Worth it to use linux?

[Veliz]

Been using linux for few years, but it seems like everything runs around Windows... Every(Most? 90%) EE software its made for windows, at my school every professor, software its Windows, most companies use windows.... So is there a reason to keep using linux as an EE student?? focused in Programming and Electronics

[amspire]

It is good to be familiar with both Windows and Linux. If you have access to MACs, know how to use OS/X as well.

Windows dominates for workstations, and Linux is hard to beat for servers. Some companies and industries love Apple  MACs. For many areas of programming, Linux is great compared to Windows. It is not hard to be familiar enough with the different platforms that you can tell a potential employer you can use the different systems if required.

Most of the time, you are using an application on a computer, and once you have got the application running, it hardly matters if it is on Windows, Linux or OS/X.

[Veliz]

one side you have to deal with virus, BSOD, etc, and on the other side have to deal with drivers and software incompatibility, etc

[steve30]

Personally, I use Linux (Debian) almost exclusively. Have done ever since I built this computer about 2.5 years ago. Prior to that, I had an old Dell PC which I used with Windows 2000.

I find a lot of stuff can be done on Linux. But unfortunately, quite a bit of CAD stuff in Windows only.

I do have a partition with WinXP on it which I can use if needs be, but I also have WinXP running in Virtual Box which I use quite a lot for running Multisim. I also have MS Office 2000 installed to view my old Office documents. Although I tend to use OpenOffice.org these days, its rendering of MS Office documents still isn't perfect.

I can highly recommend that you use Linux, but there's no need to be limited to only one OS.

[amspire]

one side you have to deal with virus, BSOD, etc, and on the other side have to deal with drivers and software incompatibility, etc

All platforms are vulnerable to attacks, and Microsoft probably is currently well ahead of Linux and OS/X in terms of securing its operating systems - largely due to the fact that they have been the main target. It is not as if Linux or OS/X is in any way "more secure".

If you are talking about a platform that you need to know well enough to program in, then yes, it is easier learning one platform and you will have a bigger market if you use Windows. But then again, more and more programming is becoming platform independent through the use of scripting languages, Java, and web interfaces rather then application interfaces. If you start making hardware that uses Ethernet or WiFi rather then USB, and you use something like Python as the programming language, you can potentially run an application to communicate with the hardware that can be ported to all platforms with relatively little effort.

What sort of programming do you like to do?

[GeoffS]

I've been using Linux since is was first available and for the last 15 years or so of my working life, it's been what I've supported.
I run it at home as well but there are some things that I have to have windows for so run them in virtual machines.
I agree that some more obscure/old/expensive hardware is not well supported in Linux but it is constantly improving in that area as manufacturers start taking Linux seriously.

Security/viruses is worth a thread of it's own. 

[steve30]

One issues I have with Linux is printing. That can be hopeless compared to Windows/MacOS. But it does work, which is something.

Can't say I've ever cared too much about security. Sure, it can be a problem, but I think some people get far too paranoid about it. But how paranoid you get ought to depend on the application of the computer.

[poptones]

Wow seriously? I haven't really used Windows since Clinton was president, but one of the things I remember most was how much it SUCKED trying to install printer drivers (well, and most drivers).

I have Windows7 and am about to install server 2008 for classes I am taking, but I try to avoid it as much as possible. When I first installed Windows7 I was like "well, that looks kinda nice and I can use this VM to watch movies on Netflix" so I started trying to make it "usable." Took me about a half hour to be reminded what a hell that environment - every damn thing I want to do I have to go find drivers, install dlls and codecs and desktop apps...

Just use terminal server to install apps in linux running in a windows vm. It's more robust than running wine and it's even better integrated. If you're comfortable in linux why on earth would you want to give up that desktop? I recently worked for Intuit, where they use Windows on all the desktops, and every day reminded me just how unproductive and repetitious that environment could be. Drag.. drop...drag...drop. Crap. Give me a bash shell!

[RCMR]

I put Linux on a PC with a view to gradually transitioning to it from Windows.

The plan became somewhat derailed after I installed Ubuntu.

I figured the Linux PC would be my secondary use machine and I'd still use Windows most of the time.

Well, almost immediately I found I was using the Linux machine for virtually *everything* -- except my video editing and PCB layouts.

The Linux package just seems to work so damned well that it's now very much my primary OS -- and I haven't had to spend a single penny on third-party software -- everything I'm using is OSS.

What's more (touch wood) no malware, no need to reboot every few weeks to regain lost performance and the stability of the applications is legendary.

And of course with SBCs like the Raspberry Pi coming along, having some basic Linux skills (especially at a command-shell level) is even more valuable than ever.

So yes, it *is* worth it to use Linux -- although Windows still has a place -- just a much smaller and less secure one :-)

[T4P]

Well ... 1) Linux is fast. That cannot be challenged by or even matched by windows or that crappy OS/X
2) woohoo! Open source!

[poptones]

LOL. No wonder you don't think linux is easy... Redhat Package Manager is the reason linux sucks! Try a Debian distro and see how easy things can be.

[Simon]

I seriously tried to do linux and got endlessly frustrated. I spent 3 months on just linux before giving up due to stuff not working. Ubuntu and any derivate have horrendously poor performance (might as well use vista) but the general problem seems to be that there are so many variants that you will never get full support for all and every one has a nigling problem that stops you using it. I often find the linux community up their own asses, it's as though your a lesser being if you can't use the bash shell or what ever it's called and know all of the commands by heart. Simply put linux is largely by computer geeks for computer geeks.

My present challenge is to learn C and to program micro controllers with it. I did not put troubleshooting  linux when windows just works for me on my list of challenges.

[Monkeh]

LOL. No wonder you don't think linux is easy... Redhat Package Manager is the reason linux sucks! Try a Debian distro and see how easy things can be.

Yes, it's so easy when by default the system starts services with default configs without even asking you!

Welcome to the war.

[Veliz]

I seriously tried to do linux and got endlessly frustrated.

Having that issue now with my touchpad

[firewalker]

I am using GNU/Linux OS exclusively for 10+ years. As an EE student the times I really had to use Windows OS was limited (mostly for presentations on university's computers without GNU/Linux).  I was using the lab computers for Windows tasks.

P.S.  If you are new to GNU/Linux, please don't use Ubuntu or Ubuntu-like distros. Use Slackware, Debian, ArchLinux e.t.c. You will immediately learn what GNU/Linux really is.

Alexander.

[GeoffS]

P.S.  If you are new to GNU/Linux, please don't use Ubuntu or Ubuntu-like distros. Use Slackware, Debian, ArchLinux e.t.c. You will immediately learn what GNU/Linux really is.

Alexander.

I think a lot of people don't want to know what's happing under the hood as it were, they just want to install Linux and have it run their software. Ubuntu is very good for that.

I mostly use Centos as my job was supporting servers not desktops. When I started with UNIX over 30 years ago, no such luxuries as GUI or software installers. You always had to compile the source code and work it out yourself.
This is probably why I never took to Windows, I like to know how it all works behind the scenes.

[olsenn]

I design the shipboard software for the Canadain military's frigates; all of our work is done on Linux, since we need to bundle the OS in with our own software, and it would be too expensive to purchase Windows licenses for each machine that needs to run our software. That being said, Linux runs Java applications just as well as Windows does, and if you know the system, then you have greater control over debugging, since you can see how the OS is responding to individual commands.

Thsat being said, if you are looking for an OS for your desktop at home, and want a black box of an OS that does everything you need, easily, Windows is the way to go. Windows 7 is MORE secure than linux, and more reliable. It has most of the features of Linux, and MANY features that aren't in Linux. No OS is perfect, but Windows simply has greater application compatability and makes better use of drivers than Linux does.

I use Red Hat Enterprise Linux 5.3 if that matters to anyone. 

[firewalker]

P.S.  If you are new to GNU/Linux, please don't use Ubuntu or Ubuntu-like distros. Use Slackware, Debian, ArchLinux e.t.c. You will immediately learn what GNU/Linux really is.

Alexander.

I think a lot of people don't want to know what's happing under the hood as it were, they just want to install Linux and have it run their software. Ubuntu is very good for that.

They should stick with Windows then. There is no point for using GNU/Linux.  It's like saying I want to just enter a car and go from place A to place B. It is not possible. You will have to learn how to drive the car and the rules of driving among others. If you are not willing to, just use a taxi. It will get you from A to B.

Old but relevant.

http://linux.oneandoneis2.org/LNW.htm

Alexander.

[madires]

The other downside to Linux is hardware support. Drivers are not as readily available. This will determine whether or not you can totally abandon Windows.

But if a hardware is supported it's supported for a very long time. The problem with new Windows versions is that drivers change and you can't use some old hardware anymore because the vendor of the hardware doesn't provide a driver for the latest Windows. They want you to buy a new model to keep the share holders happy :-) Saw that a lot for scanners when upgrading from XP to Win7.

[madires]

I think a lot of people don't want to know what's happing under the hood as it were, they just want to install Linux and have it run their software. Ubuntu is very good for that.

I've installed Ubuntu on my parents PC. Since they're used to OpenOffice it was a minor transistion. They had to decide between Win7 (old OS was Win2000) plus a new PC or going for Linux. Two happy Linux users more :-)

[Mechatrommer]

But if a hardware is supported it's supported for a very long time.

i dont want to use my grandfather's 300dpi printer that is supported on Linux ver1 this day, i have 1200dpi one today. and i dont buy random brand and type of printer off the street just to meet driver supportability in Linux

The problem with new Windows versions is that drivers change and you can't use some old hardware anymore because the vendor of the hardware doesn't provide a driver for the latest Windows.

the real killer is not that (you can keep your older OS as long as you like). but the "PC hardware" (new motherboard, faster CPU, bigger RAM) that cannot run/install Windows ver 1 (or XP) anymore. i upgraded to XP due to new USB protocol, and i stick with it due to retain drivers support of existing peripherals. i will continue that way even someone threat me with death, unless my current PC hardware is damaged and i have to buy new PC that cannot support XP anymore in it thats the real nightmare!

[GeoffS]

Linux is a good way to use old hardware.
I have an ancient IBM Thinkpad that Windows 7 does not like. It will install but most of the peripherals (video, soundcard, wireless, touch pad) are not supported. All work just fine under Linux so the machine had a stay of execution.

The batteries are not holding charge for very long so I expect to scrap it soon.

[Monkeh]

But if a hardware is supported it's supported for a very long time.

i dont want to use my grandfather's 300dpi printer that is supported on Linux ver1 this day, i have 1200dpi one today. and i dont buy random brand and type of printer off the street just to meet driver supportability in Linux

How is it random if it's selected in order to work?

Despite what people will claim, most hardware works fine in Linux these days.

The problem with new Windows versions is that drivers change and you can't use some old hardware anymore because the vendor of the hardware doesn't provide a driver for the latest Windows.

the real killer is not that (you can keep your older OS as long as you like). but the "PC hardware" (new motherboard, faster CPU, bigger RAM) that cannot run/install Windows ver 1 (or XP) anymore. i upgraded to XP due to new USB protocol, and i stick with it due to retain drivers support of existing peripherals. i will continue that way even someone threat me with death, unless my current PC hardware is damaged and i have to buy new PC that cannot support XP anymore in it thats the real nightmare!

Change. It's scary.

[joseph.anand]

Windows 7 is MORE secure than linux, and more reliable.

If Windows 7 was really more secure than Linux, it would have been running far more webservers than Linux. The only thing Windows 7 is more secure than is probably windows xp.

It has most of the features of Linux, and MANY features that aren't in Linux.

USB Audio 2.0 support for one is not something Windows 7 has.

No OS is perfect, but Windows simply has greater application compatability

It is not that Windows has greater application compatibility. It is that there are more number of commercial applications for Windows. And yet many businesses do not want to upgrade from Windows XP because of compatibility issues. Writing commercial apps for Linux is not financially viable for most people as the market  share of Linux desktop is small. The same holds for Android and Windows Phone. Far more apps on Android than on Windows Phone. 

and makes better use of drivers than Linux does.

Linux distros come with more drivers than Windows 7. Getting bluetooth dongles to work on Windows can be quite a hazzle especially if you are unable to trace the driver disk.
How many times did you have to install motherboard drivers for Linux. I never did.

[G7PSK]

The only problem I have found with Linux is wireless cards finding drivers for them can be very hard if not impossible also scanners, the printers work but not scanners, so the only time I use Linux these days is when I have a problem computer I run Linux on a live CD very often just running the live cd makes the computer decide to work with Windows.

[Monkeh]

The only problem I have found with Linux is wireless cards finding drivers for them can be very hard if not impossible also scanners, the printers work but not scanners

Rather dated, that. Wireless hasn't been a problem for years. Scanners generally aren't much of a problem either.

so the only time I use Linux these days is when I have a problem computer I run Linux on a live CD very often just running the live cd makes the computer decide to work with Windows.

Which makes no sense at all.

[Veliz]

Getting the touchpad to work the same way it does in windows, i find it to be very very hard =(

[joseph.anand]

Getting the touchpad to work the same way it does in windows, i find it to be very very hard =(

I have yet to find a multi-touch touchpad that does not work in Linux. Same with Wacom tablets.

[Monkeh]

Getting the touchpad to work the same way it does in windows, i find it to be very very hard =(

Yes, getting a touchpad to work quite that badly takes a lot of effort.

[firewalker]

The only problem I have found with Linux is wireless cards finding drivers for them can be very hard if not impossible also scanners, the printers work but not scanners, so the only time I use Linux these days is when I have a problem computer I run Linux on a live CD very often just running the live cd makes the computer decide to work with Windows.

I have 7 wireless card at the moment, 4 usb and 3 on laptop/desktop (not selected by me for GNU/Linux use,  two off them brand new 802.11-n). Intel, Crypto, NetGear, LevelOne with various chip sets. All of them works great under GNU/Linux.

http://linuxwireless.org/en/users/Devices

The two scanners I own (hp psc 1200, cannon scan LiDE), also work fine (except from the buttons on the cannon).

The only major hardware issue for me is AMD/ATI video cards. PITA.

Don't be afraid of the hardware compatibility. It is really easy to find hardware that works flawlessly under GNU/Linux.

Alexander.

[Veliz]

is there any speed difference between running Vmware Workstation on a linux OS vs windows one? any speed difference?

[T4P]

The only problem I have found with Linux is wireless cards finding drivers for them can be very hard if not impossible also scanners, the printers work but not scanners, so the only time I use Linux these days is when I have a problem computer I run Linux on a live CD very often just running the live cd makes the computer decide to work with Windows.

Or just testing a new computer, works great
I use SLAX though, the modern SLAX weighs in at 200MB

Windows 7 is MORE secure than linux, and more reliable.

If Windows 7 was really more secure than Linux, it would have been running far more webservers than Linux. The only thing Windows 7 is more secure than is probably windows xp.

Since when was Win7 a OS for servers? If it is the performance is appalling! Yes i know Ulti versions have IIS in it but it ain't no windows server 2003!

The only major hardware issue for me is AMD/ATI video cards. PITA.

I was going to try Ubuntu for my hall's desktop but the moment i remembered both AMD and Nvidia doesn't have proper support for linux i gave up the idea
(and no, don't talk the built in intel, i ain't gonna use that one)

is there any speed difference between running Vmware Workstation on a linux OS vs windows one? any speed difference?

Remember that the one you need for speed for should be your main OS and the virtualized OS is the one you do not need so much speed for as virtualization is far from perfect but virtualization always works better on Linux ( that wasn't my line! that was told to me by my dad who manages integration and upgrades, especially in AIX and UNIX )

[SeanB]

My first use of linux was using Redhat 4 on an old computer, barely able to run Win95, and too slow to upgrade to Win98. Worked straight offf, and was usable. Sound was a problem, but the sound card in that machine anyway had been a hit or miss affair with win95, it barely worked with MSDOS, so not a big problem. I could leave a browser window open for weeks with no problems, CD writer actually worked straight off ( By Bye Nero there and then) and it was really responsive, compared to how it was when it had a fresh 95 install. I upgraded all the way to RH6 with it, and only stopped using it when I got a newer faster machine that was being tossed as too slow for Win2000.

biggest change was going from RH to Debian, going from one package manager to another, but nice was that almost all the software I was using would be available in the other variant, or that there was a similar one there that was pretty close, or even better. That was where I got my love of VLC, so much better than any other player, and I am still finding things that it can do, and even nicer is it works on so many platforms.

[madires]

is there any speed difference between running Vmware Workstation on a linux OS vs windows one? any speed difference?

Yes, but you won't notice it if you're just doing average stuff. BTW, the ESXi platform is based on a stripped down linux.

[Simon]

I've never found linux easy because it is not made user friendly, it's written by people who expect you to be as clever as them

[bingo600]

I only boot windows at home , if i need to do PCB layout (haven't gotten to KiCad yet).
So that's prob 1..2 times a month.

I have been using linux occationaly since 90' , Slackware & Yggdrasil.
I have used it (maintained it) at my job since RH6 , DNS,Syslog,NTP,MRTG & other services.
But strangely the company always insisted on desktop/Laptop PC's being windows , even today.


At home I use Ubuntu 10.04 on my laptops & desktop , and still uses Ubuntu 8.04 for the home-server.

I switched server Distro. from CentOS to Ubuntu , due to RHEL/CentOS being behind with many apps that i would like to run on the server (as it's on 24/7).
That was even considering the many new programs on the dag.wieers repos.

My server does a lot of household jobs:

Sendmail + Doveot - aka. Mailserver for the household.
Apache Webserver
DAV calender server for the household (Laptops & iPhones) , i refuse to let Google know my entire life
Subversion server for my programs
Samba & NFS server for the household.
Asterisk PBX for the inhouse SIP Phones

Data aquisition -
Right now fetching & logging GPIB data from 4 voltage refs under burn in , using a HP-3488A as Mux and a HP 34401A as DMM.

Always fetching & logging the temperatures in my summerhouse via VPN. In summerhouse an AVR-Ethernet board with ds18b20's.

...
...
...


But I hate the new Ubuntu (11+) Screen manager , and i'll probably switch to Linux Mint when i need a newer version on the Laptop and Desktop.

I also noticed that Linux Mint has a "rolling release" , just as Debian has. And i must admit that the thought of never having to "Distribution upgrade" my server again , sounds very attractive.

So i'm considering a total switch from Ubuntu to Linux Mint.
Then Mark can join the "I wanna Rule Club" along with Bill and Steve.

- Goodbye Mark & Thanx for all the fish -  It once was a nice Distro.

It becomes more and more rare.
But i'll prob. always have my Desktop being dualboot, and occasionally boot into windows.


/Bingo

Ps: Thunderbird w. lightning and the iPhones syncs beautifully against the shared calendars i have set up on the server , i'm using DAViCal from http://www.davical.org/ (well synaptic has it if you're on 10.04+).

[Simon]

Linux mint comes in two versions, the main one based off ubuntu, suffers the same crap performance and has a new version released with each ubuntu release. The rolling version is based on debian and is for experimenting ONLY. I did not head this advice and installed it on an old pc that would not take the crappy ubuntu version. One fine day it just stopped working, as they had warned. Mint = ubuntu with a new interface. Don't use the rolling release version for anything critical - your server

[SeanB]

Nice thing about Linux is the support online. Most of the time you can get a clue with a careful search. Works for me a lot, and I am by no means an expert.

Agree with the Meh on Ubuntu, probably will on next upgrade ( EOL) will look at Mint or plain vanilla Debian as an upgrade, unless something else looks better.

[bingo600]

Don't use the rolling release version for anything critical - your server

I just read & discovered from the LMDE url , that it's based on Debian testing.
So you are entirely correct ... Don't use that for a Prod-server.
http://www.linuxmint.com/download_lmde.php

Thanx for that advise 

But i simply can't agree with the bad performance on Ubuntu. At least until vers. 10.04.
I haven't had any serious trouble , but i have always used the LTS versions aka. (8.04/10.04/----)


The ---- should have been 12.04 , but i'm dropping Ubuntu now.
My PC's aren't Phones , and they can stuff their Phone adapted lightweight screenmanager.

I Just bought a used Nokia N900 , just because it can run Debian.
And i absolutely had to have a phone that could run SSH & VNC 
Thats a cute toy , but i don't even have put a simcard in it. It's much more fun to run SSH.
I'm working on installing WireShark --- That'll be cool


/Bingo

[Simon]

I put ubuntu on my laptop last xmas. was top of the range 6 years ago, runs windows xp pro nicely. It was so slow it was unusable and despite my laptop having a dedicated graphics card and memory the graphical performance was awful as they did not provide a driver for it so it was like tottaly unusable. When i then had to search for the executable file that shuts the laptop down because there was no button or menu to do that I decided that they had truly outperformed microsoft in crap software.

[G7PSK]

Somebody made the reference to to buying a car and expecting to drive it without having first learnt to drive, with Linux it is more like buying your car and find it delivered as a pile of pieces, no tools and a skimpy instruction book written half in a foreign language. Whereas Windows comes ready to drive away in but still has the instructions in chinglese.   

[Simon]

Somebody made the reference to to buying a car and expecting to drive it without having first learnt to drive, with Linux it is more like buying your car and find it delivered as a pile of pieces, no tools and a skimpy instruction book written half in a foreign language. Whereas Windows comes ready to drive away in but still has the instructions in chinglese.

very well put, and the problem is that the manufacturer is so far up it's own arse it will only help if you are as clever as them...... (although some distros have some really helpful people - ubuntu was full of assholes)

[Monkeh]

I put ubuntu on my laptop last xmas. was top of the range 6 years ago, runs windows xp pro nicely. It was so slow it was unusable and despite my laptop having a dedicated graphics card and memory the graphical performance was awful as they did not provide a driver for it so it was like tottaly unusable. When i then had to search for the executable file that shuts the laptop down because there was no button or menu to do that I decided that they had truly outperformed microsoft in crap software.

I assure you, it had a button, you just failed to find it. And the command to shut down is pretty simple, 'shutdown' or 'halt'.

Somebody made the reference to to buying a car and expecting to drive it without having first learnt to drive, with Linux it is more like buying your car and find it delivered as a pile of pieces, no tools and a skimpy instruction book written half in a foreign language. Whereas Windows comes ready to drive away in but still has the instructions in chinglese.

Not really. As far as ready-to-go distros like Ubuntu go, they're far more usable than Windows out of the box. Windows is full of stupid bugs, needs endless patching, numerous additional pieces of software to do anything useful, and half the 'features' turning off so you can actually do things without a helpful little dog to guide you as if you're five years old.

I could have a fresh install of Ubuntu (bear in mind here, I hate Ubuntu and never use it) in a usable state half an hour after burning the DVD. Windows 7? ~20 minutes to install. ~2 hours to patch. Then I can start installing extra software and turning bullshit off.

the problem is that the manufacturer is so far up it's own arse it will only help if you are as clever as them...... (although some distros have some really helpful people - ubuntu was full of assholes)

Most of us aren't like that. We do, however, expect people to help themselves. If we tell people to read documentation, we really do mean it.

[poptones]

Wot? I installed the newest ubuntu just a few weeks ago, and I wiped my userspace which means I didn't have all those nice settings anymore, I essentially had to start over. Here's what I found:

I did NOT have to go find new drivers. For anything. And yes the screen works just fine
I did NOT have to go grab a zip application so I could unzip files, and a rar application, and a pdf application, and...
I did NOT have to install my Brother printer. I did have to unplug the USB connector and replug it. Whoopee.
I did NOT have to install an office application just so I could read the documentation that was included with my desktop.

Unity really sucked on the previous releases but a LOT has been done on this release and it no longer sucks. I quite prefer it.

So far as security... what a laugh. Who said Windows was more secure? Of course it depends on what software you run and how you configure the machine - certainly one can make a vulnerable linux machine or a comparatively secure windows machine - but ootb securityis, I think, no comparison.

BTW there's four days left, if you're using Adobe Reader, to find something else...

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Google-warns-of-using-Adobe-Reader-particularly-on-Linux-1668153.html

[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 ...

The endless linux windows osx discussion is moot.
An operating system is only there to manage files and resources and run applications. In general it should stay out of the way. Just run the os needed for the app you want to use. Multiboot the machine or just get two pc's and a mac. Done.

[poptones]

It makes no difference in the end if a given user ever uses the source code. What DOES matter is the source code is there for those who CAN make use of it. So, while the Windows world waits and hopes for the security fixes they need to arrive on "update Tuesday" or whatever, zero day holes in open source systems are often patched the very same day they become known.

Open source works because it's open. And so far as "get out of the way" - you can't really ask for a more intrusive and confining os than windows.

[Monkeh]

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.

[asbokid]

BTW there's four days left, if you're using Adobe Reader, to find something else...

http://www.h-online.com/open/news/item/Google-warns-of-using-Adobe-Reader-particularly-on-Linux-1668153.html

Adobe are a load of plonkers    Their Acrobat Reader has all these vulnerabilities.  Just imagine all the exploits hidden in the Adobe Flash Plugin!

okular is a lovely PDF viewer - super fast - never crashes - open source so officially-planted nasties never reach the codebase - and okular is available for Linux, OS X and even BillyGatesWare.

http://okular.kde.org/

cheers, a

[RCMR]

Speaking to the issue of those who don't care what's going on under the hood...

My wife had a netbook that had Windows on it.

She had a bad brain injury three years ago so struggles with anything technical -- such as a computer.

She was having difficulties with Windows and had on several occasions ended with malware on her computer, despite AV software running.

So I threw Ubuntu on it.  The install was absolutely smooth -- no extra drivers (not even for the WiFi), software or anything else required.

Now she has less problems navigating around and has had not a single malware infection -- that we know of :-)

If she can use a nicely shrinkwrapped version of Linux I can't see how anyone can justifiably say that it's not suitable for end-users or as a Windows replacement for those folk who just want to *use* their computers.

Having said that, she only uses her computer for email and a bit of web-surfing.

[amspire]

If she can use a nicely shrinkwrapped version of Linux I can't see how anyone can justifiably say that it's not suitable for end-users or as a Windows replacement for those folk who just want to *use* their computers.

Having said that, she only uses her computer for email and a bit of web-surfing.

When you start getting past the point of using Firefox, Thunderbird and Open Office, that is when the problems start.

In Windows, when you need to update to the latest version of a program, you download it and install it and it works.

In a Linux distro like Ubuntu, you find that the latest version of a program has not been packaged for your particular release of Ubuntu, and so you are using one several versions old.

It is possible to remove the packaged version of the application, download the latest source files and compile, but then the Ubuntu package manager will no longer do any updates for that package - you forever more have to download source and compile.

As an example, say you need your Ubuntu system to access files in a SVN (Subversion) repository. The current SVN program is at the 16.x release stage, but the version of Ubuntu you are running may only offer a 14.x release of SVN. Once 16.X clients have written to the repository, you cannot use the 14.X SVN clients for useful work any more. You probably could update Ubuntu to the latest release to (hopefully) get a recent package for SVN, but should you be forced to update the whole operating system, just because you want to use SVN?

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. I do not know if distro's like Debian handle this problem in a better way. I imaging that the Gentoo distro can get around this as everything is compiled from source, but I am not sure if Gentoo is suitable for the average user.

Richard.

[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 $$$.

[free_electron]

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.

why would i care how about how the software manufacturer has to to his development or what model to follow ? I give him money , he gives me something that works. If its decent software i can go whack him up if there is problems.

[/quote] If you used significant 3D acceleration,[/quote] it doesnt't get more serious than Quadro cards.. Zero issues. As those drivers are designed as it should be.

Audio ? Computers are for computing. Radio and ipods are for audio.

Sata or usb 3  ? Both of em. Zero bsods. Why ? Cause i don't use wingpangpong boards or cheapcrapionachip like VIA chipsets. My computers are built on intel Dg55wg mobos. Zero problems.

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

But, as an end user i feel the effects of that. I agree it is the developers fault , but it is also their fault it makes linux a friggin nightmare !

If the whole open sauce community could come together, agree on 1 package manager , 1 unalterable API, and make sure not to break existing stuff whenever the next version of wonky wanker or loopey looney will be released things would be a lot easier. But, no. The linix world invariably sinks away in endless emacs vs vi and gnome vs lde wars... Enough with all the gui eye candy.
Linux by design is broken. Deliberately. They want to force everyone to release source and try to block 'binaries only' programs. Well guess what, that may be an idealistic philosophy, but do you really think hardware makers like nvidia are going to disclose all their tricks ? Or tool makers like altera show how the optimizer in the synthesizer works ? That is the part that gives them advantage over the competition. That source is a very tightly guarded secret. You don't stand a chance of ever getting your hands on that. In a commercial world there need to be secrets. As we live in a commercial world.... Linux and commercial software don't mix very well. And who is the end victim ? The user who has to install and maintain the linux box because he happens to need a particular piece of software.
This is a problem inheritant to the linux world that does not exist on other platforms. Windows , osx , os2, as400 and even big-iron operating systems. None affected by this 'linux only' problem.

[Monkeh]

If you used significant 3D acceleration,

it doesnt't get more serious than Quadro cards.. Zero issues. As those drivers are designed as it should be.

They're the same chips and the same drivers as normal GeForce cards. You're just not pushing them with typical software.

Sata or usb 3  ? Both of em. Zero bsods. Why ? Cause i don't use wingpangpong boards or cheapcrapionachip like VIA chipsets. My computers are built on intel Dg55wg mobos. Zero problems.

Good boards. Shame about the lack of flexibility. Other boards have various issues, and please don't sit there and blame the buyer, because it's a software problem caused in great part by Windows and the closed-source development model.

Linux by design is broken. Deliberately. They want to force everyone to release source and try to block 'binaries only' programs.

Who's they? I certainly don't want to do these things. But you've only got one brush, so everyone gets tarred with it.

This is a problem inheritant to the linux world that does not exist on other platforms. Windows , osx , os2, as400 and even big-iron operating systems. None affected by this 'linux only' problem.

Because none of them use the same development model. Here's a fantastic concept for you: Not everyone and everything has to come from the same mould. Most of your beloved software actually uses open-source libraries in great quantity. They just package them in. If you want a Linux system where everyone uses static linking and shipped libraries like Windows, go make one. You have the power. Until then, stop whining.

And actually, it does exist on other platforms. You just willfully ignore them.

If the whole open sauce community could come together, agree on 1 package manager , 1 unalterable API, and make sure not to break existing stuff whenever the next version of wonky wanker or loopey looney will be released things would be a lot easier. But, no. The linix world invariably sinks away in endless emacs vs vi and gnome vs lde wars... Enough with all the gui eye candy.

Why do I even bother. You'll clearly never get it.

[Lukas]

I don't really see your point. I'm using Arch Linux and have no issues with proprietary software:
Skype: It's in the repos
EAGLE: Some guy created a Package
ADS Demo: The installer happily installed it into ~, after fiddling with some libraries and the license manger stuff, it worked quite well. If I had used one of their certified enterprise Distros, such as RHEL, it would have been easier.

When using proprietary software on Linux, you're best using RHEL, CentOS,... and not a volatile Distro such as Arch or Ubuntu which changes daily to monthly.

[Monkeh]

I don't really see your point. I'm using Arch Linux and have no issues with proprietary software:
Skype: It's in the repos
EAGLE: Some guy created a Package
ADS Demo: The installer happily installed it into ~, after fiddling with some libraries and the license manger stuff, it worked quite well. If I had used one of their certified enterprise Distros, such as RHEL, it would have been easier.

When using proprietary software on Linux, you're best using RHEL, CentOS,... and not a volatile Distro such as Arch or Ubuntu which changes daily to monthly.

His point, as far as I can tell, is that he might have to open his mind, learn something new, and do something other than the sole task he sees in life.

[poptones]

As we live in a commercial world.... Linux and commercial software don't mix very well.

Bill Gates would disagree with you. They have taken many steps to play better in the open source community because they (finally) saw the writing on the wall.

Open source is not just linux. And I would be willing to bet more people are using open source software in Windows than not. Whether it's open office, vlc or whatever, open source is all over the place. AviSynth, one of the codebases I worked on a decade ago is probably on ten percent of the desktops out there - if you used a Windows DVDripper in the previous decade, odds are pretty good it installed this because so many of them used avisynth to do the preprocessing. That's open source software. A lot of the code evovled its way to other packages like vlc and mplayer. That's more gpl code, and it works damn well with proprietary software.

Linux by design is broken. Deliberately.

This is idiocy. No one is "forcing" anyone to do anything - if you want to release everything in binary blobs, go right ahead - just don't link your binaries with GPL code. This is no different than any other "broken" licensing agreement between any other copyright holders. If you want to get into a discussion of copyright being broken, that has nothing to do with the topic at hand.

There is an inherent design philosophy to gpl code - because it is always "out there" it is never really completed. Code is always as fresh as you want it to be. This actually makes it MORE competitive than closed source software. You can see this in how rapidly (for example) the unity desktop has evolved - a year ago it was almost unusable, being little more than an evolved experiment. Today it is, in many ways, one of the most productive desktops out there. That's one year - and how many years did MS spend coming up with Windows 8? They've been working on that code since before Windows 7 was released. If you have a desktop you like and don't want the latest features, guess what? no one is forcing you to update it or change it.

This sort of rapid cycling is one of the major strengths of open source software, to the point many of the major players are finding ways to adopt it. Intuit, for example, calls it "design for delight" - their philosophy is to get the specs from a client, give them  a quick basic version of the product, then use their feedback to evolve the product. This eliminates many of the dead ends wherein time is spent debugging and evolving a "feature" that turns out to be a misguided path. Yes, it means some of the stuff in the beginning is going to be unevolved or "broken" - but it also allows the product to evolve holistically, based on immediate feedback from the users. If you dislike this notion, by all means use windows.

[firewalker]

Every serious software company can develop any proprietary software for GNU/Linux without problems. Matlab, Vmware, LabView, Nvidia, Corel  AfterShot Pro, Penumbra, Nero, EAGLE for example.

Alexander.

[free_electron]

I stand by my statement that linux is deliberately broken. Go look up the famous video interview of torvalds where he stuck up the middle finger to nvidia. One of his personal rampages is explicitly against binary only drivers. At one point he broke backward compatibility in the kernel in an attempt to armwrestle nvidia into releasing source.

That is just counterproductive for anyone out there that needs a working system. Update and you are stuck with 640x480 in 256 colors... Whoopdedoo..

Stunts like that don't fly in my book.

At lukas : 'some guy created a distro' if it dosnt come from the manufacturer i dont want it on my system. Who knows what has been done to it. And if there is a problem the makers from eagle will not support you.

Ads demo: after fiddling with libs and licence managerr.  I rest my case. Why is this even acceptable ? I expect to put in the disk , or download, click install and it should run.

[Monkeh]

That is just counterproductive for anyone out there that needs a working system. Update and you are stuck with 640x480 in 256 colors... Whoopdedoo..

Because that's never happened with Windows before!

[HardBoot]

For the past 4 years it's been this for me: Windows for games, Linux for work... and some games.

Linux is easy to use and secure, never had updates break things on stable distros.

There's tons of software for Linux, EDA, CAD, Office, science, math... the only thing I play with on linux which doesn't run native is ltspice... the guys at LT even admit "ya we use in Wine and are too lazy to make linux port because it works well"

[free_electron]

Because that's never happened with Windows before!

Not deliberatly and on purpose !

Look , my point is simple. I have linux boxes. And i find i need to mess more with them , and am more restricted on what version i have to install because of application compatibility problems.
That is frustrating and time consuming. Companies like Cadence , Mentor and Magma tell you explicitly what distro, what kernel build , what patches and what packages. Install anything else and the hands are off.. And that is multimillion dollar software.
That is a situation that should not be and needs not be. The people that build linux need to structurize and nail things down and maintain backward compatibility.
Linux as it is is way too fragmented and forked. And that poses problems for the users as they are put before a dilemma. I need xyz for this but abc for that...  The choice and upkeep of the os becomes a problem, especially on distros that have new releases every 6 months.

Developers get weary of that... As they need to keep twiddling with things that don't belong to their core business, so they eventually tell you : this distro , this kernel. Done. We don't have time to keep mucking about with things that are out of our control. And as the end user you can do the legwork. I do NOT like that.

[poptones]

Update and you are stuck with 640x480 in 256 colors... Whoopdedoo..

Not saying this never happened, but it did not happen deliberately.

And I remember how much fun it was to get ATi's drivers installed when I used Windows. Yes, Windows has no video problems at all. Wonder what happens when all those people with ten year old graphic cards go to run 8? Once linux has support for a product, it's there forever - which is not the case in Windows.

I'm using an Nvidia card right now. It has full 3D effects, hardware acceleration of video and so forth, and it's using completely free drivers. You  seem to think this is 2005.

[free_electron]

Not saying this never happened, but it did not happen deliberately.

You  seem to think this is 2005.

Nope, 2012... July actually

http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/06/17/1415250/torvalds-slams-nvidias-linux-support

[Monkeh]

That is a situation that should not be and needs not be. The people that build linux need to structurize and nail things down and maintain backward compatibility.

No, they do not. That is what distros are for. Go find or make one which meets your requirements. Linux is not even an OS. It is merely a kernel. The rest is up to others, so pick one or get some more brushes!

I do NOT like that.

Then by all means, feel free to not use Linux and not spend your clearly valuable time in threads like this focusing on the specific disadvantages you see with no mention whatsoever of any of the advantages.

I'm using an Nvidia card right now. It has full 3D effects, hardware acceleration of video and so forth, and it's using completely free drivers. You  seem to think this is 2005.

Really? Because nouveau's not really there yet. We don't have hardware decoding, 3D is limited, NVC0's just about working, and NVE0's barely even getting a framebuffer. Thankfully, the closed driver works pretty well.

Not saying this never happened, but it did not happen deliberately.

You  seem to think this is 2005.

Nope, 2012... July actually

http://linux.slashdot.org/story/12/06/17/1415250/torvalds-slams-nvidias-linux-support

I'm sorry, but were you actually going to post some evidence that kernel APIs were changed purely to break the nvidia driver?

[poptones]

Again: where does it say he deliberately broke nvidia support?

Linux has had very good open source nvidia support for 3 years now. He may have a headache dealing with them, but I have heard nothing about the kernel team deliberately breaking such support simply to "get back" with nvidia.

[poptones]

We don't have hardware decoding, 3D is limited, NVC0's just about working, and NVE0's barely even getting a framebuffer. Thankfully, the closed driver works pretty well.

I'm not using the closed driver - I won't. It actually screws up my machine pretty badly.

What I am using is (in part) vdpau, and vdpau does support hardware decoding, etc. Perhaps it lacks some features, but it does not lack hardware acceleration of video, or of (at least some) 3dfx. Maybe not the best for gaming, but it works quite well as a desktop.

[Monkeh]

I'm not using the closed driver - I won't. It actually screws up my machine pretty badly.

What I am using is (in part) vdpau, and vdpau does support hardware decoding, etc. Perhaps it lacks some features, but it does not lack hardware acceleration of video, or of (at least some) 3dfx. Maybe not the best for gaming, but it works quite well as a desktop.

VDPAU support still requires the driver to support hardware decoding. Reverse engineering of nVidia hardware decoding is not complete, and is still mostly offloaded to software. There is no support for current generation cards at all.

VDPAU has nothing to do with 3D acceleration whatsoever. It is a video decoding API.

[poptones]

Ok... well, I guess that's why I also have an ATi card

[Monkeh]

Ok... well, I guess that's why I also have an ATi card

Ah, yes, ATI cards which simply do not have VDPAU.

[poptones]

Maybe not, but it does have 3d and video.

[Monkeh]

Maybe not, but it does have 3d and video.

Actually, again, hardware decoding is pretty much entirely unimplemented in the open drivers.

[T4P]

Here's another thing Linux got up it's arse :
Windows has DX11 which when introduced included DirectCompute!
And UVD

[poptones]

I don't think anyone would suggest linux for gaming. Doesn't mean it's broken.

[HardBoot]

Maybe not, but it does have 3d and video.

Actually, again, hardware decoding is pretty much entirely unimplemented in the open drivers.

Basic hardware decode works for me with open and closed drivers, will be basically universal with gpgpu decoders.

Here's another thing Linux got up it's arse :
Windows has DX11 which when introduced included DirectCompute!
And UVD

Yay, DirectCompute, noone uses that, the little GPGPU is OpenCL which is multiplatform and some CUDA.

[joseph.anand]

Companies like Cadence , Mentor and Magma tell you explicitly what distro, what kernel build , what patches and what packages.

Problem with their design. They should restrict requirements to the Linux standard base (LSB).  Take the case of Matlab which works fine on almost all distros and kernel builds. The most you have to do to fix issues is use alternate JDKs.
Same issues exist with Windows XP/Windows Vista/Windows 7. Infact there was very little 64bit support from these companies initially. When the user base starts growing they slowly start adding more human resources for the new platform. Even service packs and updates have broken stuff on Windows. People just tend to ignore it even when they have paid for the OS. But Linux, you do not pay for it and yet  you expect it to perform better than Windows when companies are not willing to play nice by employing developers of the same caliber as those working on Windows products.

And that is multimillion dollar software.

Just because a software is a multimillion dollar software does not mean it has been properly designed. Most companies are not willing to spend a lot of resources for supporting Linux platforms. In fact most teams working on commercial software for Linux are very small compared to those working for Windows.

The people that build linux need to structurize and nail things down and maintain backward compatibility.

That is why the Linux standard base (LSB) exists. A binary blob should depend only on the LSB. Any other dependency is due to poorly designed software.

[T4P]

Yay, DirectCompute, noone uses that, the little GPGPU is OpenCL which is multiplatform and some CUDA.

DirectCompute is used more often together with OpenCL. CUDA? Not much.
Even my photoshop CS5 refuses to work with CUDA for some reason on my GT540
As well as DirectCompute being faster and AMD throwing in support for OCL which is a good thing
But in any case DirectCompute is available if it's truly DX11 supported which Intel still doesn't have

[baljemmett]

Once linux has support for a product, it's there forever

If one were being pedantic, one might be tempted to mention Econet at this point as a recent counterexample

[poptones]

Fair enough. Things do get obsoleted - but if you need it, the source is still there.

[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 !!!

Caught up with by who and how?

Keep getting a pop up message saying I may not have a genuine windows, yea you bet

[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?

Keep getting a pop up message saying I may not have a genuine windows, yea you bet

Two possibilities.
1: You did it wrong.
2: You have a virus.

[Simon]

Worked fine for a while then it started.

[Monkeh]

Worked fine for a while then it started.

See above.

[T4P]

If the asshole thing is coming up again just use RemoveWAT

[ToBeFrank]

That is why the Linux standard base (LSB) exists. A binary blob should depend only on the LSB. Any other dependency is due to poorly designed software.

Well of course, software couldn't possibly (directly or indirectly) depend on anything not covered by the LSB.

[Simon]

Worked fine for a while then it started.

See above.

?

[Simon]

If the asshole thing is coming up again just use RemoveWAT

I did but........

[Monkeh]

Worked fine for a while then it started.

See above.

?

You either did it wrong, or you have a virus.

Either way, I'm not going to help you with it on a public forum.

[Simon]

I still have my vista as a backup. Might even toy with linux again

I just wish reactos would make faster progress.

[Monkeh]

Might even toy with linux again

Pick a non-babysitting distro.

[Simon]

I'll pick anyone that actually works and gets support without a forum full of snotty people that think every joe blogs should be able to program. If the flipping OS worked right I might actually have time left to learn to program instead of trying to sort problems out.

As Ubuntu managed to permanently disable my laptops wifi I await any number of surprises.

[Simon]

I'm thinking debian as most stuff is derived from it, might as well cut the bull, and definitly avoid stuff that is a derivate of a derivate of debian, anything ubuntu based can get stuffed, I want an OS not another re-incarnation of vista !

[madires]

I'm thinking debian as most stuff is derived from it, might as well cut the bull, and definitly avoid stuff that is a derivate of a derivate of debian, anything ubuntu based can get stuffed, I want an OS not another re-incarnation of vista !

Debian is more suitable for servers, and if used for desktops it requires a savvy Linux user. The goal of Debian is to provide a stable system, so you won't have the latest versions of applications in the depository. And it has the BEST upgrade reliability of all distros. My main Linux systems are actually 15 years old! Yes, 15 years! No new installs! Just upgrades to the latest stable Debian release! Only the hardware has changed from time to time.

[Simon]

there is no mention of this on their website. I am looking for reliability over latest untested versions of software, for that we have windows. I'm not going to pay to be a beta tester of microsofts latest rubbish. most desktop distos are based off debian, or based of a distro based off debian, at which point the os is buggier than windows

[ampdoctor]

Linux is absolutely worth it, given the assumption that your time has no value.

[elliott]

Linux is absolutely worth it, given the assumption that your time has no value.

That has been said for years and it is as silly now as it was in the beginning.

[Monkeh]

Linux is absolutely worth it, given the assumption that your time has no value.

That has been said for years and it is as silly now as it was in the beginning.

Quite. Actually, I grow very tired of people simply placing a monetary value on everything. Life isn't about money..

[elliott]

Linux is absolutely worth it, given the assumption that your time has no value.

That has been said for years and it is as silly now as it was in the beginning.

Quite. Actually, I grow very tired of people simply placing a monetary value on everything. Life isn't about money..

It is not even that, since I spend very, very little time maintaining my systems. Maybe an hour a week, if that, this is with bleeding edge Arch installs too. I find installing things in Windows to be needlessly time consuming, since I just sit and click next a dozen times and try to remember to uncheck the crapware they try to bundle with it. Which is quicker and takes less user intervention, installing MS Office on 7 or me typing 'sudo pacman -S libreoffice'? Last time I installed MS Office for someone took well over an hour, then it wanted to update, I can install LibeOffice on my Arch system in 15 minutes, which includes downloading the latest version.

Get past the initial learning and actually using Linux is quite easy and it is simple to maintain.

[Ed.Kloonk]

.../snip
Get past the initial learning and actually using Linux is quite easy and it is simple to maintain.

Quote of the century.

[elliott]

.../snip
Get past the initial learning and actually using Linux is quite easy and it is simple to maintain.

Quote of the century.

I think a lot of people forget that they weren't born knowing how to use Windows, they've been carefully conditioned over the past couple decades into thinking the Windows way is THE way to do things. Put the same effort into learning Linux and you'll realize how easy it can be, especially now. I started in the days of RedHat 9 and RPM dependency hell, spent years with Slackware compiling everything myself, I feel downright lazy using a modern package manager sometimes because it is so easy and painless.

[Simon]

Well installed debian on my laptop. Nice system and to be honest I'm trying to figure out what the various distros based on it offer that it does not, they are so similar that it's pathetic that we have so many distros, sounds like lots of people want to play god instead of just being sociable.

Ony thing is I can't log in and there don't seem to be any forums I can ask on. I setup with just a root account and I was never told the root username and so can't get in and no root does not work. The mailing lists are a mystery to me, will have to do  some reading around.

[Monkeh]

root is the root user. Last I checked, Debian does not rename it.

[Simon]

that's what I thought, oh well might end up reinstalling

[Ed.Kloonk]

You have the wrong password. Blast out your shadow file to reset the root password. Google it.

Easy to do.

[GeoffS]

Ony thing is I can't log in and there don't seem to be any forums I can ask on. I setup with just a root account and I was never told the root username and so can't get in and no root does not work. The mailing lists are a mystery to me, will have to do  some reading around.

By default, root is created with no password and you can't login directly as root, you have to sudo to gain privileges.
I take it you didn't create another user when prompted to? The normal way to become root is to use the sudo command from a non root account. This will prompt for a password which is your user password, not root's password.

[Ed.Kloonk]

Geoff is right. My Linux doesn't speak the Sudo dialect. Not happily anyway.

[Monkeh]

Ony thing is I can't log in and there don't seem to be any forums I can ask on. I setup with just a root account and I was never told the root username and so can't get in and no root does not work. The mailing lists are a mystery to me, will have to do  some reading around.

By default, root is created with no password and you can't login directly as root, you have to sudo to gain privileges.
I take it you didn't create another user when prompted to? The normal way to become root is to use the sudo command from a non root account. This will prompt for a password which is your user password, not root's password.

No, that's an Ubuntu specific brain-dead method, not the usual way.

[GeoffS]

Ony thing is I can't log in and there don't seem to be any forums I can ask on. I setup with just a root account and I was never told the root username and so can't get in and no root does not work. The mailing lists are a mystery to me, will have to do  some reading around.

By default, root is created with no password and you can't login directly as root, you have to sudo to gain privileges.
I take it you didn't create another user when prompted to? The normal way to become root is to use the sudo command from a non root account. This will prompt for a password which is your user password, not root's password.

No, that's an Ubuntu specific brain-dead method, not the usual way.

Sorry. must have the brain stuck on Ubuntu at the moment. I normally use Centos which has a real root login 

[Simon]

I didn't set up a user account, am reinstalling now so did one just in case. The instructions did say I didn't have to do a user account.

[Monkeh]

I didn't set up a user account, am reinstalling now so did one just in case. The instructions did say I didn't have to do a user account.

The docs assume a certain level of knowledge with Debian. You do not want to use the root account for daily use.

You do, however, want to make very sure you can login as root or you can't install anything.

[Simon]

Well I'm in. Nope, the install promps specifically said that I did not have to setup a user account until later if I didn't want to do it now and I could just run with the root user but it was not recomended. They failed to point out this would lock me out of the system unless maybe i know some black magic

[Monkeh]

Well I'm in. Nope, the install promps specifically said that I did not have to setup a user account until later if I didn't want to do it now and I could just run with the root user but it was not recomended.

As I said: You do not want to use the root account for daily use. You can, if you're feeling dumb..

They failed to point out this would lock me out of the system unless maybe i know some black magic

Because it does no such thing.

[Simon]

Well I'm pretty sure of the password i chose but I could not log in as the root user. I'm in now anyhow.

[Ed.Kloonk]

 

[glee]

After reading this thread I'm still not sure I have any clear(er) idea about the pros and cons of attempting to run individual EE software application under linux (and there is no way that I will switch operating systems).

Is there anything which polarises people faster than a discussion of pet operating systems? I followed the debate in Australia about chucking kids off ships (supposedly) in a n attempt to gain citizenship. Didn't come close ;-)

[Simon]

If you decide to use linux make sure you have a windows backup and don't bother with a distro based on another distro that is based on another distro. Ubuntu is popular, no idea why, I cal it the equivalent ofvista. Getting a distro based off it is asking for trouble!

[poptones]

Simon, this is going to sound really bad, but I have to ask...

You were just talking about having to reinstall because you didn't know you had to create a user account. This would indicate that you felt it appropriate to use a linux install (or any operating system) as a "root" user, which is a giant security no-no.

Where exactly does this dislike of ubuntu come from? Honestly, it really doesn't appear you're all that experienced with any of it. Ubuntu and debian in general are far more friendly for new users than virtually any rpm managed distro. I've been using linux more than a decade, and I hate delving into rpm hell.

[Simon]

I followed the install instructions to the letter, an error was made in the statement. I've not used debian much but it seems to be the most solid i have seen yet.

Ubuntu, well clearly the fore runner of windows 8! no start menus no nothing, I had to search for everything. The system was horribly slow and a driver for my 6 year old laptops graphics was not available so it was slower than vista. The forum users were so far up their own asses that clearly they were not interested in helping. It permanently dissabled my wifi, including the use of any usb adapters (luckily with debian I can use my modile phone with no drivers). On changing the "these" the shut down button dissapered, I had to shut the computer down by searching for the exe that runs the stutdown sequence. Basically it was tottally shit.

I then tried mint based off ubuntu, the performance was awful even on my main quad core PC, various thing did not work, it would only see one of my HDD's at a time, pdf printing did not work, another disaster. Linux always makes prmises and hen breaks them, they should not dear criticize windows because frankly they are even buggier. If you have a 3rd hand system who will know how to fix it. I can't see te point of all these distros, they mostly work and look like the one they are based on but you just have more problems and no one will know which part needs fixing

[elliott]

Ubuntu and debian in general are far more friendly for new users than virtually any rpm managed distro. I've been using linux more than a decade, and I hate delving into rpm hell.

Using RPMs isn't as bad as it used to be, modern package managers have helped a lot. In the days of RedHat 9, there were no package managers that pulled in RPMs from repositories and automatically solved dependencies, but now there is yum. It is every bit as easy as using the Debian system. It is rather slow and clunky though, which apt is guilty of too.

[poptones]

Simon, this is why live distros exist. I have no idea what hardware you're using, but it sounds like you may be using off the shelf systems? Of course the laptop is. But if you would run some of these distros live you would be able to get an idea of how they're going to interact with your system without making any permanent changes.

There is documentation out there, but you do need a bit of basic understanding of systems. So far as the unity desktop, that's just a personal preference - if you don't like it you can always use (for example) ubuntu 10.04, which had a very nice version of gnome 2. I'm afraid ANY "new" distro you use, however, is going to require some relearning so far as the desktop goes because gnome has moved to gnome 3. I'm not sure which is more hated - gnome 3 or unity - but it seems to be shaking out a bit. I personally love unity, I was using a desktop similar to that for more than a year before this version finally was usable enough to convince me to switch to "ootb" unity. There are still a couple of bugs, but it's evolving quickly. I've used and supported a variety of systems and I still prefer ubuntu.

There's a wide variety of distros out there but they all use the same underlying code. Ubuntu funds development of some things, just like Novell funds development of some things and IBM as well. This is why there's diversity out there - anyone is free to evolve it as they like. This prevents the monoculture you have with OS X and Windows and makes the platform more robust. Complaining about the diversity of linux makes about as much sense as complaining about the variety of automobiles one can buy; if you don't like choice, you can always choose a platform like Apple where all your choices are made for you, and you can always ride the bus.

And yeah, the ubuntu user forum can be a bad experience. But I recall when I was starting out and I can honestly say the Mandrake and Suse forums were not any better. Support forums tend to attract two kinds of people: those who are complete noobs and need answers NOW, and those who believe they know all there is to know but have no life so they hang about in the forum. Those who know what they're doing have no need to be there, they're too busy actually doing it. I find the best avenue for answers is google.

[Simon]

my point is that it would be better to have less higher quality distros than a sea of them few of which deliver as promissed. The debian website is the first I see that looks serious on rock solid software rather than mamby pamby social statements like "we believe software should be free". I'm happy to pay a reasonable amount for software that actually works as oposed to using free software that does not deliver. I don't understand why people base distros off ubuntu if they could just base them off debian, curely a better way of doing it.

Yes I'm a linux noob but then many distros promise to be beginner friendly (as in windows is beginer friendly ?) and then just don't work. From what I can understand you have the linux kernel, the OS on top and then the desktop on top of that, why we have so many "desktops" I don't know, I guess they are like themes ? I have a 6 year old gigabyte mobo with a C2Q and a basic cuda enabled video card plus 8 gb of ram

[poptones]

my point is that it would be better to have less higher quality distros than a sea of them few of which deliver as promissed.

This is a non sequitir. It's like saying there should be more pretty colors, that we shoudl get away with those that are not pleasing. The notion that fewer distros would mean fewer, higher quality distros is illogical. The people who were not releasing distros would not necessarily be contributing to the bigger players. Anyone can have a distro. You or I could put together a distribution - there are even distributions that are focused on helping someone create their own distro. There are distros that make a computer into a dedicated router or firewall, into an audio studio, into a desktop publishing center. The notion that people interested in this diverse range of software would somehow pool their development efforts into a "universal" tool that could meet all these needs at once is naive.

Ubuntu is based on debian. Why do people choose ubuntu instead of debian? Part of it is because ubuntu has features that are specific to ubuntu that many people like. Sometimes these features eventually show up in other distributions. And it's funny you should bemoan that whole "mamby  pamby free software" thing because debian is one of the strictest of the distributions about enforcing this. You'll not get many audio and video codecs, or a dvd player with base debian because  they are licensed, non free IP. Ubuntu builds on debian but tries to make it more friendly by allowing easy paths to the codecs one will want in order to watch videos and enjoy music, among other things. That's one of the reasons ubuntu caught on quickly. Another is because it reduced the choices new users need to make - many distributions would install three or more web browsers, three or more archive managers, three or more mail clients, three or more file managers, all in the name of "choice." The result was a fresh install with a bewildering array of tools that do roughly the same job to varying levels of success. Ubuntu did away with this nonsense, instead packaging one of each and focusing on making that particular tool as useful as possible.

Most of your frustration is because you're expecting linux to be Windows. It isn't, and never will be. Once you accept this and get over your trepidations about "programming" (ie using the command line) you'll begin to appreciate the power and flexibility of the desktop. If you're willing to pay for software then you can always pay for an ubuntu support package - then you'll have someone to hold your hand through the learning curve.

[Simon]

I don't expect a linux distro to be like windows, I simply expect it to work. Yes there are a number of dedicated distros and that is fine. It's the mass of distros that really do the same thing unless your a linux pro and already know one well.

I'm quite happy to use a command line, in school I was one of the few that could navigate around dos. The problem is these commands seem to be quite alussive even though advanced users seem mto think everyone should know them.

Debian is running on my laptop far better than ubuntu, is that the difference between no hardware support in debian and support in ubuntu ? for a novice user there is so much choice and so many pitfalls. Yes as you say anyone can make a distro, and support for that distro could stop any time. I'm not saying there should be only one but I get the impression that there are a lot of low quality ones out there. If a linux distro is failing to find my hard drives and the software preinstalled with it that has nothing to do with hardware (pdf printer) fail to work what am I supposed to think of that disto ?

[firewalker]

The problem is these commands seem to be quite alussive even though advanced users seem mto think everyone should know them.

Blame the GUI! And the bad documentation witch is an issue for free software. Shhhhh..

I am always having fun with new users an the following "command".

Code: [Select]

:(){ :|: & };:

[poptones]

I'm quite happy to use a command line, in school I was one of the few that could navigate around dos. The problem is these commands seem to be quite alussive even though advanced users seem mto think everyone should know them.

I know some people who have been using linux since it was unix and even they don't claim to know everything off the top of their heads. Linux is constructed of thousands of tools, no one can know them all. Some of the basics you'll get to know simply because you'll use them quite a lot, but pretty much everyone uses them as they need them. The "trick" is to know how to pull usage info (for example, using the -h or --help switch) how to use man pages and such.

Bad documentation? You think that's a linux exclusive? I'd question whether you had ever developed for Windows.

Simon, it sounds like you were having a video driver issue with ubuntu. This is not showing up in debian because debian is not going to attempt installing "non free" drivers - ie you are using open source video drivers rather than the binary blobs supplied by the graphics maker. So, ironically, your complaint really seems to be with closed source software and you are experiencing one of the merits of that "free software" culture you were mocking a few hours ago.

Free doesn't just mean free. I don't use linux because it's gratis (we all know how easy it is to pirate Windows) I use linux because it's free.

[Simon]

I don't know what driver I'm running now. All I know is that ubuntu couldnot cope with a 6 year old GPU yet debian works fine on it.

I had similar problems with mint, the ubuntu based version was as sluggish as, surprise, ubuntu, but the debian based version they did for development worked fine, as does debian. Sadly it was as they warned unstable and the version I had crashed.

[Monkeh]

The debian website is the first I see that looks serious on rock solid software rather than mamby pamby social statements like "we believe software should be free".

Actually, Debian are one of the most anal distros going as far as licenses go. They also have a long history of forcing their opinion on people and projects.

[Simon]

well at the minute I'm concerned about having usable aoftware. I don't know what restrictions you refer to but quality of code should be paramount. I don't need an OS where main features fail to work.

[Monkeh]

I don't need an OS where main features fail to work.

Which is why I don't use Windows. Not using Windows gets me working printers, for a start.

[saturation]

FWIW Android OS and Tomtom 1 GPS units run the Linux kernel. 

[firewalker]

Don't forget the TiVo! 

Alexander.

[Slobodan]

This is why I use Linux (Ubuntu 12.4.1):

- I despise globalist Microsoft and baby killer Bill Gates
- Linux is free (both as a freedom (you control OS, OS does not control you) and as free of charge)
- Linux is open source (so it doesn't have back door, unlike Windows, for example)
- Linux is more stable (can run for years without need for reinstallation)
- Linux does not require maintenance (for example ext4 file system does not fragmente so there is no need for defragmentation every week or so)
- There are practically no viruses for Linux (so there is not a need for antivirus software, which means that I don't have to pay antivirus companies to protect my computer from viruses they create themselves)
- There are more than hundred of OS based on Linux
- Practically all software for Linux is free (free as freedom and as free of charge)
- There are few desktop environments you can choose for your OS (like unity, xfce, gnome, kde,...)
- You can customise Linux more than you can Windows
- All your updates are centralised (all you have to do is add a repository for your program once, and Linux automatically updates everything for you)
- No messing around with drivers because everything works out of the box (of course, there are so many different hardware so there are exemptions)
- It is completely in my language
- And a million other things that I can't remember at the top of my head...

But hey, that's just me.

[Monkeh]

- Linux does not require maintenance (for example ext4 file system does not fragmente so there is no need for defragmentation every week or so)

Myth.

- All your updates are centralised (all you have to do is add a repository for your program once, and Linux automatically updates everything for you)

Depends on the software you use. And the distro. And whether you find the supplied packages suitable.

- No messing around with drivers because everything works out of the box (of course, there are so many different hardware so there are exemptions)

Very much not true, especially for laptops. Sometimes there is a lot of messing around to do. But Windows is no better. Some hardware just plain sucks.

[SeanB]

One thing I do like is that desktops are mostly able to work with each other. Some KDE applications are a lot better than the Gnome version ( and vice versa of course) and so I run mostly Gnome, but the KDE apps work well enough in it. Of course you do need 2 sets of libraries, and there is a little overhead in having both running, but they are pretty stable. Uptime for me is now 78 days 6 hours 12 minutes since the last long power failure. Might restart sometime to finish the kernel updates that are scheduled.......

Windows needs a restart at least every month on the second wednesday........... That window is really annoying on the update screen, though I do not close it, just move it to the edge and nearly off until I am ready.

[Slobodan]

- Linux does not require maintenance (for example ext4 file system does not fragmente so there is no need for defragmentation every week or so)

Myth.

Well, it is not perfect, but compared to Windows...

- All your updates are centralised (all you have to do is add a repository for your program once, and Linux automatically updates everything for you)

Depends on the software you use. And the distro. And whether you find the supplied packages suitable.

That is true, but again, in Windows you have to update every program separately, instead of just clicking one button like in Linux...

- No messing around with drivers because everything works out of the box (of course, there are so many different hardware so there are exemptions)

Very much not true, especially for laptops. Sometimes there is a lot of messing around to do. But Windows is no better. Some hardware just plain sucks.

Well, as I said, there are exemptions. But most of the drivers are included in the kernel.

[free_electron]

- I despise globalist Microsoft and baby killer Bill Gates

Communism doesn't work. Gates never killed babies. As a matter of fact, Gates is the largest charity donor in the world..

- Linux is free (both as a freedom (you control OS, OS does not control you) and as free of charge)

linux kernel is controlled by a control freak so even his best buddies abandon him ( the guy that did TTy told torvalds to stuff it and walked away. ) Torvalds has 'holy crusades' against 'binary blob's in the kernel.

- Linux is open source (so it doesn't have back door, unlike Windows, for example)

Bullshit. just becasue you have the source doesn't mean you are secure. How much of the source have you read ? understand ? know all the interactions with other modules ? unless you have actually verified every line of code and knows what it does you are just as blind as someone that does not have the code as you need to trust someone else ...

- Linux is more stable (can run for years without need for reinstallation)

linux has more bugfixes on a daily basis than windows has on a monthly basis... almost every day ubuntu and other popular distro's have 'patches'....
I havent reinstalled windows on any of my machines in the last 10 years.

- Linux does not require maintenance (for example ext4 file system does not fragmente so there is no need for defragmentation every week or so)

os <> filesystem ...

protect my computer from viruses they create themselves

here come the tinfoil hats...

- There are more than hundred of OS based on Linux

and that is why it is a pest ! too many flavors , too many forks ,and a nightmare to cross-port all fixes. it's a friggin twit-race. Bang ... and they all take off in a different direction. If all the effort that was spent on the forks was combined to release 1 uniform system then linux would rule the world. now it's just a can of stale spaghetti...

- Practically all software for Linux is free (free as freedom and as free of charge)

and in a perpetual half-finished , undocumented, not usable state ... see the forking problem above...

- There are few desktop environments you can choose for your OS (like unity, xfce, gnome, kde,...)

oh goodie.. here we go again. who gives a rats ass about the color sceme and windowing manager eye candy ? I want applications that work. Any linux forum is stranded in endless gnome <> kde , vi <> emacs and other moot discussions. Besides 'X' is the biggest failure of all time.

- You can customise Linux more than you can Windows

give me a system that doesn't need customisation. So i can be productive. the Os is only there to load applications in memory , handle the hardware and that's it. You use applications, not the operating system. the OS is just a gigantic library that does common menial tasks so the apps programmers don't have to reinvent the wheel every time.

- All your updates are centralised (all you have to do is add a repository for your program once, and Linux automatically updates everything for you)

if they can figure out which installer package they are going to use... this installer works only on ubuntu , that one only on red hat ...
forking problem...

- No messing around with drivers because everything works out of the box (of course, there are so many different hardware so there are exemptions)

got your wifi card working yet ? what about the scanner or fax in a HP all-in-one ? ar any other piece of hardware that needs to rely on 'user-written' drivers. There is very few hardware and peripheral manufacturers out there that support linux. almost none.

- It is completely in my language

if learning english is too much work ...

[poptones]

linux kernel is controlled by a control freak.... Torvalds has 'holy crusades' against 'binary blob's in the kernel.

Because blobs are unsupportable. Anyone can put anything in a blob, and once you introduce it to the kernel the entire "free software" ecosystem becomes suspect.

The rest of your remarks are so full of misinformation as to be considered a troll.

[SeanB]

One thing I like is that mass storage devices are recognised automatically and, depending on the distro and how you set the options, automounted. Add FuseFS and you can read and write to almost _ANY_ file system you can put on a drive. Sometimes I forget the USB drive is ext3/4 and plug it into a windows box, where it causes some confusion. Gnome defaults to automount and bringing up a query window if there is an autorun file present, or it detects a photo card, otherwise a file window is opened.

Contrast this to windows where plugging a drive it has never seen before brings up a driver install dialog...... Go through all the motions, windows wants to reboot, but the drive is now accessible. Until recently autorun was on by default.

[Monkeh]

- Linux is more stable (can run for years without need for reinstallation)

linux has more bugfixes on a daily basis than windows has on a monthly basis... almost every day ubuntu and other popular distro's have 'patches'....

That is a completely bullshit 'statistic', and you know it. Linux distros come with a vast amount of software, Windows comes with practically nothing.

- No messing around with drivers because everything works out of the box (of course, there are so many different hardware so there are exemptions)

got your wifi card working yet ? what about the scanner or fax in a HP all-in-one ? ar any other piece of hardware that needs to rely on 'user-written' drivers. There is very few hardware and peripheral manufacturers out there that support linux. almost none.

Yes to all of the above. It's easier to get a printer working on Linux than Windows, and doesn't require a 50MB package consisting of a load of gigantic flashy buttons and ten prompts to do things you have no interest in doing, just to print something. Quite a few of them support Linux 'unofficially' (ie. they pay a developer or two to help with supporting a driver for which they take no legal responsibility).

[psycho0815]

Well this looks to me like just another flamewar, but here are my two cents anyway. Basically, if you have to ask if it's worth to use linux than the answer is no. I mean what is it supposed to be worth for? These days windows is actually pretty darn good. Yeah there's that virus thing, but you can get around it with virus-scanners and if there were more people using linux there would be more viruses and trojans for it (As a matter of fact writing viruses for linux is a bit harder than for windows, but in the end it's just a matter of motivation). As for the Hardware thing. Yeah there are some issues. But if you got normal quality hardware, you should be fine. Nvidia optimus is the obvious exception, but apart from that, don't buy dodgy hardware and you won't have to deal with dodgy drivers .
I guess what i'm trying to say is: Most peaople seem to believe, linux is just like windows only better. But it really isn't it's a lot different from windows and it's not necessarily better either. If you want something that just works(most of the time), and don't want to worry about software working or not you'll probably be fine with wndows, if you're ok with paying to use something you've already paid for that is. If you want  something that just works most of the time without paying for it, go for linux, but don't whine if some software doesn't work because it only runs on windows. Just use what you need. if you need some specific piece of software, that only runs under windows than obviously windows is the way to go. If you decide to use Linux, you just have to accept right now that some things might not work like expected or at all. That's the price you pay for not paying a price.
Most people want windows for free, and linux just isn't it. These days it's mostly about taste. I like GNU/Linux better for various reasons, but the win7 on my workpc works just fine too.

[poptones]

That is a completely bullshit 'statistic', and you know it. Linux distros come with a vast amount of software, Windows comes with practically nothing.

That's not bullshit at all, but it's hardly a liability. I've seen zero day exploits patched within hours and sent out via updates. With Windows you don't even when (or if) they're going to get patched - for example this one that was published in the beginning of May and "patched" in August.

Look at the exploits in the wild - it's not open source software that's getting attacked, it's Java and Adobe reader and Flash player - all of which also come to the open source community in the form of unfixable, unpatchable, binary blobs. Look at the known exploits for Windows or linux and you'll see hundreds of entries for Adobe, probably the worse of the offenders. Any system is only secure as its weakest link - and the weakest link, proven time and again, is closed source, proprietary software.

[psycho0815]

Java isn't the best example here, because for most linux users java means openJDK which is of course Open Source. but generally your right of course. Most security holes are in the software rather than the os itself. but that argument can be made for both windows and linux, unless you consider the internet explorer part of windows, than windows would be much worse of course

[Monkeh]

That is a completely bullshit 'statistic', and you know it. Linux distros come with a vast amount of software, Windows comes with practically nothing.

That's not bullshit at all, but it's hardly a liability.

It is bullshit. People are constantly pulling the 'oh, but it gets patched so much more' card out, but you cannot compare the numbers with Windows patches.

[psycho0815]

true. but it's no more comparing apples with oranges than anything else. people do seem to continually forget that Linux is not windows and Linux distros are even less like windows. To compare the frequency of patches you would obviously have to compare Linux patches to windows and every piece of installed software. personally is think that Linux would still come out on top, but i have nothing to proof it.

[Alana]

For me linux or windows is a matter of usefullness, but usefullness FOR THE SPECIFIC TASK a computer is going to be used.

For example - for servers its better to use linux, simply because you may get rid of graphical front end and save resources. This approach also gives another perk - you can configure entire server by text files, and if you are dealing with many accounts simple copy+paste or a clever database script saves you allot of time and work.

But for desktop PC linux is in my opinion not as functional as windows. Home PC is mainly used for multimedia, internet browsing and games, and from what i experienced this is better handled by windows.
Same goes for EE software, especially if it comes to PCB programs. And its not a matter of having a program, its a matter of being compatible with rest of the world.
If i cannot open someone else projects, or someone else cannot open my projects work gets much harder.
I know that there is linux version of eagle, but my main PCB program is damn old version of protel, and i haven't found any protel compatible linux software.

[Slobodan]

- I despise globalist Microsoft and baby killer Bill Gates

Communism doesn't work. Gates never killed babies. As a matter of fact, Gates is the largest charity donor in the world..

I hate both communism and capitalism, and you sir are not well informed. How Bill Gates kills people using vaccines and GMO I will not discuss on this forum, because my posts would be deleted anyway. And yes, I am familiar with his "charitys".

- Linux is free (both as a freedom (you control OS, OS does not control you) and as free of charge)

linux kernel is controlled by a control freak so even his best buddies abandon him ( the guy that did TTy told torvalds to stuff it and walked away. ) Torvalds has 'holy crusades' against 'binary blob's in the kernel.

It can't be controlled, it's open source.

- Linux is open source (so it doesn't have back door, unlike Windows, for example)

Bullshit. just becasue you have the source doesn't mean you are secure. How much of the source have you read ? understand ? know all the interactions with other modules ? unless you have actually verified every line of code and knows what it does you are just as blind as someone that does not have the code as you need to trust someone else ...

Don't, just don't. It's pathetic.

- Linux is more stable (can run for years without need for reinstallation)

linux has more bugfixes on a daily basis than windows has on a monthly basis... almost every day ubuntu and other popular distro's have 'patches'....
I havent reinstalled windows on any of my machines in the last 10 years.

Already replied by the other forum members.

- Linux does not require maintenance (for example ext4 file system does not fragmente so there is no need for defragmentation every week or so)

os <> filesystem ...

No.

protect my computer from viruses they create themselves

here come the tinfoil hats...

I don't say all viruses are created by the antivirus companies.

- There are more than hundred of OS based on Linux

and that is why it is a pest ! too many flavors , too many forks ,and a nightmare to cross-port all fixes. it's a friggin twit-race. Bang ... and they all take off in a different direction. If all the effort that was spent on the forks was combined to release 1 uniform system then linux would rule the world. now it's just a can of stale spaghetti...

Not worth replying.

- Practically all software for Linux is free (free as freedom and as free of charge)

and in a perpetual half-finished , undocumented, not usable state ... see the forking problem above...

Not true.

- There are few desktop environments you can choose for your OS (like unity, xfce, gnome, kde,...)

oh goodie.. here we go again. who gives a rats ass about the color sceme and windowing manager eye candy ? I want applications that work. Any linux forum is stranded in endless gnome <> kde , vi <> emacs and other moot discussions. Besides 'X' is the biggest failure of all time.

It is not a "theme". If you change desktop environment than you change the whole way you interact with OS.

- You can customise Linux more than you can Windows

give me a system that doesn't need customisation. So i can be productive. the Os is only there to load applications in memory , handle the hardware and that's it. You use applications, not the operating system. the OS is just a gigantic library that does common menial tasks so the apps programmers don't have to reinvent the wheel every time.

Not worth replying.

- All your updates are centralised (all you have to do is add a repository for your program once, and Linux automatically updates everything for you)

if they can figure out which installer package they are going to use... this installer works only on ubuntu , that one only on red hat ...
forking problem...

I use Ubuntu, so I am talking about how the situation with updates is with Ubuntu.

- No messing around with drivers because everything works out of the box (of course, there are so many different hardware so there are exemptions)

got your wifi card working yet ? what about the scanner or fax in a HP all-in-one ? ar any other piece of hardware that needs to rely on 'user-written' drivers. There is very few hardware and peripheral manufacturers out there that support linux. almost none.

The wifi worked straight away, so as the HP Photosmart C3180 (three-in-one).

- It is completely in my language

if learning english is too much work ...

Not worth replying.

[GeoffS]

As with most 'Why use linux?" threads, this one has gotten into a slanging match between Windows and Linux users.

To answer the original question, if Windows provides support of the EE software you want/need to use then keep using it. If cost is a concern and you want/need to use open source software then Linux may be worth a look (lot's of the open source stuff does run on Windows).
Linux is worth a look but if you find it all too much to learn or to maintain, then stick with Windows. There's no point putting up with an operating system that doesn't meet YOUR requirements.

[I'm a Linux tragic, a UNIX user/admin since the early 1980's and someone who has little knowledge of Windows other that at a user level. Linux does nearly everything I want and for those few things it can't support, I use Windows.]

[elliott]

- No messing around with drivers because everything works out of the box (of course, there are so many different hardware so there are exemptions)

got your wifi card working yet ? what about the scanner or fax in a HP all-in-one ? ar any other piece of hardware that needs to rely on 'user-written' drivers. There is very few hardware and peripheral manufacturers out there that support linux. almost none.

Do you realize HP is one of the manufacturers that does actively support Linux and their printers work quite well, including the dirt cheap networked all-in-one I currently use? As for wifi, Atheros supports Linux, Intel supports Linux, Broadcom supports Linux, just to name a few.

Ever wonder why the good wifi penetration testing tools are all Linux based? Linux has better wifi support than Windows.

[Simon]

indeed plugging my android phone into may laptop on debian instantly gives me internet access. To do the same in windows I am forced to install the complete htc suit just to get the tiny driver nedded to do the same.

I'm not sure what the comments on bill gates refer to. I do know that he is a Rotarian and is matching funds that Rotary raises to fuel Rotaries end polio campaign which seeks to eliminate polio from the world - just to set the records straight.

[Slobodan]

I'm not sure what the comments on bill gates refer to. I do know that he is a Rotarian and is matching funds that Rotary raises to fuel Rotaries end polio campaign which seeks to eliminate polio from the world - just to set the records straight.

Well, it's off topic, and I said that I won't discuss it on this forum, but just a quick one for you: http://www.activistpost.com/2012/01/polio-vaccines-now-1-cause-of-polio.html

Of course, this is just a tip of the iceberg.

MODERATORS NOTE: FOLLOWUP POSTS TO THIS TOPIC DELETED. IF YOU WANT TO DISCUSS THIS, THEN OPEN A NEW THREAD. (preferably on another forum    )

[Ed.Kloonk]

I don't care what platform use or what your beliefs for doing so are. I really don't.

Most people whine something doesn't work. A small fraction of people are motivated to help out the leader of a small open source project but too many are discouraged because they run into a grumpy developer. That's our fault and we are sorry.
 
But if you think our code is so bad and you can't be bothered to even look under the hood a bit by downloading some source code and see why it's stuffed than you are part of the problem. Go away.
 
Too everyone else, have a nice day!

[free_electron]

How Bill Gates kills people using vaccines

ah the vaccine conspiracy ... you just shot your credibility to pieces.

and in a perpetual half-finished , undocumented, not usable state ... see the forking problem above...

[quote >Not true.[/quote]

Care to show me one finished, released , free (as in gratis and with full source) , completely and correctly documented, application that works as expected , is functionally equivalent to, and can be installed on any linux distro out there. You can pick from any of these categories: ( which is the software i want to use. this is an electronics forum , so you get to pick only from software related to that )

- Schematic / PCB  / simulation layout software
- IC design or FPGA design.
- Mechanical design software genre Solidworks / Autodesk inventor / Alibre
- Modeling software genre Rhino or Maya or Alias

good luck ...

Note : I do use linux where it is appropriate :
- as a file server in several NAS boxes. Zero problems. I have 5 NAS boxes all running Linux. Interact seemlessly with both Windows and Mac machines.
- as a home automation system. Zero problems, works like a champ.

My android tablets give a mediocre experience at best .. problems with the wifi that need hot patching... waiting 6 months to get ice cream sandwich release for them ...

I use a computer as a piece of equipment. i have ZERO interest in knowing how it works internally. to me a computer is similar to a screwdriver or a scope. i use it. i don't build them , don't need to know how they are built and i don't mod them.
The OS is there to let me run applications that allow me to do the things i want to do : draw schematics and design pcb's, design an enclosure for it and send it off to production.

And ,sadly, linux is not up to par on that front (at least not in the 'free' as in gratis and source supplied section )

[poptones]

Are you kidding me? You're not joking?

Maya comes from Wavefront. Wavefront was developed on SGI and Sun platforms.

This is just one of the many productions that have been created using Blender, a completely open source and free 3D and video production studio.



What you stupidly refuse to "get" is that the whole point of linux as a platform is that it constantly evolves in any way the user desires. This is why linux is, in Hollywood, the mainstream platform. Virtually every blockbuster you've seen in the last decade has been produced using hundreds of linux workstations and rendering engines. "Off the shelf" tools include: cinepaint, Combustion, FrameCycler, Mari, Houdini, Maya, Mental Ray, Nuke, Piranha, Platform LXF, RaveHD, Pixar's RenderMan, SoftImage|XSI...

http://blogs.computerworld.com/if_its_animation_or_special_effects_its_linux

http://player.vimeo.com/video/19934045

So far as IC design - again, it's the unix platform where these tools started decades ago. There are tons of vhdl libraries and tools for the platform, most of them free.

i don't build them , don't need to know how they are built and i don't mod them.

Uh huh. So what you are saying is that you don't like to think outside the box. Well fine, stay in the box all you like. But don't pretend all there is exists inside that tiny box. People use linux because we don't like being stuck inside that same stupid box. A computer is a tool: you can drive it using the buttons some people think are all you need to navigate or you can get inside, take control, and drive it to new places. And that's why Windows cannot compete with linux.

[krish2487]

@free_electron

Care to show me one finished, released , free (as in gratis and with full source) , completely and correctly documented, application that works as expected , is functionally equivalent to, and can be installed on any linux distro out there. You can pick from any of these categories: ( which is the software i want to use. this is an electronics forum , so you get to pick only from software related to that )

- Schematic / PCB  / simulation layout software
- IC design or FPGA design.
- Mechanical design software genre Solidworks / Autodesk inventor / Alibre
- Modeling software genre Rhino or Maya or Alias

- Schematic / PCB  / simulation layout software

Eagle , Kicad
Like it or not they are PRETTY stable on any *nix platform.

I beg you to kindly show me one report where eagle on *nix ever had an issue..

It is however a fundamentally different issue if you dont like the windows variant of the above in the first instance.

- Mechanical design software genre Solidworks / Autodesk inventor / Alibre.

draftsight from 3ds
(a FREE (free as in freedom of speech and not paid for) replacement of autocad that is supported by 3ds on linux)

Autocad 2013 is a full 4.7 GB in space.
draftsight is all of , hold your breath, 108MB with similar performance.

- IC design or FPGA design.

ISE suite 13.2 has as much stable performance on ubuntu as on windows, if anything faster on linux, check with vivado.

- Modeling software genre Rhino or Maya or Alias

already answered by poptones

I have given examples of softwares made,used and maintained  by serious professionals to do productive work in their fields, not a half baked peice of software by amateurs. I am pretty sure many of those who use any of these products on linux would be active and/or passive participants in this thread.

Furthermore going a little bit further,

Eclipse
rowley crossworks
monodevelop

all run with minimal problems on ubuntu.
and yes i do use all the sw i mentioned above.
I have yet to see an application fail to run when I invoke it.

The only point where my argument fails is the source code. It is not open source per code but is free to use.

But that is the OP concern anyway. software stability concern and ease of use in linux.
 
i have addressed these issues in the softwares mentioned above.

Eagle is paid for the lite and commercial version even on windows,
Xilinx ISE is free
draftsight is free and so is eclipse
free as in free for usage.

The source code for any of these softwares is not available even on windows.

As you stated

I use a computer as a piece of equipment. i have ZERO interest in knowing how it works internally. to me a computer is similar to a screwdriver or a scope. i use it. i don't build them , don't need to know how they are built and i don't mod them.

they work AS reliably on ubuntu.
Dont trust me, try any of them for yourself on a desktop *nix variant

[poptones]

Eagle is not free, not open source, and not GPL. The "free" version prohibits you from selling boards created with it.

kicad is open source and GPL. It is free in the proper sense of the term.

Rowley crossworks is very expensive, at least IMO, and not at all free.

Monodevelop is built on mono, which is itself an API protected by all sorts of patents. Microsoft has given its formal blessing to the platform but it is also free to pull that support at any time. This is why so many in the open source community hate mono apps. Mono may be GPL but at any time Microsoft could enforce their patents leaving users vulnerable to lawsuits and vendors potentially libel for indemnification.

[free_electron]

i'm going to drop the 'sourcecode required' to make this easier .

- Eagle  : no simulation, not free.
- Kicad :  poorly documented , not a 'real' tool ( when talking tools i am after things that are on par with Altium, Mentor or Cadence.
- draftsight : that's 2d. I'm after Solidworks ....
- ISE suite 13.2. Pass with restrictions (only officially supported on specific builds of linux).
- Blender : not what i am looking for. That is more for animation. I want mechanical cad and modeling ( enclosure design , vacuum forming, injection molding. Rhino fits the bill there. )

While many 'big tools' started at 'unix' ( solaris / Hpux ) they did not get ported. Some even become windows only.

From my perspective there is no incentive to switch to linux. Here is why :

- For the software with the capabilites i want/need i am not off cheaper. It will cost me just as much as on windows. So the 'free' as in -gratis- factor disappears. The lure to make me switch would be 'cheaper / free' as i simply can't afford all this hi-end stuff. I have an Altium license, i bought Rhino and i'm pondering about either Solidworks or Inventor... The decision is going to be price/performance... This is still all hobby you know ...

- I have a much narrower offering of industrial-grade software. (let's face it. Stuff like eagle, kicad et-al are NOT industrial grade... Walk into any mechanical shop and it's all Solidworks / Inventor / ProE / Catia ) There are more industrial-grade tools on windows than on Linux. This is good for competition as it drives down prices for me as a user.

- I get the additional burden of having to deal with : 'this is only for distro so and so, that is only for such-and-such. mod it and we take our hands off'. Ok ,granted, windows may be more vulnerable (which is also debatable... i haven't had a single virus infection since i started with my first Pc in 1986. So i think all this virus stuff is FUD. Then again , i don't download illegal stuff.)

So the answer to the question 'is it worth it to run linux ?' for me is 'NO',

[Monkeh]

So the answer to the question 'is it worth it to run linux ?' for me is 'NO',

Fine. Now stop making up bullshit and fudged numbers to 'prove' Linux isn't a useful OS.

[poptones]

You're simply saying "I don't like what's available." Now you change the rules to be more subjective. Then, when you're shown other software you say it's not cheaper than windows. Well, so what? You're obviously willing to pay for software. It doesn't matter if you're willing to switch from linux - that's not what you asked.

kicad is every bit a "real" tool. A lot of people (myself included) don't like Eagle's software, especially the router. Subjective.

Using alliance you can design everything from the cpu core to the board it goes on.

I have no idea what you mean by "industrial grade." What you seem to be saying is "everyone I see uses something else." Well, so what? you certainly cannot say this is not "industrial grade" although I doubt you know anyone who uses it, either. Blender is also a full blown cad, what you are saying (again) is that you never heard of it and no one you know uses it, so it must not be "industrial grade."

'this is only for distro so and so, that is only for such-and-such. mod it and we take our hands off'.

I have no idea what you are complaining about here, it makes no sense. To install kicad on my machine I go to a command window and type "apt-get install kicad." If you are too terrified of command windows then fire up synaptic and search for it and click the button. Same thing with Blender. Same thing with gimp.

And of course "mod it and we take our hands off" - duh. That's because you modded it. Modify autocad and see if autodesk supports it. Oh, that's right - you CAN'T modify it. Google "moot point."

[free_electron]

you say it's not cheaper than windows.

But that is exactly what linux is all about no? free ? as in -gratis-. that's what keeps popping up over and over again. Linux is free, its much cheaper than windows , i don't need to spend money blablabla...

You're obviously willing to pay for software.

Yes, i have no problem shelling out some money for quality software. but i am also cheap ... My hopes of getting away cheap with linux are dashed. It's gonna be more expensive than on windows in the end run.

I have no idea what you mean by "industrial grade."

Walk into any company that designs and buids mechanical stuff.. ( whether these are buildings , motorcycles or enclosures ) or subcontracts things and has machinery like lasercutters , flowjets , 3d printers ( real 3d printers like stratasys , not pizzabox and plywood makerbots ) , 3d mills et al. They invariably are runing tools like Solidworks, Inventor , Catia , ProEngineer.. and they are all on windows. The same goes for the control software of all these machines. There has got to be a reason...

'this is only for distro so and so, that is only for such-and-such. mod it and we take our hands off'.

Mod it as in: mod the linux it i installed on, not the program itself. I just went and took a look at that 2d drawing program (draftsight. Thanks for the tip. autocad alternative. i like it.). my point is proven. There are two installs. One for ubuntu and one for red hat.... why does that need to be ? ( oh right .. the forking problem i mentioned before )

The same goes for the altera and Xilinx tools. it is for 1 specific 'flavor' of linux. use any other flavor and you are on your own. they take their hands off. We have the same problem at work. The compute farm has multiple machines with different builds of red hat. simply because software A wants build X and software B want another build and is not tested or released on A.. that is frustrating.

I am a member of Techshop. They have all kinds of machinery to use for their members. Lasercutters , 3d scanners , 3d printers , milling machines (Tormach) waterjets (Flowjet) , CNC routers , CNC plasmacutters,  embroidery machines , vinyl cutters and a whole bunch of other industrial equipment. They have a large room full of HP workstations equipped with design software, free for your usage as a member, to let you make your projects on any of these machines, or even design your website. All software from Autodesk , Adobe, and many others is there. And it's all windows based. Not a linux box in sight.

I was at a subcontractor firm to get some socket for a new chip designed. ( combination of milling , molding ). I toured the design center and the factory floor. Solidworks and windows. Wherever i go in the industrial world it's all windows.

Can you explain why i don't see a single linux box if linux is so much better in all aspects over windows? Are all these companies idiots for sticking with windows and closed source software?

Now, it may  very well be, like poptones said, that in other industries ( like moviemaking) it's all linux. But i'm not in that business (and this is not a moviemaking forum) . It's electronics / mechanics ( and even mechanics is weak in my case as it is limited to designing a nice case for a bit of electronics in my situation)

I don't understand it anymore .... The linux community tries to keep convincing me they are way superior and better yet i can't find anyone already using it. This simply baffles me.

[Monkeh]

I don't understand it anymore .... The linux community tries to keep convincing me they are way superior and better yet i can't find anyone already using it. This simply baffles me.

So how come there's a community?

[free_electron]

So how come there's a community?

I guess it must be a community of people that like tinkering with the operating system itself ... as opposed to use it.
I don't know. I honestly don't know.

Whenever i look at linux ( and i do several times a year ) i see no attractor. The promise of 'cheaper than windows' does not get fulfilled.
Whenever i look around at what the industry uses i very rarely see usage of linux based applications. ( apart from where i work  which is IC design , i don't know of any )

I am currently looking to get some good 3d cad program to do case design ( plastic cases that will be injection molded but initially 3d printed). Anyone i talk to , that does this kind of work for a living , points me at windows only software. I have talked to at least 5 different companies that do this kind of work . They are all windows based.

The same goes with subcontractors that do PCB design and assembly. It's all windows based.

I am speaking for what i need to do : electronics/ mechanical work. Undoubtedly if i were to visit a huge datacenter or a webprovider or a moviestudio i would find massive installs of linux. But that is not what i am doing , nor is it what is prevalent on eevblog. When i look at my customers , that develop hardware with my IC's and write code for them. Not a single one uses linux for their schematic / pcb work or code development ... and these are big corporations.

So, again, if linux is so good, so stable, so cheap, and gives you all the freedom in the world , how come i can't find anyone using it ?
Why is everyone chosing to stick with virus plagued, monopolistic, drm encumbered , closed source , baby killing windows shiite ?

Can anyone shed a light on this ? it is a mystery to me. Either these companies are all masochistic idiots, or linux (and linux based applictions) are simply not ready for that kind of work. It's one or the other ...

[poptones]

But that is exactly what linux is all about no? free ? as in -gratis-. that's what keeps popping up over and over again. Linux is free, its much cheaper than windows , i don't need to spend money blablabla...

Damn dude. Do you listen to anyone besides yourself? You've been told over and over free does not just mean gratis. Linux is cheaper than windows, but that doesn't mean every application is gratis. Free software has many advantages, but if you just want to run canned windows software linux does not exist just so you  can dodge the windows tax. If you just want a Windows clone go get ReactOS.

One for ubuntu and one for red hat.... why does that need to be ?

Because they use different package managers. The fact that both are provided makes your "argument" sheer idiocy. So what? This not a problem it's just something for you to bitch about. Shall I bitch about Windows? It's broken a dozen ways from sunday, you haven't seen me go off on the stupidity of paying for software that is broken by design.

The compute farm has multiple machines with different builds of red hat. simply because software A wants build X and software B want another build and is not tested or released on A.. that is frustrating.

Doesn't matter, that's not a problem with linux. It's a problem with the broken software you've installed on linux. Why don't you bitch about not being able to run the software on OS X? Or Windows? Does that mean OS X and Windows are broken because they won't run your broken software? You might want to tell your IT department it's 2012; the idea of having two or three boxes just because they need different operating systems is rather quaint.

I am a member of Techshop....it's all windows based. Not a linux box in sight. Can you explain why i don't see a single linux box if linux is so much better in all aspects over windows? Are all these companies idiots for sticking with windows and closed source software?

CNC machines are expensive, often gigantic, machines with liability issues. If you have money invested in software you don't redevelop it all over again until you need to. I've worked on cnc machines running freaking DOS - so? Maybe they should all run DOS!

Your argument "no one uses it so why should I" is easily put in perspective: in 1999 there were thousands of people asking why they should run apache, or linux. Trivialize hobbyist cnc machines all you like, the fact remains a great many of them are running linuxCNC. LinuxCNC is mature, powerful, and well supported. And where do many of our products come from today? Newsflash: China has an official policy against Windows. As these new businesses grow - and many of them inevitably will - why should they switch to Windows?

[free_electron]

You've been told over and over free does not just mean gratis.

Correct. i fully understand that. But for me one of the attractors is -gratis-. I fi need to payas much for a linux app as for a windows app .. why switch os? i would have to re-buy all the other stuff i already have...

Because they use different package managers.

So? there are a dozen package managers for windows ( installshield et al ). they all work fine. Why does x only run on a and y only run on b. If the software manufacturer only gives a package for linux flavor X and i use linux flavor y i am stuck. i can't use that software...

It's a problem with the broken software you've installed on linux.

So multimillion dollar IC design software is 'broken' ? riight... i think not. What comes out of it works perfectly fine.. as long as you use the specific linux build it was written for. if it locks up or crashes on other builds the manufacturers take their hands off..

Why don't you bitch about not being able to run the software on OS X? Or Windows?

irrelevant. That software is designed for 'linux'. they don't make it for windows or mac.

Your argument "no one uses it so why should I"

That's not my argument. My argument is : i want to use linux , where is the software ? There is none... none of the existing equipment/cad suppliers out there develop for it. Like you said : they have too much invested in other platforms and there may be liability issues. That video shows an old cnc that has been retrofitted with linuxcnc. bravo ! great ! Can i buy a CNC that comes with linuxcnc pre-installed ? probably not ... the machine makers will no support it.

So the outcome is : if none of the equipment that is being sold has the software made for linux we are stuck to whatever it IS begin developed for... which is windows. So here comes the question again : why would i want to use linux in that case ? Why would i want to use the square peg if everything out there is made with round holes ....

Coming back to the topics question : Worth it to use linux ? still a NO.

[Monkeh]

Why don't you bitch about not being able to run the software on OS X? Or Windows?

irrelevant. That software is designed for 'linux'. they don't make it for windows or mac.

And still you are consistently failing to grasp the concept that Linux != Windows, OS X, any of the various Unix flavours (which are far more incompatible than Linux distros, FYI), or any other OS.

[free_electron]

Ok so , linux is not any of those other operating systems. Got that.
Yet , if software is designed for linux i expect it to install and run on linux. And it doesn't. red hat linux is not ubuntu linux.. ( proven by different installer requirements).  Ubuntu and Red hat may as well be totally different operating systems... ( i just saw the new ubuntu. that user interface and dock is almost alien to anything we know. totally lost to find anything )

Linux is NOT a single operating system. It is a collection of operating systems that share a kernel. And there is already one of the problems. If someone tells me ' you really should use linux' the question arises : which flavor ?  Will it run the applications i want to use ? What if i pick the 'wrong' flavor.... I'll need to install two computers or virtual machines and switch between them... and they may have different desktop managers .... i may as well buy a mac and a install windows on it in parallels...

As a simple user this creates uncertainty and doubt. what to pick ? where to go ? will it work with my printer ? will the software i want to use be compatible with the chosen 'flavor' ? questions questions questions.
questions that don't exist on mac or windows.

[Monkeh]

Ok so , linux is not any of those other operating systems. Got that.
Yet , if software is designed for linux i expect it to install and run on linux. And it doesn't. red hat linux is not ubuntu linux.. ( proven by different installer requirements).  Ubuntu and Red hat may as well be totally different operating systems...

Congratulations, you're finally beginning to get the idea. Sort of.

Linux is NOT a single operating system. It is a collection of operating systems that share a kernel.

Yes, slowly getting there..

Now, what you're still missing here is that if these closed-source proprietary big-money companies put five minutes into understanding what they're doing, they would develop for Linux, not Redhat, or Ubuntu, or the next distro. They do not develop for the OS, they develop for the distro. And that's a fatal mistake which they STILL haven't realised they're making.

And there is already one of the problems. If someone teels me ' you really should use linux' thequestion arises : which flavor ... will it run the applications i want to use ? What if i pick the 'wrong' flavor.... i'll need to install two computers or virtual machines and switch between them... and they may have different desktop managers .... i may as well buy a mac and a install window on it... same problem.

Now, see, that only appears to be a problem because you're incapable or unwilling to look at the software, appraise it, learn it, and make a decision of your own. Bit like the people who won't buy a car for themselves, but ask everyone else what they should buy.

[free_electron]

You think i didn't know that from the onset ? I have been playing the devils advocate throughout this topic....

As far as being unwilling to look at the software :I base my input on what is used in the real world.

If i need a part machined i go to several companies that do that and ask for a quote. I ask them to tour their facility , what machines they use and prod them about what software they use or prefer and what file formats they read ( and i score free lunch ). I then look for commonalities. The thing that is used the most amongst them should , reasonably, be the best suited. if nine out of 10 of them use solidworks then the conclusion is that this is the best suited for this kind of work. To make my life easy i will pick that up so i am compatible in terms of data format and exchange.

So far, in all these expeditions i have done ( whether for mechancial stuff, 3d printing , milling, injection molding , pcb assembly , pcb manufacturing ) the common denominator , without exception, is a windows based piece of software. And there are per-industry preferences. Certain industries prefer Solidworks , others perfer Catia , others prefer Inventor. None of em prefer or even use antyhing linux based. which leads me again to : what is the reason for this ? Everyone here yell's at me that linux is soooo much better than windows and that i need to open my eyes. well i did. not a linux install or linux based application in sight.

Now, if were to be on the lookout to build a datacenter... i may very well find out it's all linux with a prevalence of one particular distro and not a windows in sight. Same for a webspace hosting company. But lik i said , this is not a forum about web hosting or building your own datacenter. It's about electronics. And in that realm .... zilch.

The only linux based tool i have seen (between 8 or 9 board fabs) is Genesys (once on Red-Hat, twice on windows and twice on solaris) to process gerber data.

[Monkeh]

None of em prefer or even use antyhing linux based. which leads me again to : what is the reason for this ?

Limited availability of software due to limited development manpower. Due to limited money, due to intensively anti-competitive behaviour by the large companies. Just a guess..

Everyone here yell's at me that linux is soooo much better than windows and that i need to open my eyes. well i did. not a linux install or linux based application in sight.

Because you've selectively picked a very narrow point of view. You'll find Linux is used for many things, in many forms, in many places. Including ones where the suggestion of using Windows would get you laughed out of the building.

You've been spending a great deal of time in this thread making ignorant, sweeping statements, and not a lot addressing the true problem: That this one, small segment of the market is lacking in software and/or competently developed sofware.

Now, if were to be on the lookout to build a datacenter... i may very well find out it's all linux with a prevalence of one particular distro and not a windows in sight. Same for a webspace hosting company. But lik i said , this is not a forum about web hosting or building your own datacenter. It's about electronics. And in that realm .... zilch.

Actually, you'll find there isn't any particular prevalance of one distro. Why? Because they all offer different features, all have strong and weak points, and people get to make choices based on their needs and feelings, rather than having them rammed down their throats Microsoft style. The 'great weakness' of diversity is the greatest strength.

[krish2487]

@free_electron

You are just looking at the biggest advantage of linux in a totally pessimistic way!

The entire concept of  "open source" including the source code issues is that anyone who knows what they are doing can change the system code to suit their requirements.

The numerous flavours of linux represent exactly that.

As monkeh said, the linux kernel is not flawed in any manner.

why??

Because the same gedit, nano,screen etc text editors which worked in 92 for the first kernel release still work on ALL linux distros.

according to you if the various flavours were incompatible with one another then the base apps should also not work
(it is a reasonable assumption, from what you said about the newest ubuntu being totally alien to the previous versions)


Somewhere down the development roadmap, the OEMS gave preference to a particualr distro instead of the core kernel dependancy.
that severely handicaps the end user if the distro is not supported.

But that is not a fault of the linux kernel, it is software providers who CHOSE to support only specific distros.

If i need a part machined i go to several companies that do that and ask for a quote. I ask them to tour their facility , what machines they use and prod them about what software they use or prefer and what file formats they read ( and i score free lunch ). I then look for commonalities. The thing that is used the most amongst them should , reasonably, be the best suited. if nine out of 10 of them use solidworks then the conclusion is that this is the best suited for this kind of work. To make my life easy i will pick that up so i am compatible in terms of data format and exchange.

Flawed, look around on this forum and you ll find that eagle leads by a majority. Does that mean you pre-decide based on major consensus that eagle is best for you without trying out the options yourself?

As far as being unwilling to look at the software :I base my input on what is used in the real world.

Have you been to ALL the mechanical fabrication units AROUND the world to have proof that linux is not used anywhere in the world?

So far, in all these expeditions i have done ( whether for mechancial stuff, 3d printing , milling, injection molding , pcb assembly , pcb manufacturing ) the common denominator , without exception, is a windows based piece of software. And there are per-industry preferences. Certain industries prefer Solidworks , others perfer Catia , others prefer Inventor. None of em prefer or even use antyhing linux based. which leads me again to : what is the reason for this ? Everyone here yell's at me that linux is soooo much better than windows and that i need to open my eyes. well i did. not a linux install or linux based application in sight.

They are spoon-fed using windows.

BTW you did not mention "who" prefers the softwares, the customer or the manufacturer?

as in they require that the customer gives them specific formatsof SW, catia or the in-house development for the industry is SW,catia etc.

[poptones]

So... there's "no software for it" except there's this "Multimillion dollar ic design software" that your company has that is only supported on one platform. And there's tens of thousands of desktops in Hollywood. And there's Millions of servers on the web. And there's half a billion Android devices. But there's no software for it.

Certain industries prefer Solidworks , others perfer Catia , others prefer Inventor. None of em prefer or even use antyhing linux based.

You seem to be confusing applications with file formats. I've never seen a pc fab house that won't accept gerbers, for example. Nor a machine shop that can't use dxf or G-code. It doesn't make a dingle damn whether those files were created with Windows, linux, or C-64 Basic.

Linux is NOT a single operating system.

No, linux is a kernel. It's the same kernel whether the desktop is wearing a red hat or a red spiral.

It is a collection of operating systems that share a kernel. And there is already one of the problems. If someone tells me ' you really should use linux' the question arises : which flavor ?  Will it run the applications i want to use ?

If you mean "will it run linux" then yes, it will. If you have special needs like a Million dollar software package then you pick the one the makers of that software package supports. This is no different than if you are running Windows or OS X. And yes, I can  most certainly point you to at least one very expensive desktop publishing program for Windows that is only supported on certain versions of Windows. This is the bargain you make when you choose proprietary software. That is the fault of the software maker, not the platform. I was helping support a network not too long ago that had Windows 2000, xp, win7 and Vista computers. Two of the machines were identical save for the operating system - one with Vista, one with XP, and the one running Vista was utterly useless for scanning while the other worked fine. How many MILLIONS of people using Windows can relate to this? You keep talking about the diversity of linux as if it's a bad thing, as if Windows was this sort of magical monoculture where everything works the same no matter what version when this is verifiably false even by the experience of the most novice of users.

What if i pick the 'wrong' flavor.... I'll need to install two computers or virtual machines and switch between them... and they may have different desktop managers .... i may as well buy a mac and a install windows on it in parallels...

This is idiocy. If you  want a different desktop manager then you install the goddamn desktop manager. If you insist on being able to install rpms on your debian box (although I have no idea why you would) then rpm manager is right there in Synaptic along with yum and alien and whatever other linux/gnu software you want.

[krish2487]

@poptones

You keep talking about the diversity of linux as if it's a bad thing, as if Windows was this sort of magical monoculture where everything works the same no matter what version when this is verifiably false even by the experience of the most novice of users.

True..
i am heading a company changeover from windows to linux. The transitional hurdles were minor. We run SAP. Leaving the server and its mirror intact, i changed all the other users to ubuntu 11.10 + go-global.

Minimal change in terms of user perspective and ease of use. They had to be tutored in using and getting around with linux, and it was by no means easy, but sure beats having to suffer the ever degrading performance of windows and the half-yearly format-reinstall exercise.



@free_electron

Quote from matrix - morpheus
"Free your mind"

:-D

There is yet another issue that should be kept in mind.
Unlike windows where every new release (service packs) are generally meant to plug old holes (and consequently introduce new ones)
every update of ubuntu is not the same.

Stick with LTS releases if you want atleast google-able support for fixing your problems.

The 6 month development cycle turn around are only RAD releases. They will not compete with LTS in terms of documented support.
and you should not expect them to be at the same level of documented support.

[free_electron]

Here is what i did. I went to five companies that do plastic work. In essence the companies either di rapid prototyping, to small runs ( injection molding ). Some of these companies also do metalwork. There was a mom-and-pop place, a small place all the way to a mass producer in the far east.
Three of these companies are local and i visited them. I playeyed the ignorant and asked 'stupid' questions to try to find out how hard it would be for me to design the enclosure and give them a workable file. I am not going down to the g-code level.

The task i need to do is design this plastic thing that can hold 3 circuit boards ( screwless , using snap-in notches ), a battery pack and the contact clips ( again snap in ) and has a few threaded inserts ( those little copper thingies, kind lok like a small lead pellet from a pellet gun and has a threaded insed. You press it in a hole and then you can screw something in ) so the top board can be screwed on and completes the assembly. I have step files for each of the boards , the battery , the battery clips and all the other stufff. I also have a step file for the final enclosure this assembly drops into. So i need to 'sculpt' this intermediate piece of plastic that holds everything together.

Instead of paying a service bureau to do this work for me and go through several iterations i decided to try this myself. Looks like fun.
Now, since i am not a mechanical genius nor a plastics expert i sent out my 'feelers' to see what is commonly used for this kind of work. I looked up some companies , and went talking to them.

The common denominator is that you use solidworks or something that generates solidworks files.i have played a bit with rhino ( which is a modeling tool but not a 'true cad' tool. ) with a few hours effort i had placed my various step files in 3d space and modeled my plastic support frame. Cool .. Or so i thought. It tirns out this is not really usable. Tools like rhine make a 'blob' and you can't really go back in and modify something you did in the middle without having to redo all the steps afterward. Tools like inventor and solidworks store all actions and you can alter something you did in the middle and the tool adapts all the steps you did after. These tools understand the relations of all elements. Rhino just makes a description of a solid object . I'm not a specialist but i was told it is the difference between surface modeling and volume modeling and relational elements. I don't know. It's chinese to me. I have my nice step file that describes exactly what i want. I can load that step file in altium , verify my boards fit and i'm a happy camper.

Now, it turns out this step file is useless if you want to make this thing . They need much more information so they can rip this thing apart to do the mold design.

So everyone of these companies said: you need a 'real tool'. So i asked them : what do you use . And the answer was , well we have different programs so we can interact with what our customers use. Here is a list of the software we have in-house . That list is small solidworks, solidedge, inventor , proengineer and one other tool. All windows based.

When we toured their facilites and they showed of their printers, milling machines , lathes , lasercutters and other gear i carefully looked around. Not a single linux in sight. All these machines had a touchscreen dangling from a pendant , or a workstation attached to the, with the control software, and were running windows. It may be that somewhere dep inside this machine is a 'headless' linux box actually driving it , but the user interface is windows.

If i go visit pcb fabs and assembly houses it is exactly the same story. Any machine on the production floor, the cad department or any other technical dpartment is running windows. There may be a fileserver in a closet that runs linux, but again, that is a 'headless' install. Every machine that has a screen shows windows.

So this strikes me as odd. Here we have on one side a large community that is very vocal about how good linux is, how many free applications there are etc...
Yet, if i go out there and look around in the technical field ( electronics , mechanics .. 'making physical things, not storing files and serving webpages ) i find exactly zero.
Now, statisticians ( is that correct ? ) will probably have a field day with me, but, if i visit 5 companies, see 20 or so computers at each company that gives me 100 machines, and none of them run linux ... That's a pretty darn small number....

As for pcb fabs the ratio is higher i have three suppliers i use on a regular basis and i visit two or three a year outside of my existing ones. In the last five years i have done about nine or ten. Looking at all computers i saw there : zero linux ( there were still a few old pdp11 with reel to reel tapedrives to run old excellon drill machines.... )

The same in the assembly plants i go. Any and all pick and place , xray , reflow oven , inventory control... Windows. Ok these machines probably have plcs inside to do the real work. But you can talk to those from linux equally fine. So why not ?

As i said , i have been playing devils advocate in this topic and deliberately throwing sticks in the henhouse to see what the reactions would be.

The title of this topic is : worth it to use linux ? Eevblog is an electronics forum. Anyone who makes electronics probably dabbles a bit in other technical fields ( mechanics , programming , etc )
So, looking a this , apart from the 'programming' there ain't a whole lot on linux that fits this technical bill.

And that baffles me. Here you have a community full of propellerheads, designing an operating system that is faster, better, more secure , free ( as in open and -gratis-) and in many aspects more advanced than anything else out there. Yet looking around nobody uses it 'in the real world', meaning on the factory floor or in the cad/cam department attached to the factory floor.

Are all these companies run by idiots ? Or is linux just 'not ready' ?
If can get stuff for cheap, or free, i go for it. So i looked for linux based alternatives that could generate the output i need. Nothing , apart from commercial software that is as expensive, or more expensive, than its winodws distro or counterpart. Oh yeah, they do exist, the linux ports of a few programs that are also mac and windows. But i have not seen anone using them. Probably because it is easier to use a single operating system throughout the company and not have to support mac , windows and a few linux distro's. Having only one os in use requires less support and is cheaper in the long run.

Now, the hobbyist situation may be totally different. There it may be acceptable to burn a lot of time trying to do something simple , the hard way. I don't want that. I want the shortest time with the smallest effort , at the cheapest price. Sadly, that doesnt line up.
I was hoping to attain cheap by looking in this massive linux community with tons of gratis programs. And i found... Nothing.

Pretty baffling.

Again, i agree this is a narrow field and if i were to look at fileservers, webservers , compute clusters it would probably be linix all the way with no windows in sight. But i point back at the topic title : worth it to use linux ? , posted in an electronics forum.... Answer ? No. Period !

[poptones]

I don't know who's the bigger idiot. But I'm done arguing with a troll.

[free_electron]

If you want me to shut up : show me a company that does mechanical or electronical design ( PCB layout , schematic capture ,assembly , machine engineering , sheet metal work , milling, injection molding or anything else that requires CNC ) that actually uses linux on a daily basis to run their cad/cam workstations and machines (and not an isolated instance, at least half their equipment needs to be linux driven )  and tell me exactly the names of the software and equipment manufacturers they use. I want names of the company , names of the software , names and manufacturers of the machines and price tags.

It may very well be that they do exist, but from what i have seen so far they are in the minority, not to say inexistent ( apart from very specialistic fields like IC design where people moved away from solaris and onto RHEL ).

I can't find any. If you can prove me wrong i will gladly accept it and shut up. And i will actually be very happy since i will have an answer to my questions. But until you can prove me wrong i have only what i have personally seen.

[poptones]

I don't care if you shut up. Ramble on her all you like. Your arguments have been discounted time after time, you just come back with more made up nonsense - or, more often, the same made up nonsense again and again.

Have fun arguing with yourself.

[free_electron]

I take it you couldn't find any either then ... ah well.

[Simon]

I think with making large CNC equipment it is a case of the blaming game. The company physically building the machine will have no software competence to speak of so sub contract to a third party program who in turn don't want the onouse on dealing with the OS too and want help when it goes wrong or they need drivers so they turn to the most commercially supported system: windows. If every company was not in the blaming game and subcontracting game and actually made something from start to finish you would find more novel solutions. I bet if you look at most windows based CNC equipment you will find that they run largely on the same software.

[GeoffS]

Offhand, I can't think of any large CNC mill/lathe that doesn't have a built in, proprietary controller. 

[ptricks]

Something being overlooked is the electronics benefits. I don't run linux as a full time desktop, but I do have it installed and use it often. The reason is that all the ARM stuff is mostly linux. I worked with broadcom chipsets, those are Mips, and linux is the preferred OS on those too. If you are into electronics and considering doing something besides the 8 and 16bit chips then you really need to learn linux.  Learning to do things like cross compiling is something that takes a while to learn and can really benefit someone who is looking to improve their skills with hardware.  If you don't know how to compile a kernel , how  an MMU works or how to emulate it, how to add something that isn't included,  or how the boot process works, then you really are limiting yourself to the lower end hardware . There are some really great development boards out for ARM that are not expensive, look at the raspberry pi for example, another linux OS device.  Cost isn't an excuse not to learn it, the software is free, there are plenty of tutorials, and something like the raspberry pi is $35 USD.

[free_electron]

Offhand, I can't think of any large CNC mill/lathe that doesn't have a built in, proprietary controller.

Most likely indeed. Or a plc based system to assist some menial tasks. But look at the control screens , ( the old machines had custom processors running dedicated screens , or even led displays ) and they are all windows. Some even show you the 3d drawing of what they are working on and highlight what they are doing etc.

@ptricks : true. Fully agree. If you are going to be running linux on a hefty embedded cpu you may as well use linux to develop for it. And in that case it makes sense to have a linux box around. There is a caveat though, if you look at the commercial devtools ... Those are again almost all windows based. Even the ones that target running linux on the cpu. Pretty weird. Rdvs and american arium have hardware debuggers that let you trace a runnin linux on an arm or mips. It can show you even what process calls what other. The entire ide is windows based though. Makes me wonder why not linux based ? The same goes for the lauterbachs.
Collegues of mine develop the firmware for the settop boxes of the large satellite providers (dish, direct tv). Those boxes run a linux kernel. They all have windows pc's running an ide connected to the jtag probe for code download and the trace port for debugging. They do have a vnc open to a RHEL machine that holds the version control system and the compiler. Code editing is on windows , get saved to a RHEL machine that takes care of version control. Compilation is done on the RHEL , then the compiler script assembles the selected modules , links them and builds the rom image and encrypts it. They drive that command line through the vnc. Its just a terminal session. After that they go back to the windows ide to actually download the new rom image and monitor it while running.

Most likely the reason is that the hardware to do the jtag and traceport only comes with a windows based ide. Even though the ide supports linux trace and debug.

So for code development it makes sense and i know of companies that use linux based systems for that purpose , but that wasn't the issue i have. Its all the other stuff involved in designing a piece of electronics. Schematic , pcb , board making , case making , case design , mechanical cad , driving the machines. Data exchange.. That is heavily windows based.

So i wonder why ? Why has noone made the step yet ?

 There is obviously the aspect , probably wrong, of perception: Our users are going to be scared of using a strange user interface.... The support guys will need training , and the customer now gets dunked in unfamiliar territory.

But, there may be an other problem. A legal one. Almost all commercial systems have secrets. Whether they are the source, the algorithms, the code logic , the fileformat , the data exchange protocol. Porting the app to linux is 'perceived' as dangerous. Disclosing source is a no no. Actually, if using certain linix libraries the licences are dangerous to you in this case. They may force you to disclose more than you want. There are so many licences out there that the company lawyers have a field day. They can't figure out if you got it right and the answer from them is a resounding 'no'. We are not going to build for linux as we open ourselves to lawsuits that may force us to disclose trade secrets. Classic case of buttcoveritis...

So back to the topic question. Worth it to use linux. ( in electronics design )
For certain kinds of embedded firmware design : yes.
For all the rest : no.