*nix vs. Windows (split from [UNIX] The Unix Mob)

[one_Two]

Thanks for, y'know, calling me a peasent. I actually have used both a windows and linux machine offline for a fairly long period of time, I could acquire a small ammount of software every now and then, so for instance codeblocks and some libraries for windows and I was up and unning, very practicle. Linux I got a similar setup (including some software from linux format dvd) but y'know, not gonna happen - couldn't compile. You can say what you like but I know that if you were in my situation you would have had to use windows.

[RedShirt]

[Razgriz]

All you did was go over the same points as the last post and even bring up something completely irrelevant like installing/compiling programs while offline which in fact I already explained why linux is better at IF it even had anything to do with the comparing operating systems. All that has to do with is the user thinking ahead and puting all his programs onto a USB or CD beforehand because he is free to unlike a windows user who would be forced to go out and buy all that shit or be completely SOL with OEM windows installs. ah yup you made me repeat myself. By the way everyone has internet this is 2013.

again
The discussion was about what operating system is better.
Not which operating is better for lazy people, average users and people who don't give a shit about their computing.
When comparing operating systems the OS themselves should be compared not the user's ability to comprehend and make the best of it.

Now aside from all the derailing ijon is trying to do lets discuss what actually makes linux superior:
Package Manager (this first point should take the win but let's continue)
Ability to compile everything from source including the kernel allowing us full customization + optimization. Something a windows user will never experience.
A more efficient, extensive , and powerful CLI/Shell
A more robust and powerful scripting language
Text config files rather than cluster fuck registry (admit it, you hate registry)
Everything is a file and can be manipulated
Plays nice with all operating systems. Plays nice with most filesystems. Strives to follow standards and works well with others while microsoft products....C'mon I don't have to explain this one...
A superior choice of different filesystems each with different benefits (yeah the customization does not end)
Superior filesystem journaling
A much better well though out filesystem heirarchy that simply makes sense.
Less vulnerabilites and exploits therefore it is more secure
Code has thousands of eyes on it leaving little to no chance of backdooring while microsoft has been knows to discuss deals and have repeated meetings with NSA
When you remove a hardrive with Linux installed and insert it into another machine you can very well guarantee it will boot.
Never have to restart the machine because a program other than the kernel requires me to.
Linux supports a wider range of CPU architectures.
Much more lightweight (getting even lighter)
In linux you command a process to be killed and it dies. In windows it's more of a suggestion.
Stability
Not have to activate my operating system and give information about my computer to any company.
No need to reboot after updating
Choice of rolling releases (yeah yeah the customization never ends does it)
not being required to type in a long random string of characters to install an app
not being nagged to register my apps, activate my apps, etc..
not having to worry about if my software will allow me to reload it
not having to worry about a company continuing to support my older version of software (I've had the oh we don't support that version, you'll have to upgrade to the new improved version to re-activate")
all the server-side/command line tools (apache, ssh, php, python, bash, rsync, rsnapshot, etc) - while a lot of this stuff has ported to Windows, its just not the same.
a scheduler (cron) that I can count on .. the windows task scheduler just doesn't seem to be very reliable.
Updates/upgrading system that barely ever fails and if it does it will explain why unlike windows and it's abstract error codes.
Proper Logging. When you switch from another OS to Linux you will be amazed at how in depth, clear cut and to the point the error and log messages are.
Superior permissions model
DRM free.
Never see a nagscreen or have a program crippled because I used it beyond the demonstration time limit.
a boot up process that mere mortals can understand .. nothing I hate worse than a Windows box that I can't boot into (Even into safe mode) -- AUGH. its like black magic trying to determine what is wrong. With Linux, it pretty much tells you where it hangs up
gui front ends for cli apps .. I like that a lot of stuff is not "rebuilt" on Linux and I get the option to use a GUI or script the command line for different tasks (ie cd burning, backups, etc)
general compliance to standards (ie storing mail in maildir/mbox format) -- ever have to resurrect an Outlook PST file? augh. nightmares. With the text based formats, I can directly manipulate the files.
Most importantly it's open source and it respects YOUR freedom

Linux is better and you are a peasant of the I.T. world if you think otherwise.

You know what actually defeats all of these points?

It doesn't take much effort to get Zandronum up and running on windows, and depending on your internet connection you can start playing moderately quick. GG Linux, until Linux can do everything people actually use Windows for easy and quickly (like, installing stuff, or playing games) then Windows on top.

[AlexMax]

Here is the correct setup:

* Windows on a desktop
* MacOS on a laptop
* Linux on a server

[Popsoap]

*Huge rant*

My god, CALM DOWN. You are getting horribly riled up over the idea of people using a different OS than Linux. People have different standards, ones that Windows/Mac satisfy but not Linux.

[-Jes-]

Here is the correct setup:

* Windows for general use
* Linux for complex use

Fixed that for you..

Never Apple.. Ever.

[AlexMax]

Never Apple.. Ever.

MacOS X is a better *NIX desktop than any Linux, while actually having decent application support. And even if you don't like MacOS X, Apple makes better Windows laptops than most Windows OEM's.

[Ijon Tichy]

Eh, Linux is a great OS for programmers. It's just that for the average user, Windows still does the job better. Apple's lost all friendliness with me purely for Steve Jobs.
If you can get Linux going, great. Otherwise, just stick with Windows.

Also, AlexMax == Durandal

[Doc Holliday]

Good job forgetting BSD everyone

[Balrog]

Good job forgetting BSD everyone

Yup, I would have mentioned BSD but this flamewar discussion seems to be about desktop and laptop computers, and BSD (with the obvious exception of OS X, which is basically FreeBSD with a nicer interface, HFS support, and Apple's walled garden) is simply not cut out for desktop use.

[one_Two]

Good job forgetting BSD everyone

Or Solaris, which I used to use quite allot when I was in education.

[Doc Holliday]

Good job forgetting BSD everyone

Or Solaris, which I used to use quite allot when I was in education.

ah man solaris, been a loooong time

Yup, I would have mentioned BSD but this flamewar discussion seems to be about desktop and laptop computers, and BSD (with the obvious exception of OS X, which is basically FreeBSD with a nicer interface, HFS support, and Apple's walled garden) is simply not cut out for desktop use.

While I don't want to agree, I have to. They need more drivers and hw support.

[L1T]

Still waiting on a decent argument against my glorious list other than but.. but.. windows is easy. And hurrrrr Mac is the correct set up cuz derr I like paying for BSD,it has pretty shiny buttons derrr. And yes it did turn into a flame war arguing about desktop OS's due to people derailing. I try to bring up point for point explanations of why linux is superior while other people throw bullshit buzzwords like "application support" and "average user" etc.

---

All you did was go over the same points as the last post and even bring up something completely irrelevant like installing/compiling programs while offline which in fact I already explained why linux is better at IF it even had anything to do with the comparing operating systems. All that has to do with is the user thinking ahead and puting all his programs onto a USB or CD beforehand because he is free to unlike a windows user who would be forced to go out and buy all that shit or be completely SOL with OEM windows installs. ah yup you made me repeat myself. By the way everyone has internet this is 2013.

again
The discussion was about what operating system is better.
Not which operating is better for lazy people, average users and people who don't give a shit about their computing.
When comparing operating systems the OS themselves should be compared not the user's ability to comprehend and make the best of it.

Now aside from all the derailing ijon is trying to do lets discuss what actually makes linux superior:
Package Manager (this first point should take the win but let's continue)
Ability to compile everything from source including the kernel allowing us full customization + optimization. Something a windows user will never experience.
A more efficient, extensive , and powerful CLI/Shell
A more robust and powerful scripting language
Text config files rather than cluster fuck registry (admit it, you hate registry)
Everything is a file and can be manipulated
Plays nice with all operating systems. Plays nice with most filesystems. Strives to follow standards and works well with others while microsoft products....C'mon I don't have to explain this one...
A superior choice of different filesystems each with different benefits (yeah the customization does not end)
Superior filesystem journaling
A much better well though out filesystem heirarchy that simply makes sense.
Less vulnerabilites and exploits therefore it is more secure
Code has thousands of eyes on it leaving little to no chance of backdooring while microsoft has been knows to discuss deals and have repeated meetings with NSA
When you remove a hardrive with Linux installed and insert it into another machine you can very well guarantee it will boot.
Never have to restart the machine because a program other than the kernel requires me to.
Linux supports a wider range of CPU architectures.
Much more lightweight (getting even lighter)
In linux you command a process to be killed and it dies. In windows it's more of a suggestion.
Stability
Not have to activate my operating system and give information about my computer to any company.
No need to reboot after updating
Choice of rolling releases (yeah yeah the customization never ends does it)
not being required to type in a long random string of characters to install an app
not being nagged to register my apps, activate my apps, etc..
not having to worry about if my software will allow me to reload it
not having to worry about a company continuing to support my older version of software (I've had the oh we don't support that version, you'll have to upgrade to the new improved version to re-activate")
all the server-side/command line tools (apache, ssh, php, python, bash, rsync, rsnapshot, etc) - while a lot of this stuff has ported to Windows, its just not the same.
a scheduler (cron) that I can count on .. the windows task scheduler just doesn't seem to be very reliable.
Updates/upgrading system that barely ever fails and if it does it will explain why unlike windows and it's abstract error codes.
Proper Logging. When you switch from another OS to Linux you will be amazed at how in depth, clear cut and to the point the error and log messages are.
Superior permissions model
DRM free.
Never see a nagscreen or have a program crippled because I used it beyond the demonstration time limit.
a boot up process that mere mortals can understand .. nothing I hate worse than a Windows box that I can't boot into (Even into safe mode) -- AUGH. its like black magic trying to determine what is wrong. With Linux, it pretty much tells you where it hangs up
gui front ends for cli apps .. I like that a lot of stuff is not "rebuilt" on Linux and I get the option to use a GUI or script the command line for different tasks (ie cd burning, backups, etc)
general compliance to standards (ie storing mail in maildir/mbox format) -- ever have to resurrect an Outlook PST file? augh. nightmares. With the text based formats, I can directly manipulate the files.
Most importantly it's open source and it respects YOUR freedom

Linux is better and you are a peasant of the I.T. world if you think otherwise.

You know what actually defeats all of these points?

It doesn't take much effort to get Zandronum up and running on windows, and depending on your internet connection you can start playing moderately quick. GG Linux, until Linux can do everything people actually use Windows for easy and quickly (like, installing stuff, or playing games) then Windows on top.

Zandronum can be installed with a few commands. It's actually easier to install programs on linux compared to windows. On windows you have to scower the web and click through GUI isntallers. In linux I install my software with a single command.

[one_Two]

So what, everything you want is in the repository? Bullshit.

[RedShirt]

Hey guys my name's L1T and i'm gloating cuz i know lots of stuff about unix/linux and other stuff no one cares about except power users! btw this topic has been dead for damn near a month so let me bump it so i can rub my own ego and try to start more stupid arguments about shit no one cares about

We get it.