.9, one RedHat Linux Server and at least five Windows machine (XP Home*2 / Pro / Win98 SE / Win2k) so you would have trouble grouping me.

    I don't think any of the systems listed above are perfect or that they are "the best they could be", they all have advantages over one another; which is why I run them all... If they all did everything then I would only be running a single OS on all the computers.


    Mac OS X 
       Advantages
    Easy to use (for new users)
    Easy to configure
    Works "out the box"
    Fashionable
    Secure infrastructure
    Consistency (but not always between OS versions)

       Disadvantages
    Not very configurable
    Not Developer friendly
    Not very fast

    Windows XP
       Advantages
    Very functional (Feature rich)
    Configurable
    Fast
    Works "out the box" 
    Highly Consistent
    Very Developer Friendly

       Disadvantages
    Configuration can be difficult (Registry hunt)
    Inherent security problems (admin by default etc)
    Expensive

    Linux + GNome / KDE
       Advantages
    100% Configurable (everything can be changed)
    Very feature rich 

       Disadvantages
    Not usable "Out the box"
    Very hard to use
    Very slow (ie KDE / Gnome)
    Inconsistent user experience
    No Technical Support

  • User profile image
    Tom Servo

    I've came to the conclusion long time ago that isn't worth spending a thought on anything remotely related to OS fanatics/wars. It's just like debating religion.

  • User profile image
    Cairo

    Rossj wrote:


    Yup. Too true. There is zealousy on ALL sides. If you think only users of alternative OSs are zealots then you are sorely mistaken.


    Ha! Good word! Zealotry + Jealousy is pretty accurate.

  • User profile image
    Sven Groot

    Can't we all just get along?

  • User profile image
    Manip

    No.

  • User profile image
    Cider

    *claps*

    Totally agree with the blog posting.  The OS zealot thing only ever bothers me when the poor, innocent end user are caught in the crossfire.  Then, its simply unfair to them.  And I'd go as far as including other software in that zealotry thing.

    But as ever, class reply from Beer:  "call yourself a zealot?!  Pah!  I'll show you zealotry!"

  • User profile image
    W3bbo

    Bogusrabin wrote:
    If you say "Linux is better than Windows" - you are called "a zealot".
    If you say "Windows is better than Linux" - you are called "an evangelist".

    If you write programs on Linux - you are called "a hobbyist".
    If you write programs on Windows - you are called "a developer".


    And if you say "Macintosh is better than Winux" you are called a "stoner"

    After all... how else did Apple come up with those multicoloured designs and weird screensavers? Wink

  • User profile image
    Heywood_J

    rjdohnert wrote:
    Read it here
    A few random thoughts.

    Have you ever heard of paragraphs?  Jeez what a mess.  You  raise some very good points, but, you'd have a little more credibility if your writing didn't look like it was scrawled on the wall by a serial killer.

    "Would you buy a car with the hood welded shut?" to which he responded " Would you buy a car with no tires and no steering wheel?" -- Exactly.  Linux is a car that comes with a detailed blueprint of the engine and every other component, but you can't actually drive it anywhere.  As far as I'm concerned, the hood of my car might as well be welded shut -- there's nothing under there I want to mess with.  This is just one of many points that the Linux Zealots simply cannot comprehend.

    "name one thing Linux could do that Windows XP and their new Server could not." -- This is the key to the whole argument, as far as I'm concerned.  It's not about operating systems -- it's about applications.

    Windows by itself, does very little.  You need applications to get real work done, and that's where Linux falls short.  But we can debate this all day and the Linux Zealots will insist that there are Linux applications available that are every bit as good as Windows.  Rather than a pointless religious debate, I prefer to look at the facts:

    Linux, Open Office and GIMP are available at no cost ... just go download them and they're yours for the taking.  And yet every day, millions of people all over the world use pirated versions  of Windows, Office and Photoshop instead.


  • User profile image
    ZippyV

    Heywood_J wrote:
    - Linux is a car that comes with a detailed blueprint of the engine and every other component, but you can't actually drive it anywhere.

    - Windows by itself, does very little.  You need applications to get real work done, and that's where Linux falls short.

    - It's not because you have the source of Linux that you get a blueprint of it. Microsoft has a whole reference of their api on msdn, something I've never seen on any Linux website. It's like open source is an excuse to not document it.

    - Those applications are dependent on Windows because they use the libraries that Windows provides. That's what makes Windows (or Office) a good developer platform.

Comments closed

Comments have been closed since this content was published more than 30 days ago, but if you'd like to continue the conversation, please create a new thread in our Forums, or Contact Us and let us know.