dcsimg
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 5 LastLast
Results 16 to 30 of 71

Thread: LINUX SUCKS!!!!

  1. #16
    Member
    Join Date
    Aug 2001
    Location
    Apache Junction, AZ
    Posts
    235
    hoodedrat~~ gay I think not. since when does an OS have a sexual preference?

    bsamuels~~ see above response

    fishninja007~~ about the kernel.. ever heard of a BSOD in windows? that's a problem with the kernel or software interacting with the kernel. don't you wish you could go in and fix it yourself? I know I have lots of times. With open source/GNU/GPL you can do that legally too...

    the reason why everything is compared to a MS app is because MS happens to be the big boy in the market currently and in order to be easily used it needs to be compatible.

    for example MS Office is the defacto standard of word processing apps therefore for business reasons apps in linux are made compatible with MS word. As for MSIE see above. and actually now they are equivalents of MSIE 5.5

    and the good thing about GNU/GPL aka free software. Lots of people look at the code and tweakit/fix it and as a result normally it ends up being more secure and less bugfree than the original release.

    Yes I will say that linux is not as carefree of an OS as windows but it's not really meant for a normal "point and click, I wanna play games and surf the net user" It's meant for people who TRULY use a computer and put it thru it's paces.

    Not to say you can't do that with a MS OS but you can tweak things to how you like them all the way down to the kernel level.

    Hoodedrat (again)~~ can't do anything with linux huh? how come full blown hoolywood level movies have been created on Linux machines? can you say "Shrek" ? parts of "Titanic" special effects.and there are more than that but that is an example.

    Also why is Solaris which used to be the defacto standard for internet servers now losing alot of ground to linux machines?

    and you can't do anything to screw it up? try this at a console
    "su root" then enter root password and start deleting stuff..

    bsamuels~~ maybe it is for him because of what he uses his box for.
    Last edited by AzKidd69; 03-01-2002 at 10:25 PM.

  2. #17
    Ultimate Member Rugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, Earth
    Posts
    2,694
    I've used both Windows and Linux. I like both for different things, but since I do enjoy computer games I use Windows a lot more often.

    Why not flame OS X because it doesn't run Windows games? Any OS is a tool, and the key to success is picking the right tool for the right job. Linux would not have developed the following it has if it was a bad OS.

  3. #18
    Ultimate Member araaraara's Avatar
    Join Date
    Oct 2000
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    1,007
    For the people here who say linux sucks, would you say that a semi-trailer truck sucks at driving a twisty mountain road at 80+ mph compared to a sports car? Maybe, but that's not important because the semi isn't designed to do that. It's supposed to be for hauling large heavy cargo over long distances, not high performance racing. I don't know of any Mustangs that can haul a 10+ ton trailer a couple hundred miles(or at all).

    Linux and Windows were designed for different reasons. Windows is supposed to have a high easy of use while linux is for stability and security and "boring" computing tasks like web hosting or routing. Only recently has it gained a UI. Windows is for people who want to be able to use a computer without having to know lots of about how the OS and hardware work.

    I have Linux (Red Hat 7.2) on my computer along with Windows98/2000/XP. Although I mostly use Windows XP, I do go into Linux to see if I can do something that I read about on the web or to do some web surfing. I can also listen to MP3s and Audio CDs under Linux, which to me, makes it not that bad of an OS.

    Anybody who is willing to take the time to run linux for a couple of weeks will find that it is an OK operating system, and one day even be close to Windows for usability. Anyone who calls themselves an "expert" should be able to understand linux.


    DON'T FEAR THE PENGUIN!

  4. #19
    Member
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Silicon Valley
    Posts
    118
    gnu
    gnome
    squid
    gimp (yes, its an acronym, but its first letter is for GNU, so it counts)
    Perl
    ...

    I should have qualified my earlier statement. Linux sucks as a desktop operating system. As a server environment it is getting very very good.

    The thing with free software is that its kind of a group effort. Lots of people work on it, a lot of the time with no real central sense of direction. Different people have different styles and different levels of programming ability (though most that contribute to open source stuff are pretty good). Writing good software takes more than just good coders though, it takes people who write good requirements docs. People to write good functional specs. People with the vision to think of (I'm gonna get flamed for this) new things. In the desktop environment nobody has really done much new, its a constant 'be like microsoft' game. Sure, there are some cool ideas, I like in gnome having multiple desktop areas I can go to, but nothing really new. You might argue that thats because whenever anyone starts something new Microsoft buys them and I don't disagree. Problem is, whatever the reasons, it is still true.

    <rant>
    I would love to see linux get a real good setup for desktop users. Sure, I play with it at home a little here and there for fun and when I screw up my windows install and need a place to fix it from. Thing is, when I need to write a paper, send a fax, scan a picture I use windows. Why? Its easier and after programming for 11 hours at work I don't wanna mess around with RPMs and command lines to get my USB scanner to work, I wanna plug it in, turn on my computer (reboot 10 times ), and have it all done for me. Until Linux reaches that point (with 10 less reboots, cuz thats a place linux rules in) I will stop saying it sucks.
    </rant>

  5. #20
    Ultimate Member Kurylo's Avatar
    Join Date
    Nov 2001
    Location
    Ukraine, Lviv
    Posts
    1,607
    Who knows about Lindows? What is it?

  6. #21
    I got pie!!! Ammok's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Stoke.UK
    Posts
    4,589
    Kurylo

    Lindows will be an "out the box" Linux op sys that will be able to take any third party application for windows and run it. Games. browsers, apps, anything.

    More here

    http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/24093.html
    Life is a bowl of cherries

  7. #22
    Ultimate Member Rugor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Pacific Northwest, Earth
    Posts
    2,694
    Ya know,

    Linux sucks so much that this thread is making me put it back on my box.



    I like Linux.

  8. #23
    Member
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Posts
    396
    Yeah...Linux does suck...

    If you have no clue whatsoever about computers!

    Half the fun of any OS is learning how to use it. Windows was a nightmare when I first started using it...and now I'm comfortable with it.

    Before basing OS opinions on 1 hour of usage (including the installation) play around with it and see what you can do. There's nothing more rewarding than finally getting something to work right. I'm trying to configure my dialup connection on a laptop running RH 7.2 and I'm having a blast (but it's still not working).

    And, Linux is great for me as a programmer because at school we program in a Unix environment...once I get the dialup working, I can just scp (kinda like ftp) my files over to their server.

    Go back to your Minesweeper.

    Jason

    BTW - saw this on a t-shirt:

    Mac for Productivity
    Linux for Development
    Unix for Connectivity
    Windows for Solitaire

  9. #24
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Knoxville
    Posts
    186
    Mac for Productivity
    Linux for Development
    Unix for Connectivity
    Windows for Solitaire

    myths, myths, myths! That statement is false. Mac for Productivity. Well dosen't PhotoShop, Pagemaker, InDesign, Quark Express, Illustrator, Freehand and others run on Windows? I beleive they do, in fact I know they do. Also the Intel and AMD processors are faster then the Macs and the displays of PC is just as good if not better then Macs. In fact with the Mac G4 you get a geforce2 MX card. Yuk! give me Matrox or ATI. Windows is better for productivity.
    Linux for development? Not so Windows has more and better developement tools. Also if you want money you will develop for Windows.
    Unix for connectivity. Most high end servers are Windows.

    Bottom line: Windows is the best for productivity, development, connectivity and solitaire. Since Windows 2000 has been out for 2 years and now XP is out Windows is the King of stability as well. Windows is the best for every single last thing and its uncles ***, period.

  10. #25
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Philadelphia, Pa, USA
    Posts
    101
    Learn how to use it.
    Tell me what you need.....and I'll tell you how to live without it.

  11. #26
    Member
    Join Date
    May 2001
    Location
    Millbury, Ohio, USA
    Posts
    54
    Well time for my opinion. I here that people say that Linux is more stable, well I say, ummm ya right. I don't have exact numbers but I am guessing that of all these billlions of computers in the world about 90% or more are windows/dos(microsoft) machines, now where do u think people are going to take numbers from. Well out of all these billions of windows machines, this many or that many crash, ya know why because there is more, if there were equal amount of Linux machines out there I would say well they are probubly even, actually I would say MS products would be more stable/crash less.

    No u may say I am being one sided but, look at it this way, u got millions of programmers out there and they are making programs that support MS because there is a much bigger market, and u know why MS operating systems have so much BSOD/crashes ,about 95 or more percent because of bad programming. It would be kind of hard to make a Operating system compatable with all these programmers that will not ever crash, wouldent it. That is why nothing is compatible with Linux, if it was Linux would have more problems.

    My business example............That, yes that linux box is awesome, it u just sits there and runs and runs(not much on it proxy and data storage),now- knowone knows how to use it --go figure no wonder it wont crash, knowone knows how to use it, how is someone going to get in there and mess it up......dahhhhh.

    Now on a windows system, it is more user freindly, and more people can get in it, and screw with it/not a server of course(ya right servers have people on them configureing things or what not). All I have to say is look at the big picture, no I mean the BIG PICTURE, think about it. Linux kind of reminds me of DOS, now will a DOS box be stable if u just sit it there and let it be a firewall/proxy/data server, i think it will, and I would bet if u set it side by side next to Linux box they would both run the same amount of time, and yes so will that windows system for that matter. I just checked the processes on my WIN2000 Server box, CPU time says 10223:24:17, now I do not know how long that is but i know it is over a year. Well u say maybe I have good luck with MS products(and I m just one person), I know how to use MS products, just like Linux users know how to use Linux.( by the way, my 2000 box does Active Directory, IIS,FTP,RRAS,VPN,NAT, and data storage)


    I am working on my MCSE, my next test is 216, wish me Luck. I also do tech support for a business 24 hours a week, and 90% percent of probs on these "Windows 9x " clients are user error, the other 5% is bad hardware. Anyone have any valid opinions am open. But I will never use a linux product if I can help it, been working with MS to long to learn somthing new, and I don't want to anyway( not stubbern, just don't have the time, life is to short, have to have some fun, hehe).

    Another thought, who do u think is going to make a better operating system. All the Programmers in the world who hate MS and love tweaking the bugs out of Linux(yes bugs), to make it better. Or MS's programmers who are getting paid the BIG bucks to do something they like/love to do.(I don't want to hear anything about stealing/borrowing of software u mught think MS did, -different subject), I know that if I liked doing something, and then got paid big bucks for it, it would make that programm that much better. A previous comment was made, and it is in-my-opinion is true about everything in life, in one way or another-- U get what u pay for. -->The END

    The only thing I would trust that is free, is AIR(not everwhere), well I guess trust is a big word , but u know what i mean.


    IN MY HONEST OPIONION-thats all, nothing else.

    Eric
    Last edited by E-Z-Eroc; 03-04-2002 at 12:58 AM.

  12. #27
    Hi kids,

    I'm a Computer Science Junior at Georgia Tech (http://www.gatech.edu). I spend the better part of each day in front of a terminal window, usually coding in C.

    From all my experiences with this interface, and the various GUIs I've used, I have concluded an important point:

    Any version of Unix: Solaris, Redhat, etc. really does suck for the end user. It has an interface similar to that of PCAOL 1.5 and couldn't help to easily automate a process if its poorly documented, open source life depended on it.

    I don't care if Windows has securities issues. I've never been the victim of one.

    I don't care of Windows becomes unstable. It's offered to me more functionality than any GUI or utility in Linux has, application suites included.

    Being different does not make you cool. If you use a flavor of Unix because others have taught you that it's wrong to like Microsoft, you're losers. If you use a version of Unix when you could use Microsoft for the same process, you're hurting yourselves.

    Learn to use a standard that has good documentation and support. Stop being idiots.

    Microsoft Rules.
    Last edited by Ranma; 03-04-2002 at 01:54 AM.

  13. #28
    Member Bogg's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Bollnäs, Sweden
    Posts
    174
    Also the Intel and AMD processors are faster then the Macs <- Tssk, get your facts straigth, sure, a 2000+ may be faster than a G4 1Ghz, but the G4 kicks the *** of a 1Ghz AMD or Intel processor


    Hmms, why do i not recognize myself in everybodies complaints about the GUI in unix? first of Console ROCKS, I just use X to surf the web or other things that really need a GUI.
    And what about WindowMaker, Gnome and KDE they all rock, and are really easy to use....get a life, don't come down on a group of OS'es just because you can't handle them...
    Hmms, what was it? "If you do something in UNIX that could also be done in Windows, stop hurting yourself?" or how was it? Hmms, Some things i do in Unix and Linux I couldn't have done whatsoever in Windows, like bash-scripting, how the hell to do it on a WindOoooze machine? And what about the 'Freeness' of Linux and other unices, why pay $120 or something for Windows when you could get Linux for free, and do everything you can on windows? Sure, it may be a little bit harder to do it, but it gets done, and often even better.
    Last edited by Bogg; 03-04-2002 at 07:30 AM.
    ----
    Men folket pa sysopt...ar ni verkligen sa pass intresserade av min signatur att ni maste fraga?

  14. #29
    Banned
    Join Date
    Oct 2001
    Location
    Knoxville
    Posts
    186
    Also the Intel and AMD processors are faster then the Macs <- Tssk, get your facts straigth, sure, a 2000+ may be faster than a G4 1Ghz, but the G4 kicks the *** of a 1Ghz AMD or Intel processor


    I agree that mhz for mhz Mac beat AMD or Intel but I was not talking about that. I am talking about the best Intel has to offer is faster then what the best Mac has to offer the same with AMD as well.
    Also an important point I forgot to make PC is much cheaper then the Mac and you can built your own PC. That is a huge bonus.

  15. #30
    Hey Boggs,

    "... get a life, don't come down on a group of OS'es just because you can't handle them... "

    I can handle them just fine. I spend a good bit of time in them. They're not more powerful; they're ****.

    "I just use X to surf the web or other things that really need a GUI. "

    I can't remember how many times I've had to do a kill pid_num on netscape because it froze. The issues with that browser are not limited to to a particular distro or configuration. Wasn't there this thing called the internet that propelled information distribution and retrieval into whole new level?

    "Some things i do in Unix and Linux I couldn't have done whatsoever in Windows, like bash-scripting, how the hell to do it on a WindOoooze machine?"

    From Windows:
    ssh unix_machine_of_your_choice

    Then you're dumped into a console (in an emulated terminal). Wow, that was hard. I REALLY need Unix on the frontend now.

    The real question that should be asked is why the consumer needs bash-scripting, or any other console service. I believe Microsoft had a similar feature about fifteen years ago, with many equivalent commands, some being exactly the same. There was plenty of (needless) control, and a setup that alienated many from using computers. Now I was young, so my memory may be off, but I believe they, like Apple, also determined that computing could go beyond that interface, and in doing so, opened computers to many, many more.

    Using, understanding, and programming an OS with more control and less automation doesn't make a person a more "powerful" user. In many cases, it wastes time. The mainstream will never be convinced to use a version of Unix as a desktop solution until it can improve a good many things. The problem, however, is that any variety of Linux will never be a viable business solution ( Redhat stock anyone?), meaning that such development will never occur. So desktop-wise, it'll remain a hardcore solution for zealots that at some point have either been told or brainwashed that "Linux is all you need," and through poor judgement decided to agree.
    Last edited by Ranma; 03-04-2002 at 09:32 AM.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •