LINUX SUCKS!

SRTMCSE

strauchr wrote:

BubbaJ wrote:

blargoe wrote:

XP is fine given the user understands which behavior on the Internet will tend to hose the installation and has the system regularly patch and is running a/v software. I'm still amazed at the morons out there running a naked xp installation with no protection and wondering why their system get so slow after a couple of weeks.

You should be careful about saying things like this. You may be able to be called a moron under other circumstances. The Linux guys might call you a moron because you don't know how to install and configure Linux, Macintosh guys might call you a moron be cause you have to jump through so many hoops to make Windows work, etc.

Those morons you are talking about don't want to have to know things like this about their OS. They are probably trained in something you know little or nothing about. Without them, you may not have a job. Why would I hire you if everyone could do what you do?

Most important, why would I hire you if you think about your customers that way?

Very well said and I most certainly agree with you!!

but patching xp and running av doesn't make you an IT pro. These users (primarily home users) need to learn some general upkeep of there computers. Same thing as with a car, you don't need to know how to change a tranny but you should know that you need the occasional oil change and air filter cleaning and if you don't know how to do it, you pay someone to do it. I think that's what he was getting at. just because you're a "salesperson" or a "ceo" doesn't mean you shouldn't know that computers, like cars, require general upkeep to run at there prime.

you wouldn't run your car with no air filter on it and drive down a sandy road and the same goes for running your windows box with no patches and checking out all those free **** sites.

BubbaJ

SRTMCSE wrote:

but patching xp and running av doesn't make you an IT pro. These users (primarily home users) need to learn some general upkeep of there computers. Same thing as with a car, you don't need to know how to change a tranny but you should know that you need the occasional oil change and air filter cleaning and if you don't know how to do it, you pay someone to do it. I think that's what he was getting at. just because you're a "salesperson" or a "ceo" doesn't mean you shouldn't know that computers, like cars, require general upkeep to run at there prime.

you wouldn't run your car with no air filter on it and drive down a sandy road and the same goes for running your windows box with no patches and checking out all those free xxxxxxx sites.

Unless someone tells them, how are they to know? Your owner's manual for your car tells you when to have routine maintenance done, but I have never seen a PC owner's manual that warns about things like this. Is it the responsibility of the PC manufacturer, the salesman that sold them the PC, or the ISP to explain this to the PC owner? If so, why is the PC owner a moron?

I still think it is harsh to call them morons when they are merely ignorant of PC maintenance.

SRTMCSE

BubbaJ wrote:

SRTMCSE wrote:

but patching xp and running av doesn't make you an IT pro. These users (primarily home users) need to learn some general upkeep of there computers. Same thing as with a car, you don't need to know how to change a tranny but you should know that you need the occasional oil change and air filter cleaning and if you don't know how to do it, you pay someone to do it. I think that's what he was getting at. just because you're a "salesperson" or a "ceo" doesn't mean you shouldn't know that computers, like cars, require general upkeep to run at there prime.

you wouldn't run your car with no air filter on it and drive down a sandy road and the same goes for running your windows box with no patches and checking out all those free xxxxxxx sites.

Unless someone tells them, how are they to know? Your owner's manual for your car tells you when to have routine maintenance done, but I have never seen a PC owner's manual that warns about things like this. Is it the responsibility of the PC manufacturer, the salesman that sold them the PC, or the ISP to explain this to the PC owner? If so, why is the PC owner a moron?

I still think it is harsh to call them morons when they are merely ignorant of PC maintenance.

no, i don't advocate calling them a moron...unless it's one of those users you've showed a dozen times to do something and they still can't learn (or refuse to learn). then, yes, in my opinion they are morons. the people who honestly just don't know, no they're not morons, but it's something they should learn. whether it be from an IT person, a manual or a training class/guide.

however outside of normal maintenance, i do expect a user, even at work to know how to use there computers. i'm sure everyone has those users who just refuse to learn, in that case I think it should be a matter for the manager to discuss since a computer is nothing more than a tool and if an employee is having problems using there tools then there boss needs to work something out (education, discipline, etc.). I've always said it, nobody would hire a doctor who couldn't use a scalpel or a mason who couldn't pour concrete, but many companies have no problem hiring someone who can't use a computer and throw them on a computer without any training in the very basics ( I wish I could provide the training but I am unable to allocate the time )

anyway this subject is getting waaaaaaaaaay off-topic.

blackzone

Linux is more flexible and customizable.

Window is a big chunk of things put together which Microsoft belives most people will need.

strauchr

SRTMCSE wrote:

BubbaJ wrote:

SRTMCSE wrote:

but patching xp and running av doesn't make you an IT pro. These users (primarily home users) need to learn some general upkeep of there computers. Same thing as with a car, you don't need to know how to change a tranny but you should know that you need the occasional oil change and air filter cleaning and if you don't know how to do it, you pay someone to do it. I think that's what he was getting at. just because you're a "salesperson" or a "ceo" doesn't mean you shouldn't know that computers, like cars, require general upkeep to run at there prime.

you wouldn't run your car with no air filter on it and drive down a sandy road and the same goes for running your windows box with no patches and checking out all those free xxxxxxx sites.

Unless someone tells them, how are they to know? Your owner's manual for your car tells you when to have routine maintenance done, but I have never seen a PC owner's manual that warns about things like this. Is it the responsibility of the PC manufacturer, the salesman that sold them the PC, or the ISP to explain this to the PC owner? If so, why is the PC owner a moron?

I still think it is harsh to call them morons when they are merely ignorant of PC maintenance.

no, i don't advocate calling them a moron...unless it's one of those users you've showed a dozen times to do something and they still can't learn (or refuse to learn). then, yes, in my opinion they are morons. the people who honestly just don't know, no they're not morons, but it's something they should learn. whether it be from an IT person, a manual or a training class/guide.

however outside of normal maintenance, i do expect a user, even at work to know how to use there computers. i'm sure everyone has those users who just refuse to learn, in that case I think it should be a matter for the manager to discuss since a computer is nothing more than a tool and if an employee is having problems using there tools then there boss needs to work something out (education, discipline, etc.). I've always said it, nobody would hire a doctor who couldn't use a scalpel or a mason who couldn't pour concrete, but many companies have no problem hiring someone who can't use a computer and throw them on a computer without any training in the very basics ( I wish I could provide the training but I am unable to allocate the time )

anyway this subject is getting waaaaaaaaaay off-topic.

There is a massive difference between a user using their work 'tool' (Generally a business application) and keeping up maintainence through av, patches etc. In fact the business user is an irrelevant example because it should the company or companies IT to protect and maintain their computers.

As for a home user again using their computer to surf the net or whatever is completely different to maintaining it. MOST users have no idea what spyware is and easily get caught out. And no one is a moron for not knowing how to use a computer or not being able to or wanting to learn. They just want to do what they want with it.

Same as, in your example, a car. I don't care how the oil is changed, or how to change break pads. All I need to know is that when something isn't right I can get it fixed and that I get it regularly serviced. PCs SHOULD be the same but its not necessary for it to run like a car.

Mind you, some car owners, like PC owner, never get things fixed or sorted on their car when it goes wrong and they break down eventually - the same as a computer. Perhaps those people could be called morons.

Danman32

Malware has been reported enough in the media that home users should be aware that they need protection from them.
Heck, even XP Security Center will inform you of security issues, though you have to have at least SP2 to get that, and it doesn't tell you about spyware.

But then, there are still people out there that don't know you need to change the oil in your car. Fonzy made fun of that in Happy Days when some girls had trouble with a car that wouldn't run anymore. When he looked at the car, he commented that there was black goo where the oil was suppposed to be. The girls replied "We just put gas in and go".

plettner

I don't think I'll be continuing on with Linux anytime soon.

I got Ubuntu and threw it on my computer. It installed like a charm. Then the problems began.

I couldn't install the nVidia driver software. I downloaded the package and tried to install it through the Add/remove area of Ubuntu but it said it wasn't a valid package. Why isn't there simply a setup.exe program or at the very least a standard package format?

On a another computer, I had Ubuntu loaded and again it was fine. However the video card clapped out on me. As the PC was under warranty, Acer replaced the video card with an ATI (not an nVidia). Well, the GUI did not come up upon the first reboot. Just a shell. I'm not going to spend three hours trying figure out how to change the video through a shell. At least Windows detects the new card and gets me to the desktop.

Linux seriously has some issues to sort out before it comes close to even being a speck on Microsoft's radar.

blargoe

Linux isn't ready for the general population on the desktop, or the general population isn't ready for Linux. However, for servers, multimedia, and us enthusiasts, it's definately more than a speck on the radar.

oldbarney

Linux indeed has a place. This place may not yet be the on desktop, although Fedora 5 has some darn good features in its GUI. But to say that linux is inferior for servers is downright absurd.

Case in point: I support the IT requirements for a publicly-traded, global semiconductor design corporation. I'm talking about developing processors with millions of transistors. We run gigabytes of data at a time through servers for simulation and development purposes.

Guess what? Those servers processing all that data are not running Windows. Most run either linux or Solaris. We currently have a few *.nix servers with uptimes exceeding 900 days.

Furthermore, were it not for the open source OS, a number of smaller ISPs and web hosts might not even exist. Linux facilitates much, much more than most Windows folks want to give it credit for.

In today's competitive IT environment, a reliable alternative is welcome. Yeah, linux has documentation issues. Indeed, there is no point and click environment. Packages are required to run other packages.

But the bottom line is that linux is robust enough to compete with Microsoft in the server platform market.

plettner

blargoe wrote:

Linux isn't ready for the general population on the desktop, or the general population isn't ready for Linux. However, for servers, multimedia, and us enthusiasts, it's definitely more than a speck on the radar.

Yes, you're right . I was writing from my experience of a "desktop" distro - not a server distro. I should've mentioned for servers they are quite more than capable. Admittedly, I have only encountered a small number of server distros.

blackzone

About the complaint on Linux lacking driver support, it's really the vendors that should be making the drivers.

It's the same reason why I use IE instead of Firefox or Opera.

Eventhough I find Firefox and Opera better, there are certain addons written by 3rd party programmer which only work for IE.

blackzone

plettner wrote:

I couldn't install the nVidia driver software. I downloaded the package and tried to install it through the Add/remove area of Ubuntu but it said it wasn't a valid package. Why isn't there simply a setup.exe program or at the very least a standard package format?

You don't use the program manager to install drivers.

I'm no expert, there are more capable people in www.linuxquestions.org where you can ask for help.

macwhizard

Chivalry1 wrote:

.... Mac OSX is based of of BSD. Which is why it is such a hardcore OS.

not really, OS X is a combination of best parts from different operating systems. FreeBSD, NetBSD, Original BSD, NEXT codes, System V, and old Mac OS (QuickTime, ColorSync etc.....

Well, Macs do have hardware problems, especially with Rev A models (early adopters).

Well every FAT OS sucks, including OS X, Windows, Linux, except old Amiga(32bit, multitasking os from the begining, all running on 8Mhz moto processor), QNX and BeOS ( fast on old hardware, apps and updates are not larger than 1 MB , good example of efficient coding )

just my opinion.

remyforbes777

Add/Remove is not used for drivers in linux. Linux definitely has a learning curve. It took me some while to understand it but it all clicks now. Linux is fully customizable so you can optimize it to the max for different uses. Its use of text based config files makes it phenomenal. Linux is what IT is all about to me. Being able to figure out how to make things click and harmonize. There is no learning involved with double clicking on a drive and Viola. Its nice and easy but its not challenging. I don't know about you all but I like a challenge. I like being that much more ahead of the rest and Linux allows you to be. I like windoze also. It has certain aspects of it that I like. But Linux is far more appealing to me.

Slowhand

I think this is an argument I'm not going to jump into, (notwithstanding that I do have my preferences and reasons,) but I did want to comment on one thing. A lot of people have made very good points in this thread, and that's a great thing, there are a lot of good ideas floating back and forth, and there was even some good input on the original question.

However, I do find it funny that, even though most people are trying to be as neutral as possible and show that they see pros and cons with both the Windows world and the Linux/Unix world, I still see the derogatory term "windoze" used. I'm not saying people don't have a right to say it, but it's odd to see in a thread where everyone is talking about the fact that Windows and Linux/Unix have good sides and bad sides. I don't think it'd be fair if anyone started saying "I'm an MCSE and I've always used Windows, but Linsux is pretty good too, I guess."

Other than that, this has been a very cool thread and a lot of constructive ideas and thoughts have been put out there. I'm really glad I'm a part of this forum because it's threads like this one, that could potentially have ended up as nothing but flamewar upon flamewar, that gives everyone the opportunity to speak their mind.

strauchr

I just find it funny that people talk down Windows because its 'easy' to administrate. Thats kinda what they're going for, so IT dept. costs don't blow out with having 50 people to look after as many servers.

And yet with Windows being so 'easy' its amazing the amount of badly configured setups I have found. Just because you can install drivers and set up user accounts doesn't mean you know Windows and just because its point and click doesn't mean its easy or that there isn't command line tools and config files to configure. In fact if thats what you think then you really know nothing about Windows.

Every system has its place in IT there is no doubt but lets face it, we coming to convergence. IT companies are swallowing up other IT companies all the time and becoming more powerful and alos eating more and more into the IT markets they didn't traditionally have a foot hold in. I know whos side I'd rather be on with the Microsofts, Symantecs, Ciscos of the world who will dominate IT in the future.

I can't comment much on Linux but I have rarely seen it in use in big business - more Sun and IBM AS/400s. So if Linux ONLY has a strong hold in the small business market (and I could be wrong but its what I see judging from my experience) then I'd MS will eat that market it up with the incredibly easy to set up and maintain MS Small Business Server suite.

I could be wrong but I am pretty unbiased and judge things on their merit. I was a diehard Novell fan which was by far and large the best NOS out there at its peak. Yet I had to face facts, especially when Active Directory came out, that MS was taking over.

If you like Linux and are a huge fan of it then thats fine. But don't deny what is happening in the market. It can only hurt your career. If you like Linux then stay with it but just keep your eye on the market.

As for Macs well I think we'll see it disappear in the no to distant future with Windows based Macs coming out.

And this rant isn't about whats better but its about looking at the market and making sure your in the right area. Disagree if you will but thats how I see things.

blargoe

strauchr wrote:

Windows based Macs

???

RussS

Interesting post strauchr.

Me, I deal with Microsoft, Linux and Novell and I have to say that MS is looking more and more like Novell each release ... at least in serious features and how you can administer things. Not yet as good but getting there. *nix - I leave to our pet propellorhead and try to only look after user administration as I really can not be bothered sitting at a console screen all day
Me, I'm lazy and love GUI ...... doesn't even have to be pretty - as long as I can go places by clicking icons

I think you mean Intel based Macs dude. However with Bootcamp you can have one natively boot XP (or Vista) and in a comparison between the two I seen that Vista out performed the Mac OS in many areas .... very interesting I think.

blackzone

blargoe wrote:

strauchr wrote:

Windows based Macs

???

I think he mean Mac computer with Intel CPU which can dual boot Mac OSX and Windows XP.

I look Linux as great kernel, decent Applicaton, Lousy driver support, and very small third party application.

Window on the other hand have a lousy kernel, great build in application, great driver support and even greater amount of third party application.

Not to menton Linux is free. Window isn't. And it's get very expensive especially you have alot of computers.

strauchr

Actually I had to edit and correct myself. I misread an article from which my post came.

Anyway the point is Windows will become more prevelant on Macs since they have moved to Intel based machines. But we'll see.

Danman32

Well, in order to run natively on a Mac, not only does it have to use an intel chip, it also has to have the same hardware platform. If hardware isn't where the OS/drivers expect them to be, it won't work, regardless of the CPU.

sprkymrk

Danman32 wrote:

Well, in order to run natively on a Mac, not only does it have to use an intel chip, it also has to have the same hardware platform. If hardware isn't where the OS/drivers expect them to be, it won't work, regardless of the CPU.

Check it out:
http://www.macworld.com/2006/03/firstlooks/xpmini/index.php

plettner

We've had Apple screening ads on TV with that guy from "Ed" Justin Long (I think his name is) saying how it's cool he can run both Mac OS X and Windows on his Apple. He's standing next to a guy who just runs Windows on his "PC". Anyway, the Windows guy is made to look like some patethic old fool. When Justin makes a comment about how his Mac runs both, the Windows guy says "touche". Justin tries to explain how to use the word "touche".

It's pretty corny.

I remember Apple used to write off Intel Pentium II chips. Now they're using them (Intel chips) in their own machines. If you can't beat 'em, join 'em!

Slowhand

There is also a version of Mac OSX available for the x86 platform. I'm not sure if it's publically available or if it's something you have to be an Apple partner/certified technician to get a hold of, but I do know that a friend of mine had it installed on his Toshiba laptop for a while. (This was after he was tired of the "PearPC" emulated edition, and wanted to screw with an Apple enthusiast we both know.)

Not that this has any relevance to the topic of Macs running Windows, but I thought it'd be fun to point out. I also saw the Mac running Windows XP at Macworld in San Francisco, when they were demoing it. It was. . . odd, to say the least, to see.

rcoop

mikey_b wrote:

Okay, fine. MAC OS sucks!

...and here is the video :
http://video.google.com/videoplay?docid=-6553260189868317794&q=Why+Macs+Suck&hl=en

Ha ha,
Rcoop

vcon790

Linux definitely has its place. I just finished a contract at AMD and guess what platform the Engineers use to design the chips on? Yeah...You guessed it! RHEL 3 ! Can you believe it! No Windows!

In this day and age you have to know both platforms. I know both fairly well and can take positions others can't. For a hell of alot more money too.

blackzone

Slowhand wrote:

There is also a version of Mac OSX available for the x86 platform. I'm not sure if it's publically available or if it's something you have to be an Apple partner/certified technician to get a hold of, but I do know that a friend of mine had it installed on his Toshiba laptop for a while. (This was after he was tired of the "PearPC" emulated edition, and wanted to screw with an Apple enthusiast we both know.)

Not that this has any relevance to the topic of Macs running Windows, but I thought it'd be fun to point out. I also saw the Mac running Windows XP at Macworld in San Francisco, when they were demoing it. It was. . . odd, to say the least, to see.

It's not legal to run Mac OSX on a non-mac computer.

And even if you can get Mac OSX to run on a non-mac computer(which I have), it runs "very" unsmoothly. "5 mnutes to open a folder??"

blackzone

vcon790 wrote:

Linux definitely has its place. I just finished a contract at AMD and guess what platform the Engineers use to design the chips on? Yeah...You guessed it! RHEL 3 ! Can you believe it! No Windows!

In this day and age you have to know both platforms. I know both fairly well and can take positions others can't. For a hell of alot more money too.

Linux is better for scripting, Window is better for "I dont' felt like remembering all the commands and switches".

Linux is more costomizable (a linux router on a 1.44 floppy), Window is more standarized (every WinXP box basically is the same).

Both have it's pros and cons.

But above all, Linux is free, Window isn't.

Humper

blackzone wrote:

vcon790 wrote:

Linux definitely has its place. I just finished a contract at AMD and guess what platform the Engineers use to design the chips on? Yeah...You guessed it! RHEL 3 ! Can you believe it! No Windows!

In this day and age you have to know both platforms. I know both fairly well and can take positions others can't. For a hell of alot more money too.

Linux is better for scripting, Window is better for "I dont' felt like remembering all the commands and switches".

Linux is more costomizable (a linux router on a 1.44 floppy), Window is more standarized (every WinXP box basically is the same).

Both have it's pros and cons.

But above all, Linux is free, Window isn't.

Linux, at times, can be very frustrating. Best part about linux it is free, and there is lots of FREE software out there to do just about anything you want. Linux does great things for your troubleshooting skills

strauchr

Some people obviously don't know Windows as well as they think they do. There is a lot of commands to know and remember as well as plenty of scripting needs for Windows.