Aarrgh! I've utterly had it with Linux. Why the hell do people use this big pile of crap anyway?
I've tried Debian. I've tried Mandrake. I've tried Gentoo. I've tried Red Hat. I've tried Fedora. I've tried Mandake again. I've tried Debian again. I've tried Mandrake, AGAIN. AND IT NEVER FUCKING WORKS.
I just formatted by second hard-disk again after a failed Linux attempt. This time, XOrg failed to load some fonts (and this was RIGHT AFTER IT FINISHED INSTALLING). I don't want to plough through 20 million configuration files to hunt these annoying things down. I want an OS that WORKS. AND LINUX NEVER FUCKING WORKS.
I don't want to know about kernels, modules, protocols and config files. I want to install and USE my computer. And I'm a CS student for fuck's sake. I use Debian at uni, and even there it doesn't run as smooth as it should (booting a Debian box at uni takes about 15 minutes, if you're lucky).
So, if everyone EVER tells you Linux is 'easy', or 'better', or 'faster' than Windows, stick your fingers in your ears and go LALALALALALA. Because it's bullshit.
Windows works. I know where things are, it works out of the box. Sure, there's a lot of crap in Windows, but at least it runs.
Please, if there are any Linux-evangelists here, tell me why it's supposed to better. In a practical sense, not on a philosophical level.
Posted by Omega (Member # 91) on :
Linux is better in the sense that you can make it do absolutely anything you want at all. Assuming you're going to live long enough to figure it out and implement it. But certain aspects of it like installation are not as polished as Windows, which is its major hurdle right now. It's not going to just work.
Personally, I'm waiting for ReactOS. Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
It's not better. It's different. Part of the appeal is that everything down to the kernel-level stuff is modifiable (in those distributions that still fall under the GPL, obviously). With Windows, what you see is what you get, and that's it. With Linux, if you don't like a module/package/shell/kernel/whatever, you tear it out and aptget another one, because you can. That open-endedness is why it's so popular in, erh, certain circles that I do not travel in (despite the gritty manual labor you sometimes/often need to do to tune a Linux machine to your preferred frequency). Linux is a sandbox, Windows is the sand filling it. Or something.
Also, when properly configured, most Linux distributions ARE faster than Windows simply due to there being less OS overhead, but on the flipside of that coin is the price you pay in hardware support and general usability. It's a trade-off that not everyone is going to be up for.
You're somewhat right that in a strictly practical sense, Linux can't match Windows virtual pound for virtual pound yet, but on the other hand, there is very little you can do in any version of Windows that you can't do in any distribution of Linux after a slightly greater initial investment. In fact, with the exception of playing games, I don't think there is anything I couldn't do under Linux that I can do under Windows. It'd just take a little/a lot longer.
As for Windows being more accessible, I am one-hundred percent convinced that if I were to sit my ancient digibetic grandmother behind Mandrake/Redhat/Ubuntu coupled with KDE/Gnome, she would give up in frustration just as quickly as she would if I were to sit her behind 2000/XP coupled with, erh, nothing. One-hundred percent.
(OK, maybe not.)
(Also, philosophy is cool.)
Posted by Balaam Xumucane (Member # 419) on :
Ha! You'd buy her an iMac, wouldn't you. Don't wait for the translation, answer me now!
Heh. He said Ubuntu.
I got a free copy of Lindows. Thinking about doing some tinkering with one of my orphan PCs. Scary though.
Posted by deadcujo (Member # 13) on :
I still use PADD OS. Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"You'd buy her an iMac, wouldn't you."
Da.
Posted by Mucus (Member # 24) on :
quote:Originally posted by Harry: I don't want to know about kernels, modules, protocols and config files. ... Please, if there are any Linux-evangelists here, tell me why it's supposed to better.
Its better because most of the people using it DO know about kernels, modules, protocols, and config files.
Posted by Nim' (Member # 205) on :
Pack of schoolkids: -"Ooooooooooooh."
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
There are two people at my workplace who proclaim how good Linux is and how much better it is than Windows. They both have ponytails. They both wear black almost exclusively. They both have really, really crap beards. That is why I hate Linux.
Posted by Nim' (Member # 205) on :
"Gordon Freeman" spectacles?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
No, actually. And he had short hair. And it was even slightly "rogue-ish" in HL2 (at least compared to HL1), and his nerd goatee wasn't anywhere near as bad as these stupid limp beards.
Posted by AndrewR (Member # 44) on :
quote:Originally posted by PsyLiam: There are two people at my workplace who proclaim how good Linux is and how much better it is than Windows. They both have ponytails. They both wear black almost exclusively. They both have really, really crap beards. That is why I hate Linux.
That is a classic quote - can I use it in a sig file sometime? Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Okay, although I'm sure Simon could say something funnier.
Posted by Cartman (Member # 256) on :
"They both have really, really crap beards. That is why I hate Linux."
And you would certainly know a crap beard when you saw one, now wouldn't you?
Posted by PsyLiam (Member # 73) on :
Differences include:
1/ I never pretended that that beard was any good. 2/ I shaved it off. 3/ I did not have a dank, limp-haired ponytail 4/ I wore a coat of many colours.
Posted by Jason Abbadon (Member # 882) on :
![[Smile]](smile.gif)
![[Frown]](frown.gif)
![[Big Grin]](biggrin.gif)