Worth it to use linux?

[poptones]

That's insane. Ubuntu is on a six month release cycle, and most of the stuff is the latest stable release. With Windows you are at the mercy of the developer to get their latest "official" release. How many developers let just anyone download their latest source, compile it and run it? Funny, I don't recall hearing about any SVN archives for Adobe, or Microsoft, or even frakking winzip.

If you want to run bleeding edge software you're always going to need a "connection" somewhere. In the corporate world of Windows this is developer networks, vendor relation channels and HOPEFULLY you rank high enough on their monetization curve to merit their attention. With open source, all you need is to know is where to find the latest HOWTO and how to follow detailed instructions. There are edge cases of course... as with Windows, OSX or even freaking DOS.

This is the kind of problem that you live with in Linux distro's like Ubuntu and Fedora and yet the problem does not exist for Windows.

Wow. Again this is so unspecific as to be unbelievable. Have you never heard of Gimp, Open Office, VLC or any of the other HUNDREDS of open source applications that run on.... wait for it... WINDOWS?

So does this imaginary problem NOT exist for Windows OR linux - or does the SAME problem exist for Windows and linux?

Both.... Windows... no, wait, linux.... doh!

[amspire]

That's insane.

I wasn't attacking linux. I use it, but there are difficulties for an average user.

Ubuntu is on a six month release cycle, and most of the stuff is the latest stable release.

Exactly, which means that older releases  - even Long Term Releases - often do not get packages upgraded to current major release versions.

Have a look for the package version of Subversion for Hardy (8.04LTS). It is a LTS release supported until April 2013, so it is still a current stable release. The Version of Subversion for Hardy is a 14.X version. Hardy will run 16.x versions of Subversion, but you have to compile it yourself. It may be zero problem for you, but a typical PC user isn't interested in spending a day working out how to get 16.x subversion on their Linux system.

If you upgrade your Linux to the latest release every 6 months, then yes, you will have recent major releases for all the packages. But there can be problems upgrading to new releases - it can break some applications, particularly if you are running commercial programs that were compiled for a particular release - sometimes even a specific kernel version.

This is not a one-off problem. Just start checking on the versions of other Hardy packages, or the versions of packages in the Lucid 10.04LTS distro supported until 2015.

With Windows you are at the mercy of the developer to get their latest "official" release. How many developers let just anyone download their latest source, compile it and run it? Funny, I don't recall hearing about any SVN archives for Adobe, or Microsoft, or even frakking winzip.

I am talking about the average user who just wants to get the latest release and install it. No problems on Windows. It is a problem on Linux.

If you read my post above, I say you can download the source and compile for Linux, and I also mention that if you do that, you can no longer rely on the packages manager for keeping it up-to-date. It is now your job to keep download the updated source packages and compiling. Am I wrong?

If you want to run bleeding edge software you're always going to need a "connection" somewhere. In the corporate world of Windows this is developer networks, vendor relation channels and HOPEFULLY you rank high enough on their monetization curve to merit their attention. With open source, all you need is to know is where to find the latest HOWTO and how to follow detailed instructions. There are edge cases of course... as with Windows, OSX or even freaking DOS.

This is the kind of problem that you live with in Linux distro's like Ubuntu and Fedora and yet the problem does not exist for Windows.

Wow. Again this is so unspecific as to be unbelievable. Have you never heard of Gimp, Open Office, VLC or any of the other HUNDREDS of open source applications that run on.... wait for it... WINDOWS?

So does this imaginary problem NOT exist for Windows OR linux - or does the SAME problem exist for Windows and linux?

I am lost trying to follow where you are going. Yes, those packages are available on Windows, and I can install them on anything from the latest Windows 7 back to perhaps Windows 2000 in many cases. The one install package will work with all versions of Windows. I do not require a separate install package for every release of every different Distro. For most Windows programs, the issue of needing a separate installer for different versions of Windows does not exist which is what I was saying. For Linux, it is a problem that does absolutely exist.

For Linux, it is far from ideal, but it is what Linux users and developers have accepted as a price for the many other advantages they get.

Have you ever tried to get a Linux source that was last updated in, say 2004, and compiling it for your latest Ubuntu? It is worth a try, if you have a few weeks of your life to spare. I can get a 2004 Windows program and I will probably have no problem installing and running it on my Windows 7 64 bit PC.

If you think I am attacking Linux, I am not. I am just mentioning a big difference between Windows and Linux that really prevents average Windows users from switching to Linux.

I use Linux. If you look at my answer to the original question on whether it is worth using Linux, I recommended knowing Windows and Linux.

Richard.

[lapm]

Well i have been useing linux since late 90´s. i would say that skills you get by useing linux is not wasted time. if nothing else it gives you choises and better understanding whats bossible with computer.

But in the end, operating system is just a tool, that allows programms to work on computer. Personally i use both ubuntu and windows7. Witch one i use, depends on what im doing. Some programs only works on windows. Some work on linux. If im trying to do microcontroller programming, i can usually do it in both. My avr programmer is generic usb type and can be used on both systems.

In the end, learning something new is newer wasted time. It keeps your brain fresh and gives you new ideas to try. And no, i dont recomend linux to everyone. No tool fits all needs. Linux has its uses, same as windows does have its uses. but i dont believe that there is on thing that can fill every need.

To me reason to start useing Linux originally was the power it gave me. It had all tons of programss ready to use after install. Im somewhat interested in programming, so Linux was to me very nice find. and i believe becouse of all that, im today much better computer user then i used to be.

[poptones]

The Version of Subversion for Hardy is a 14.X version. Hardy will run 16.x versions of Subversion, but you have to compile it yourself. It may be zero problem for you, but a typical PC user isn't interested in spending a day working out how to get 16.x subversion on their Linux system.

Again: this is not a problem"most users" are going to encounter. Most users are not power users. Internet, maybe videogames are the most "power" demanding apps average users deal with. If you want to be a power user, then yeah you're going to have to deal with that stuff.

Which is no different than Windows. The last time I used Windows on my home machine I was still doing development work on AviSynth, which meant I needed the latest and greatest Visual C studio. I was using Windows 2000 (this was about 2001) and it was a freaking nightmare to get Microsoft's own software installed in their latest OS! It was one update pack after another - go get this installer package,go get that update, then apply this other update AFTER you've done that update - it was a frakkin nightmare. Three days it took me to get my system back up and running after a reload. And I was not alone - our c developer when I was in LA (around 2000) had the same ordeal when we got him a new machine. Took him more than two days to get that damn thing in order.

How long does it take to put together a build environment in ubuntu? As long as it takes to type and run "apt-get install build-essentials."

I just installed Windows7 a few weeks back for a class, and it was similar - there's virtually nothing there when you get the machine installed, you have to go on the internet and find all this crap just to get basic functionality out of the machine. I could give a grandma a thumbdrive with ubuntu, show her how to boot from it, and she could hit the ground running. She'd still need vlc to do media stuff, but that's one click away in the software center, which is easily supported with a phone call.

If you upgrade your Linux to the latest release every 6 months, then yes, you will have recent major releases for all the packages. But there can be problems upgrading to new releases - it can break some applications, particularly if you are running commercial programs that were compiled for a particular release - sometimes even a specific kernel version.

This is not a problem with linux - this is a problem with running proprietary software which only makes itself available in binary blobs. Either get them to fix that error, or find an open source alternative and you won't have this problem.

Do you have any idea how widespread this problem is with Windows? I just finished a contract with intuit, they are still using  freaking ie6 on their desktops because so much of their legacy software depends on proprietary, nonstandard behavior of that browser. The new desktops that have ie8 are essentially "broken" right out of the box, and you can't install ie6 on them - you can't "degrade" this part of the OS.

Legacy support is a huge problem in the windows world. It is with linux too - the difference here only comes down to how often you are able to fix vulnerabilities. Linux wins in that regard hands down.

This is not a one-off problem. Just start checking on the versions of other Hardy packages, or the versions of packages in the Lucid 10.04LTS distro supported until 2015.

'Scuse me, but there have been how many versions of Windows? 95. 98, me, 2k, xp... A few of them came just a couple years apart, but there was about a decade in ther where there was no "new Windows." You didn't have the option of upgrading at any price. So it's a problem because an LTS release doesn't upgrade itself to the newest packages? That's WHY they're LTS releases. If you want bleeding edge you don't marry yourself to LTS releases. LTS is supposed to be stable. That means not changing. That means not bleeding edge. It means you have a desktop that you know will be supported and mature, not that it will always be introducing new niggles and tweaks with every update. LTS releases are so companies can rest assured they won't be facing those "legacy" issues just mentioned for at least the next few years.

I am talking about the average user who just wants to get the latest release and install it. No problems on Windows. It is a problem on Linux.

No, the problem is defining "latest and greatest." In Windows, "latest and greatest" is what the high priests of your software company are willing to make availabe to you. In linux, "latest and greatest" means whatever is in the svn repository. Most popular software is also supported by individuals who do make it easy for the users of their favorite distro to just click and install, but you have the work of finding that person. Oh well.. so learn to do a ./install or learn to use google. It's much less a "problem" than not knowing when the next update is coming or ever.

If you read my post above, I say you can download the source and compile for Linux, and I also mention that if you do that, you can no longer rely on the packages manager for keeping it up-to-date. It is now your job to keep download the updated source packages and compiling. Am I wrong?

Depends, again, on what you mean  by "latest and greatest." I use pan and newspost, neither of which are the latest versions in ubuntu. Pan was pretty much abandoned for a few years, but then was picked up again in the last year or so. Newspost hasn't changed much at all since probably 2005. I built newspost years ago and it still works just fine. I built pan back around 10.04 and it worked just fine for quite some time. I doubt that version would work with 12.04 because they went to gnome 3, but it didn't require a rebuild on every upgrade.

It also depends on  where you put that software. If you built a flat install with everything in one big honkin' drive, then your userdata is going to get stomped on with every upgrade. That means all your installed software is going to get ripped out and brought up to sync with the latest version, whatever that might be. This is why, when you do a ./configure you make sure your custom builds go into ~/bin, not /usr/share or whatever.

But if you're just running updates and not an all out upgrade, and if you already have a newer version of something of course the package manager isn't going to update it - it can't, and you wouldn't want it to revert your newer version.

This is the kind of problem that you live with in Linux distro's like Ubuntu and Fedora and yet the problem does not exist for Windows.

Wow. Again this is so unspecific as to be unbelievable. Have you never heard of Gimp, Open Office, VLC or any of the other HUNDREDS of open source applications that run on.... wait for it... WINDOWS?

I am lost trying to follow where you are going. Yes, those packages are available on Windows, and I can install them on anything from the latest Windows 7 back to perhaps Windows 2000 in many cases. The one install package will work with all versions of Windows. I do not require a separate install package for every release of every different Distro. For most Windows programs, the issue of needing a separate installer for different versions of Windows does not exist which is what I was saying. For Linux, it is a problem that does absolutely exist.

I used Windows for quite some time. This notion about a universal installer is fallacious - every time I installed something it inevitably needed some other package of dlls from some other software. I have no doubt Microsoft has taken steps to update that, but I am  also dead certain this is  not a dead issue - even in 8 they are saying some certain legacy apps will no longer run. When I was doing my Windows 7 class they spent an entire week on the "features" that allow XP apps to (maybe) run in a new "xp mode." They also spent some time talking up the hypervisor and virtualisation as a means of making it sound like a "feature" that you can always run those old apps in a virtual machine - but of course you now have to install microsoft's virtualisation software, configure a vm, then install xp in that vm. And Windows8 is going to be even less compatible because the UI is pretty much an entirely new paradigm. So grandma's not going to get confused when she goes to install some recipe package from 2005 but it won't work in Win7 so she has to go to the xp vm, fire up the package installer there and then manage all these links from one OS to another? Yeah, that doesn't sound like a power user issue at all...

And let's not even get into drivers. I don't know how much hardware I was forced to upgrade those years I was using Windows. I remember at least a couple of printers and several scanners - new version of windows comes out, guess what? You need new drivers! Oh, I'm sorry.. your hardware maker no longer supports that scanner so there will  be no win2k driver, time to upgrade! Oh, I'm sorry... that printer won't be supported in Windows 7....

If you want to be a power user, you're going to have to learn new skills. It's not harder than windows - it's much easier, actually - but it's different. You've got to learn to use google, and you've got to stop letting the notion of "compiling software" be something scary. Windows users are not used to thinking that way, they're used to thinking of software as something that's handed down from upon high. The whole point of open source is it isn't.

[free_electron]

2) woohoo! Open source!

How much of that source have you
A) actually read ?
B) do you actually understand ?
C) made modifications to because you needed it ?
D) posted it back to the community ?
E) was reabsorbed into an actual release ?

Let me guess .. None ? To all questions ...

That whole open source thing is just a bunch of blabla.
Of the people using linux about 1% actually have read some of the source.
Of that 1% about 1% are capable of actually making meaninful mods to it.
And of those mods maybe 1% makes it into a release ...

That's not the point, and you damn well know it.

No , it may not be 'the' point but ot is 'a' point.
A lot of afficionados ( in the mac world they call them mactards or sheeple , don't know what they call linux equivalents.. Loonies ? )
Bleat the ' open source' stuff , yet they don't even understand a single line of code in the kernel.

Now, personally, as a computer USER ( i don't design operating systems and i don't write programs. A computer is a box where i can install programs that let me be productive and do things i want to do ) i don't give shit if the source is available or not.

My car is used to drive to work and back. If it fails i take it to the dealer. I can change a lightbulb. Oilchange is done at jiffy lube. I do not install a new motor, nor do i have any interest in how the rear differential works. I am also not going to cut a hole in the roof to install a sunroof and post on the internet clear instructions on how it was done.

My computer is used to run Altium , Quartus , Rhino , Photoshop , Premiere , Illustrator , office etc . If it needs an update or an install i can do. Antivirus is also simple. I do not build kernels , have no interest in how the network stack works so i can get wireless running , or am going to mod it and post back.

From this 'user' perspective, having the source is useless.
Windows works perfectly fine. Xp sp4 is stable and so is win7. I haven't seen a bluescreen in the last 10 years and ii have 8 computers. Then again, i do 't change stuff in them either. I don't install new graphics cards every year and i don't mess with the system. I have 5 or 6 programs that i use and that's it. My mac also works perfectly fine.
My linux boxes also work perfectly fine. I don't update them and use them as is. (red hat) i played with ubuntu and gave up. Every 6 months you can reinstall ,you get force fed a new gui ( that adds NOTHING ... i only care about the apps ) . Installers change . Code compiled for one linux platform cannot install on another. There are competing package managers that are incompatible ... No thanks.
And the toolmakers ( altera ) only deliver builds for very specific os build , because they too are resource limited and cannot follow every whim of the os twiddlers )

There is too much flux in the linux world which makes it hard to keep with the flow. And supporting all older flavors is a nightmare

[T4P]

I like open source because i at least know what's going under the roof...

True that i don't know nuts about Linux itself but i hate Windows just for the fact that everything is hidden away from me

It's just like measuring equipment that uses all proprietary and there's absolutely no info on them, i hate that

[madires]

How much of that source have you
A) actually read ?
B) do you actually understand ?
C) made modifications to because you needed it ?
D) posted it back to the community ?
E) was reabsorbed into an actual release ?

Let me guess .. None ? To all questions ...

Done all of that and also wrote several programs for communication stuff.

[madires]

Linux is an OS with a child-proof lock :-) If you are just a user, running some applications, there's not much difference between Windows and Linux besides the licence costs. But Windows makes it easy for an user to click around system settings and cause trouble, especially if the user has got administration rights. One can fix that but it's quite cumbersome. If you are going for advanced stuff like automation of tasks or debugging problems Linux will help you a lot more than any Windows. And it's not Linux only, it's the whole Unix family.

I know both worlds well, managed corporate Windows domains, written group policy rules since some stuff wasn't included by default, cleaning up tons of malware for friends, managing Unix systems providing Internet services and also developing software. At home I'm a happy linux user :-)

[saturation]

I agree fully with free_electron: apps drive which OS to use.  I now add Android to the bunch.

OS are mature enough and boxes cheap enough that users can support them to run the app you need rather than siding with any camp.

Now, personally, as a computer USER ( i don't design operating systems and i don't write programs. A computer is a box where i can install programs that let me be productive and do things i want to do ) i don't give shit if the source is available or not.

[poptones]

Who needs boxes? Use VMs and run any os you want. In linux it's pretty trivial to use terminal server to create links directly to windows apps running in a vm. I just hate Windows apps because they're ugly and clunky feeling.

[poptones]

[Veliz]

lol

[Monkeh]

Now, personally, as a computer USER ( i don't design operating systems and i don't write programs. A computer is a box where i can install programs that let me be productive and do things i want to do ) i don't give shit if the source is available or not.

Fine. You are not every user. The point, for many, in open source is the development model. It is far superior to closed-source for most applications, and the proof is out there if you open your eyes and look.

From this 'user' perspective, having the source is useless.

From this one specific perspective you seem to apply to everyone.

Windows works perfectly fine. Xp sp4 is stable and so is win7. I haven't seen a bluescreen in the last 10 years and ii have 8 computers.

I'm glad to know you don't do anything involving hardware access beyond USB and RS232.

And the toolmakers ( altera ) only deliver builds for very specific os build , because they too are resource limited and cannot follow every whim of the os twiddlers )

There is too much flux in the linux world which makes it hard to keep with the flow. And supporting all older flavors is a nightmare

It's actually not hard at all to keep up with it. They simply refuse to adjust their development model to suit the platform they chose to develop for. That is their fault.

[Simon]

damn I think my dodgy windows7 has been caught up with again  I refuse to use that shit known as vista despite having paid for it !!!

[Monkeh]

damn I think my dodgy windows7 has been caught up with again  I refuse to use that shit known as vista despite having paid for it !!!

Caught up with by who and how?

[T4P]

Vista was dodgy. 7 is much better
7 Is a boatload more stable than Vista back then i would have to wait 10mins after i got onto the desktop ...

[krish2487]

well...

Quite an interesting thread...

Must say quite refreshing to see a Windows vs Linux thread instead of the usual
"Pic vs AVR" bashing....

 

my 2 cents..

As with the case of pic vs avr, use what each individual is comfortable with.

I wouldnt go so far to say the parallel is exact but its a comparision nevertheless.

The key points being change, customization, ease of use, long term stability and most importantly learning curve.

I am being deliberately vague and general here,
I am not endorsing any specific OS here. Use what you (the user) likes, feels better, adopts easily, maintains easily yada yada yada.

Afterall that is the ultimate goal of any OS isnt it. ease of use combined with rock solid stabillity, intuitive menu system with blazing fast performance.

(I myself am a core *nix user having "made the leap of faith" a couple of years ago. I also respect each individual's wishes as to the choice of OS)

I ll just say this :- go with what you are comfortable with.

as to the OP, if you have used both MS and *nix, you would already have a favourite by now, go with it. If not then weigh your options and your needs.

[free_electron]

Now, personally, as a computer USER ( i don't design operating systems and i don't write programs. A computer is a box where i can install programs that let me be productive and do things i want to do ) i don't give shit if the source is available or not.

Fine. You are not every user. The point, for many, in open source is the development model. It is far superior to closed-source for most applications, and the proof is out there if you open your eyes and look.

that is why i explicitly wrote 'personally as a user'. You drag in the developer again. I AM NOT A DEVELOPER. I AM A USER. I don't give a rats ass if there is source or not. I pick the program i want to use , pay for it if it is not gratis, and i am done.

From this one specific perspective you seem to apply to everyone.

again: it is from a pure user perspective. Users like me don't care if there is source or not. We're not going to read it or mod it. It's a tool. We use it. As is.

I'm glad to know you don't do anything involving hardware access beyond USB and RS232.

like what hardware access ? If i buy a peripheral i plug it in , install the accompanying driver and software and done. What hardware do you feel the need to access yourself ? Any piece of hardware out there comes with drivers.
For homebrew hardware usb works fine. Serial ports and printerports are relics. Windows has winusb built in. For PCI cards , and very few hobbyists thread there, there are tools from jungo and altera. They give you the ip and the api. Done.

It's actually not hard at all to keep up with it. They simply refuse to adjust their development model to suit the platform they chose to develop for. That is their fault.

That may very well be, but as a user of those tools it brings me extra headache. If i download the win or mac instaler it deploy irregardeless of version. . Xp , vista 7. 32 or 64 bit. Don't matter. Click and run. Linix version ? Ehhh sorry .. Only specific build. If you don't have that build you need to do the legwork. No thanks. I'm lazy. Can't be bothered. Want to develop block of logic in fpga.. Not learn how to hack loonix ...

[free_electron]

It's just like measuring equipment that uses all proprietary and there's absolutely no info on them, i hate that

Now there is an interesting statement to play with ...
So, if it's got anything proprietary you refuse to use it. Scrap all mayor brands then. Agilent, tek, fluke , even rigol gets eliminated..

Let's extrapolate a bit. 'no info on them' if it uses an asic those get eliminated too. There go the cheap brands too... Tonghui ,appa, extech .. Game over as they use asics for the meter part where you can not get info for.

Lets extrapolate further. an ic is a black box. You don't really know what is inside... You have a vague description in the form of a datasheet but you can only 'use' it. Not 'modify it' .. So let's scrap anything that has IC's in it too...

So you are stuck with an analog multimeter with a needle amd a 'grid-dipper' built around a triode for your RF work...

You are only short-changing yourself. Blocked by some stupid filosophy.
I don't like this . . Blablabla . I will go live in a tree ... Fine.. But you are missing all the cool stuff like running warm and cold water , an oven , a car , central heating and airco and a soft bed to sleep in.

This is all idealistic nonsense. You can't change the world. Live in it or live outside it. Either way works. The world doesn't care. I elect to live in it. I take the path that makes my life easiest. When it comes to computers : the machine that let's me run the program i want to use wins. I don't care if it's windows, linux or mac or something else. It's a tool that serves a purpose. I don't make or modify tools. I use them. I make the thing i want to , go home , throw some dead cow on the bbq and go float in the pool. The world moves on. With or without me.


Reductio at absurdum : you are restricted to handwound coils and resistors and leyden-jar style capacitors as you can't construct or modify any other part... Because you refuse to use anything that contains a black box or something you cannot 'mod'

See how absurd this philosophy is ?
It is idiotic to want to do everything. Use what exists and build upon that. Reinventing the wheel over and over gets you only .. A wheel. You will never get a car.

[poptones]

Users like me don't care if there is source or not. We're not going to read it or mod it.

doesn't matter. If you use it then you are, defacto, benefitting from all those things you fail to see as benefits. Without open source sharing, no linux kernel. Gnu existed for quite some time without the kernel and emacs was sort of the poster child of that - so what, without a holistic OS you were just running a "free" text editor on an overpriced and locked down OS. The way the software grows and matures is because of all those things. Ergo, if you  use linux, whether or not you "care" about these things, they do, in fact, matter directly to you and the way you  do things. Do you use the internet? It matters. Do you have an android phone? It matters. Do you have a home router? It matters.

Use what exists and build upon that. Reinventing the wheel...

Oh, the irony...

[T4P]

It's just like measuring equipment that uses all proprietary and there's absolutely no info on them, i hate that

Now there is an interesting statement to play with ...
So, if it's got anything proprietary you refuse to use it. Scrap all mayor brands then. Agilent, tek, fluke , even rigol gets eliminated..

Let's extrapolate a bit. 'no info on them' if it uses an asic those get eliminated too. There go the cheap brands too... Tonghui ,appa, extech .. Game over as they use asics for the meter part where you can not get info for.

Lets extrapolate further. an ic is a black box. You don't really know what is inside... You have a vague description in the form of a datasheet but you can only 'use' it. Not 'modify it' .. So let's scrap anything that has IC's in it too...

So you are stuck with an analog multimeter with a needle amd a 'grid-dipper' built around a triode for your RF work...

I know! It's just a general fact ... I use them tools but i want at least some info what's going under the hood, don't like sneaky things happening out of the blue and not knowing how to reverse that

[GeoffS]

I know! It's just a general fact ... I use them tools but i want at least some info what's going under the hood, don't like sneaky things happening out of the blue and not knowing how to reverse that

So if you're running Linux and you have, say, a kernel fault, you'd be able to fix it?
Knowing what's 'under the hood' is a long way from being able to repair it when it goes wrong.

[Lukas]

Today's operating systems have emerged to a complexity, that failure is imminent. No matter whether you use windows or linux, it will break at some point. With windows, your stuck with fiddling with various auto-repair options and reinstalling software. Not the way we engineers solve our problems... If a linux system breaks, you have the possibility to track down the failure and fix it properly (without reading the source code) A computer operating system that 'just works' is utopia. If you want a computing device, that 'just works', go an buy yourself one of these shiny new Android or iOS based mobile devices...

[Monkeh]

that is why i explicitly wrote 'personally as a user'. You drag in the developer again. I AM NOT A DEVELOPER. I AM A USER. I don't give a rats ass if there is source or not. I pick the program i want to use , pay for it if it is not gratis, and i am done.

I did not drag in the developer, I dragged in the development model, which affects you as a user whether you want to realise it or not.

I'm glad to know you don't do anything involving hardware access beyond USB and RS232.

like what hardware access ? If i buy a peripheral i plug it in , install the accompanying driver and software and done. What hardware do you feel the need to access yourself ? Any piece of hardware out there comes with drivers.
For homebrew hardware usb works fine. Serial ports and printerports are relics. Windows has winusb built in. For PCI cards , and very few hobbyists thread there, there are tools from jungo and altera. They give you the ip and the api. Done.

Things like audio and video acceleration with consumer grade hardware. Where Windows and the people who write the entirely closed spaghetti code drivers nobody can possibly help with the development of fall over, badly. If you used significant 3D acceleration, or Creative audio cards, or even some SATA or USB3 drivers, you would have had BSODs.

It's actually not hard at all to keep up with it. They simply refuse to adjust their development model to suit the platform they chose to develop for. That is their fault.

That may very well be, but as a user of those tools it brings me extra headache. If i download the win or mac instaler it deploy irregardeless of version. . Xp , vista 7. 32 or 64 bit. Don't matter. Click and run. Linix version ? Ehhh sorry .. Only specific build. If you don't have that build you need to do the legwork. No thanks. I'm lazy. Can't be bothered. Want to develop block of logic in fpga.. Not learn how to hack loonix ...

And again you entirely miss the point. If the developers did their job you would not need to do any of that.

So if you're running Linux and you have, say, a kernel fault, you'd be able to fix it?
Knowing what's 'under the hood' is a long way from being able to repair it when it goes wrong.

Actually, I likely would. If not, I know ten people who either know how or know ten people who either know how or know ten people who know how. Good luck with that with Windows.

[krish2487]

@monkeh

well put with the

Actually, I likely would. If not, I know ten people who either know how or know ten people who either know how or know ten people who know how. Good luck with that with Windows.

That is a fact.

One facet of open source is that people who develop are available right there to help you.

Any *nix distribution is not free from bugs. Having said that, check the most popular distro forums and chances are it is already a acknowledged problem and has been solved or people with significantly more experience are willing to guide you through it.

(I deliberately mentioned "people with significantly more experience", because the source of solution is not important, the solution is)

How many of us know any microsoft developer, who is willing to help you rewrite/modify a small section of any of their dlls just so that your webcam/printer/scanner works for you???

The open source model works well in such a scenario.

I  like to tinker around with my system, i am by no means an authority on *nix nor do i represent majority of any collective group, but the bootstrapping of open source support makes it great for me.

(PS: Many will want to talk about their bitter experiences on *nix forums where people ostracized them for posing a wrong question, but we have seen it happen here on eevblog forums and on numerous other technical forums where the OP posts without either having enough knowledge of the situation or is talking out of his hat)

As with every discipline *nix needs investment just in terms of time rather than $$$.