homepage Welcome to WebmasterWorld Guest from 54.145.183.169
register, free tools, login, search, pro membership, help, library, announcements, recent posts, open posts,
Become a Pro Member
Home / Forums Index / Microsoft / Microsoft Windows OS (XP/NT/Vista/Windows 7/8/9/10)
Forum Library, Charter, Moderators: bill

Microsoft Windows OS (XP/NT/Vista/Windows 7/8/9/10) Forum

    
Is Open Source OS (Linux) really better than Windows?
Windows VS Linux
yurembam

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 10:42 am on Nov 17, 2005 (gmt 0)

How can one prove that window is better than Linux. Some of the allegation put about windows are:
1.Windows are Buggy.
2.Speed Of Fixing Bug(Patch release)is slow
3.Linux is Free of cost
4.Linux is more
=> Secure
=> Robust
=> Performance and Reliability
=> Interoperability

If these true, what are the counter measure?

Which is "worse?" Linux or windows, both have bugs, some major, some minor. Complex software will always have bugs and security problems. That we know, how to make others realize this..

Waiting for your comments.

 

incywincy

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 10:54 am on Nov 17, 2005 (gmt 0)

I installed Linux (Ubuntu) on my laptop some time ago. I would never go back to Windows. I get the following for free:

1) Email client (Thunderbird)
2) Open Office (can read and write in MS Office formats) for word processing and Spreadsheet work
3) Gtkpod to manage my iPod
4) Bash so that I can administrate my laptop and SSH into my webserver
5) Bluetooth and WifFi management so that I can work wirelessly and manage my mobile
6) PHP, mysql and Apache so that I can use my laptop as a development/test webserver
7) Robustness against viruses
8) Reliability. I have yet to have to reboot it because of an application hanging.

Those are just a few things that Linux gives me for nothing. Why on earth would i want to pay Microsoft to give me an inferior product?

graeme_p

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 1:19 pm on Nov 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

Those of us who use Linux obviously think its better!

My key reasons are:

1) Security and reliability

2) Easy software installation upgrade: this depends on the distribution, I use Ubuntu. Other Debian based distros are the same. Some such as Mandrake are the same if you pay for their subscription service (and Mandrake is VERY easy to install and configure).

3) Transparency, you can largely stick to open source code. This means that anyone who wants to examine what the software does - you may not do it, but someone is likely to. It cuts down on the risk of software installing back doors into your system and other nasties - like the Sony audio CDs do on Windows.

4) Easy of administration of office networks. You can replace a Windows network with one Linux server and cheap terminals (the latter can be old PCs). Form then on, all the installation, con fig etc needs to be done only to the server.

5) Choice: because there are so many variants of Linux around, you can find one that is tuned to your needs: there are distributions for old hardware and for fast supercomputer like clusters, for new users and for unix geeks and for people switching form Windows, for servers and desktops.

If you are considering moving from Windows Mandrake or SuSe with the KDE desktop is probably the easiest transition.

maccas

10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 1:34 pm on Nov 21, 2005 (gmt 0)

"PHP, mysql and Apache so that I can use my laptop as a development/test webserver". You can do that on Windows for free. Open Office, yep works well on Windows to. Maybe Linux has improved since I tried mandrake several years ago but it was a nightmare trying to install my graphics card and modem. As for security, I have never had a virus, trojan, keylogger etc ever.

graeme_p

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 5:33 pm on Nov 22, 2005 (gmt 0)

Maybe Linux has improved since I tried mandrake several years ago but it was a nightmare trying to install my graphics card and modem

Yes it has improved a huge amount. Hardware problems are now very rarely rare. It can even be easier than windows because all the driver you need are almost always on your OS install CD, and you do not need to install drivers separately from a manufacturer's CD.

As for security, I have never had a virus, trojan, keylogger etc ever.

That means that either you are very lucky or very careful (i.e. you have installed a virus scanner, spyware remover etc. ) With Linux you need to take fewer precautions.

Of course this argument goes on for ever. Perhaps, yurembam, the best way to decide is to install Linux, try it for a month or so. If you do not like it you can always go back to Windows. If you want advice on choosing a distribution, installing etc. sticky mail me, or ask you nearest Linux User group for help.

yurembam

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 6:22 am on Nov 24, 2005 (gmt 0)

Those who dont use Linux think that Window is the best option. With the wide range of user and it easy to use, help and support features, how can One believe that Linux is more Powerful

graeme_p

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 6:58 am on Nov 24, 2005 (gmt 0)

OK, so most people use Windows. Most of these people have never tried another OS.

On the other hand most people who have tried Linux (at least in my experience) prefer it to Windows.

Why do you think Windows is easier to use than Linux? I disagree (some of the reasons are in previous posts)

As for support Linux has more support options: from free help from a local Linux user group to various forms of enterprise level support from Red Hat, IBM etc. The on-line documentation and support forums for Linux are superb.

how can One believe that Linux is more Powerful

For desktop use: try it and see.

Linux is very widely used for servers. Most of the internet runs on open source Unix type OSes (mostly Linux and Free BSD). There are very good reasons why so many sites, from personal websites to Google, run on Linux. Others such as Yahoo use FreeBSD (which is also open source). Even Microsoft used FreeBSD for a long time because Windows NT could not scale up enough to run Hotmail.

Hester

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 3:50 pm on Nov 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I installed Linux (Ubuntu) on my laptop some time ago. I would never go back to Windows. I get the following for free:

1) Email client (Thunderbird)
2) Open Office (can read and write in MS Office formats) for word processing and Spreadsheet work
3) Gtkpod to manage my iPod
4) Bash so that I can administrate my laptop and SSH into my webserver
5) Bluetooth and WifFi management so that I can work wirelessly and manage my mobile
6) PHP, mysql and Apache so that I can use my laptop as a development/test webserver
7) Robustness against viruses
8) Reliability. I have yet to have to reboot it because of an application hanging.

All of those apply to Windows as well.

1) Thunderbird - just download it
2) Open Office - I think this is Windows too?
3) surely iTunes works best here
4) Windows is so popular there will be an equivalent here for free downloading
5) These are common Windows areas
6) I use XAMPP for Windows XP (PHP/MySQL/Apache etc)
7) Just install a free anti-virus program and firewall
8) Same here, using XP. Applications in XP no longer take the OS down with them when they crash.

Don't get me wrong - I'm thinking of installing Ubuntu myself on a spare PC - but Windows is far from bad compared to Linux. I did read today though that Ubuntu was "not ready for the masses". This was in a review on the main Linux website. Hmmm.

Also the instructions for installing even simple things like Opera involved tweaking the code. With Windows it just works.

Matt Probert

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 6:10 pm on Nov 25, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have both Windows and Linux. Linux is faster, but a complete nightmare. So I use Windows for my office, and minimal Linux for the web server.

Linux lacks documentation, applications, hardware support and user friendliness.

Windows lacks security, stability, and speed. BUT Windows has applications I demand, and doesn't take half an hour to start up nor demand I recompile the kernel for my particular collection of hardware.

In balance, Linux is a serious server O/S but a desktop toy for computer snobs. Windows is a far better desktop solution.

(okay, flame away <g>)

Matt

graeme_p

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 5:45 am on Nov 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hester, I installed Opera with no tweaking: download the appropriate version for your distro, open in package manager and click a few times. Can you tell me where you got instructions that said otherwise?

I also think you are missing part of the point in the list of software you quoted. All that is included with a typical Linux distro and can be installed painlessly. Nothing more to buy or download, just a few clicks to do it all. And you do not have to bother installing and updating anti-virus software etc.

Yes, you can bring Windows uo to the standard of Linux, but it is a lot of work, so why not do things the easy way?

As I said, software installation on Linux is easier. My software installs go like this:

1)Start Synaptic from the Star Menu.

2)Type a search term in the search box.

3) Look through the descritions of the applications it finds.

4) tick off those I want installed

5) Click "apply".

6) Get on with my work while the downloads (that right, it even does the download for you!) and installation happen in the background

7) Switch back to Synaptic and check everything installed OK.

Matt, I have installed Linux on several PCs. The only software that I have ever had to recompile was the Erlang language - hardly mainstream! What distro and version are you using. What hardware needed a kernel recompile?

I suspect you are using a distro aimed at Linux geeks (like Gentoo or Linux from Scratch for example). Try Mandriva, Ubuntu or SuSE: they are easier to install and configure than Windows. This is part of the attraction of Linux, there are distros out there fine tuned to your needs.

As for applications, again, can you be specific and tell us what is missing? I have used Linux for four years, and exclusively (i.e. for both work and home) for over an year and a half, and every application I need has a Linux equivalent at least as good as what is avaiable for Windows.

Until recently I would have said Excel is a better spreadsheet than Open Office, but a former employee recently told me that having been made to swtich back to Excel in his new job, he found he prefered Open Office. So even the gem of Microsoft's software is not better for everyone.

Compworld

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 8:07 am on Nov 26, 2005 (gmt 0)

I have Linux Red Hat on my other laptop and it works great on an old IBM. Had problems with the wireless Internet, but everything else worked like a charm. Cannot really go 100% Linux due to most of the programs I use are Windows only or web based Windows only. I think it is only a matter of time where Linux would be more widely adaptable.

Hester

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 10+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 10:09 am on Nov 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Hester, I installed Opera with no tweaking: download the appropriate version for your distro, open in package manager and click a few times. Can you tell me where you got instructions that said otherwise?

Sure. Read this review of Ubuntu on Linux Online:

[linux.org...]

I also had similar gotchas installing a couple of other applications that just happen to be a tad on the proprietary side. One was Opera. In spite of getting a *.deb package (Ubuntu, based on Debian, uses this package format) from Opera itself, it wouldn't work.

Ubuntu, though an excellent distribution for people who are comfortable with Linux already, isn't quite ready for the masses yet.

LBmtb

5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 11:45 am on Nov 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

When somebody says that Linux is more reliable and stable then Windows, it goes beyond avoiding the BSOD or rebooting because of hanging programs.

* Windows gets clogged up even with careful maintenance.
* The registry is just a bad system.
* The way Windows handles memory is also inefficient.
* Permissions, not just to users but to programs is also much improved in Linux.

Spyware? If you're on Linux you never even have to know what the word means. Same goes for virii. On Windows it's sometimes faster and easier to backup your documents, reformat and reinstall (I've done this MANY times) then to figure out how to get rid of spyware or virii. This is especially true because sometimes a virii messes up a system file or leaves copies of itself in other places.

With Linux, once you have your system configured the way you want it, there is no need to do periodic OS reinstalls like there is in Windows. You don’t need to get ‘Windows updates’ every week. You don't have to worry about 'weird' things happening which could be cause by a myriad of things in Windows.

I installed a file and print server using Samba on a Fedora installation for a small law firm a year ago. NEVER has the machine needed to be reboot. Never has it given the computer illiterate attorneys any issues (they never even had to touch it). The only thing that might qualify as maintenance on it was probably a week after installation when I had to re-work the way it handles permissions and then a few weeks later to add a new attorney as a user. Whenever I start to wonder why I even do backups on it, I remind myself about natural disasters and that hard drives go bad. Has it grown slower over time like Windows would probably do (although Windows would not last that long)? Nope, smooth as butter to this day.

That also raises the fact about Windows server software (plus 5 licenses) is over $1000, while you could have Samba and Linux for free and have a much more stable and reliable system.

Personally, I have Fedora 4 on my Desktop and a dual boot Fedora / WinXP on my laptop and the ONLY reason I have Windows on there is for Dreamweaver. Linux editors still aren’t up to par with Dreamweaver IMHO.

I didn't even go into the whole licenses/activation garbage that you do away with when you switch from Windows to Linux.

As for starter distro's, Fedora, Suse, Mandrake are all good. Many point to KDE as being more 'windows-like' although I started with gnome and have found it very simple and easy to use. As long as I use Linux I might as use the gui that least resembles Windows as possible, right?

I keep editing this because every minute I'm reminded of something Linux does very well.

Installation programs and updating them is VERY easy and IMO easier then in Windows with YUM or apt-get. All you do is setup repositories and go from there. If you wanted to check on openoffice, you would type "yum list ¦ grep openoffice" and it would list off all the packages with 'openoffice' on your system and updates available. Then you can pick and choose if you want to update. You can also install any package from the repos with "yum install xmms" (xmms is a simple example, it's a popular audio program similar to winamp). You could even setup dailyi scripts that will check and update all your software while you sleep. No need to go to download.com or anywhere else to install new programs or update current ones.

graeme_p

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 12:45 pm on Nov 28, 2005 (gmt 0)

Thanks for the link Hester.

The review is very unfair. I just installed Opera on Ubuntu perfectly smoothly. I suspect that the reviewer had not bothered to select Ubuntu from the drop down menu on the download page - his wording implies that.

Of all the software I have installed:

1) Real Player was a bit of a nuisance - I had to download their installer, and run it from the command line.

2) Skype, Opera and BUM (Boot Up Manager, does what it says) needed download and then right-clicking on the file and choosing install. This is much the same as Windows, right?

3) Everything else (and I have installed a lot of software) was installed using Synaptic - i.e. easier than the windows process of finding the download on-line, downloading it, and then running an installer.

I would say the ease of use comparision here favours Linux - and that is without even taking the easy upgrading into account.

Of course if you want a more Windows like experience, you could use something like Mandriva of SuSE. In fact the paid Mandriva update service pretty much gives you the best of both worlds.

topsites



 
Msg#: 339 posted 6:09 am on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0)

It's not that viruses for *nix do not exist, it is that over 90 percent of the world uses Windows, and when it comes to bad stuff, the most-used apps always are the hardest targeted.

graeme_p

WebmasterWorld Senior Member 5+ Year Member



 
Msg#: 339 posted 6:32 am on Dec 14, 2005 (gmt 0)

t's not that viruses for *nix do not exist, it is that over 90 percent of the world uses Windows, and when it comes to bad stuff, the most-used apps always are the hardest targeted.

No, its that viruses for Unix/Linux find it much harder to spread because there is decent security in place. There have been very few Unix viruses even in proportion to market share, and almost all of these can not spread unless users deliberately run as root "administrator".

It is also that Windows is harder to set up securely than Linux, so the average user can not set it up securely.

Further more Unix/Linux systems are more worth more to attacker than sheer numbers would suggest. A very high proportion of websites run on Unix, *BSD or Linux, as do other types of servers. These are very attractive targets.

Microsoft software tends to have poor security track records even where it does not have majority market share: web servers, databases etc.

Global Options:
 top home search open messages active posts  
 

Home / Forums Index / Microsoft / Microsoft Windows OS (XP/NT/Vista/Windows 7/8/9/10)
rss feed

All trademarks and copyrights held by respective owners. Member comments are owned by the poster.
Home ¦ Free Tools ¦ Terms of Service ¦ Privacy Policy ¦ Report Problem ¦ About ¦ Library ¦ Newsletter
WebmasterWorld is a Developer Shed Community owned by Jim Boykin.
© Webmaster World 1996-2014 all rights reserved