digg

Who says I don't use Linux? Did you read the article? I've had SimplyMepis on my laptop for several months, have dragged all my files across from the Windows partition, I'm learning to use OpenOffice and Scribus ... what else do I need to do to walk the walk?
Kim

1. Cost - I've already paid for Windws. What do i save now? It's like buying a car and getting the bus.
2. Resources - I've already built myself a nice spec pc.
3. Performance - Runs fine to me.
4. No bloatware - I'm not stupid to install that "free" app and infest my pc with spyware. Firefox helps in this respect too.
5. Security - Comon sense + AV helps keep my pc clean. I don't really want to open XXXSCREENSAVER.scr.exe do i?
6. Dual Booting - Why do i want to dual boot? My Windows install does the same as a linux distro, plus all my games work. Why waste the hard drive space?
7. Installation - Installing an OS is a pleasure now eh? No thanks.
8. Reinstalling the OS - So i have to run windows update eh? Is that really such a pain?
9. Keeping track of software - I manage to install all my apps. Typing in the odd cd key isn't too hard now is it?
10.Updating software - Firefox updates itself, Office 2003 updates itself (With MS Update), Photoshop updates itself.... What is wrong with that?
11. More security - I don't get this one. What does "Hard manual labour" mean? Insatall OS, Install AV make sure router firewall is on and don't b a fool with emaill attachments or warez.
12. No need to defrag disks - Yes, somethign that i run whilst I'm in bed is such a drain... The HDD's keep me awake....
13. A wealth of built-in utilities - Now here's a thought. If Microsoft decided to include a ***** of applications that could compete with the other progrmas out there would they get away with it? ***** no. Look at the trouble MS got in with including Media Player and IE with the OS. There's be antitrust calims and software companies would be sueing MS left right and centre.....
Why did I reply with this? Because I'm constantly being told how good linux is and the time i've played with it has been fine, but why should I change somthing that works for me? Would Linux let me use my XBOX360 as a media center extender? Would it allow me to paly all the games I've paid for on my pc? What about all the software I've already bought?

To be honest there is one thing that keeps me from getting and using linux, and that's the inability to easily play many computer games on it. That looks to be changing as time goes on, but currently it's not exactly an easy fix. I can download wine or another program that will help me but they're aren't 100%.

http://digg.com/linux_unix/25_Reasons_to_Convert_t ...
check tis out to find more reasons

writer obviously is a linux fanboy, even i as a mac user disagree with some of the points made up, like all da gibberish about taking days to install windows. bullcrap.

It already is.

What's with all the clueless Microsoft fanboys trolling the Linux section all of a sudden?

When Dell invited comments/suggestions to their Idea Storm I voted for having systems with Linux to give people more choice.
I had the choice between getting relatively low maintenance low cost system that does a lot bundled with many apps (LINUX under any distro) and a much higher cost system able to play the latest games and initially a few hurdles to deal with because things were just getting started (VISTA and its drivers).

In the end I choose Vista because I wanted to game and I didn't want a stagnant console. But up until that point I had a low cost pc with Ubuntu.

I am curious about Linux but ill only get it when I get around to buying a new PC. No point bining an OS I've already paid for. As chazuk said, it's like buying a car and taking the bus.

Linux as a whole still isn't there yet IMHO. I have seen so many problems with it still, and usability-wise it's still frankly retarded.
Don't believe me? Sit down a relative that's only used Windows in front of OS X, and then down in front of KDE/Gnome... ask them to do some basic tasks (install software, add a new piece of hardware like a webcam). See which one comes out on top for 'working every time' and speed. I'd like to see your mother try to set up something akin to Time Machine (Leopard auto versioning/backup feature) in Linux.
Linux is the best thing I can imagine for most servers, for desktops... the cost isn't an issue for me. Getting work done is. Give me OS X anyday.

I couldn't agree more with the installation step. When I used Gentoo and wanted to reinstall, I just backed up my world file (a record of every application installed), fed it into the package manager of the new install, waited a very long while (Gentoo is source-based, so stuff has to be compiled unlike other distros), and done.

I'm all for linux, solaris, windows, whatever you want to run, but God almight can we stop with the evangelical approach to desktop OS's?

Nice, this week I switched to Suse 10.3. I've always hated linux, there has been some growing pains over the past week, but fortunately I stuck it out and must say as of tonight I am loving linux.

Now just awaiting Epics UT3 beta to hit linux.

"You can't just download an updated version of Windows. You have to use the CD that came with your PC and download all the patches Microsoft has issued since the CD was made."

Windows Update?

"Vista is greedy: a single-user PC operating system that needs 2GB of RAM to run at acceptable speed"

How am I running it perfectly fine on my system that has 1GB of RAM then?

Linux advocates: people like the author of this article are one of the main reasons people are put off of Linux. They're not helping your cause at all.

The things about antivirus are confusing... Fact is antivirus is sign that your OS and apps are broken!
Antivirus is ONLY needed on linux if you run a server and want to scan the information you pass on to others... Not needed on desktop computers, just keep your desktop fairly updated and well configured... Perhaps a firewall...

The only reason antivirus software is needed on windows is because OS vendor (Microsoft) and Third party applications vendors doesn't patch their security flaws... And mostly because there's not package managment tool to make sure all the users applications are kept up-to-date!

7. Installation -- Anyone who's done it once knows that installing Windows from scratch takes hours or even days by the time you get all your apps up and running. With Linux, it can take as little as half an hour to install the operating system, utilities, and a full set of applications. No registration or activation is required, no paperwork, and no excruciating pack drill.

You got to be kidding on this one. I installed a dozen of Linux distros I never got my laptop 100 working like I do on XP even after some weeks searching the Internet. In many distros for example in the installation process I get a blank screen. I need to edit my xorg file to get X working. It’s pretty annoying. Not every person can do that...

There is no real reason for corporate desktops not to use a GNU/Linux distro. The total cost of ownership is lower and the performance on non-current hardware can't be beat.

zzZzZzZzz. Again a "x reasons" list. I want news!

I agree with a lot of you. If I could just play all my games on Linux I'd install Ubuntu in a second. Until then I guess I'll just "suffer" with Windows.

Which brings me to another point, why do most Linux-switch arguments think we're stupid? If we are savvy enough to install Linux don't you think we are smart enough to configure our Windows boxes to run lean and efficient? Most of these articles think our Windows boxes are bloated, virus-laden machines. My winxp laptop is very fast and can do everything I want it to do. The only reason I'd switch to Linux is that it's free and my own curiosity.

i've got one - so that no-life h4xx0r wannabe's can laugh at you because you don't know which site you have to go to to download jpegview.app

Nice to see the Linux reaffirmation society are still in work.
Hearing other people say it - a substitute for just knowing your OS is decent.

Microsoft may have a lot of problems, but at least normal people can use it without having to "recompile the kernal" or "mount the f*ing floppy". I've never seen any version of Linux that was even close to as easy to use as Windows XP.

Personally I couldn't give a toss what other people are using; so long as if they want to send me things they send them in a format I can view, and manipulate if needs be, I'm happy.

So if you can't figure out linux, get a cheap (read about 100USD) old laptop and put linux on it and leave windows to eat resources on your monster home gaming desktop. Less work than dual boot and gives you the ability to say "i know linux, 1 r 3l337 h4>< du3d!!"

I think that this article sounded something along the lines of a cold war propaganda ad. All the walls that make Microsoft are starting to fall and the like.

On another note, I do think I should give Linux another try. I used it years ago in college and when I started working for a big corporation I really didn’t need to worry about using Linux all that much. I will give it a try again and see how things have changed. I will not however, let an article lead me believe something is getting so close to destroying one of the biggest companies in the world, until I have tested it for myself.

1 reason you shouldn't read this article: 1) No one cares.

14. All 13 points are meaningless because linux doesn't run the apps I want.

"13 reasons why Digg promotes 'xx Reasons to use Linux' stories to the front page"

I would digg that story.

I can think of 1,000s of lines of code and imcompatibility reasons why it shouldn't.

Take this how you want but at most it takes me 1 1/2 hours to set up Windows XP, firewall, AV, drivers and everything. I don't have to compile anything and the applications work from one system to another without having to bother with dependencies. If that has changed, forgive me.

EULAs. I don't play games so the biggest issue with Linux doesn't matter to me. I program, use graphics software (GIMP & Inkscape are enough for my creativity), browse the web and play music. For a visiting cousin I installed Quake 3 and was presented with a EULA, the first since I moved to Linux (not counting the legal notices when installing a distro). Life is better without EULAs.

OK put every argument to rest the article is biased anyway it would mean more from an unbiased source

I use Linux exclusively for many years and it is not because of ANY of the points listed in the article. The most of those points are simply not true or are not relevant at all.

1. Cost => I paid for Windows copy for each of my dells running Linux
2,3,4 Resources,Performance,No bloatware => You need 1GB or RAM to run cool Linux desktop with some nifty superkaramba widgets, beryl and what not. There is nothing preventing people from wasting resources.
5. Security => People who get viruses in windows are the same people who will use "password" as the root password in Linux and use it for day to day computing with root account.
6.Dual booting => Well that must be fun. Shell we go out tonight or grab popcorn and beer and dual boot for a while
7. Installation => Yup, as soon as average Joe figures out what language is "Kernel panic, no root found" written in, he can pick up phone and call people that sold him computer to help him out.
8. Reinstalling the OS => Sure, with Linux it all just happens on it's own. All obscure hacks and configuration changes you did over the years, just magically survive updates.
9. Keeping track of software => There is free and non-free software for Linux and for windows, If you use non-free software in Linux (and I do) you need to keep your licenses and serials.
10. Updating software => it is all good until you run into some circular dependency or you install something outside your package manager.
11. More security => and way more ways to screw it up.
12. No need to defrag disks =>I just love watching defraging process on my wife's windows computer. That might be one single thing i miss in Linux.
13. A wealth of built-in utilities => wealth of small tools that you do not know exist vs. a wealth of tested and popular and well supported applications, hmm.

I hate articles like this. Linux in not for everyone. Using Linux is an option, but it is not something someone SHOULD do.

Here are one good reasons to use Linux:
When in Quanta I save php file in base_local folder of some project, file is tested for syntax errors that are shown to me as clickable links pointing to the problematic line in the file and if there are no errors, ioncube encoded copy of the file is automatically created in the base folder of the project. There is simple way for me to change any settings related to this process or use different types of encoding for different projects.

Is there a day on digg without a "Linux & Desktop" post? It is borderline propaganda. I'm all for Linux. And for Linux on Desktop machine stoo. But this fanboy-ism gets on my nerves.

I've tribooted all three wanker debated OS's in Grub on an 800 dollar Toshiba

This debate = Yawn

There are only 3 reasons why I don't use Linux.
1. I don't have enough disk space to do a partion and install and I've had bad experiences with partitioning using Linux.
2. I don't have any SATA hard drives except for my main drive.
3. My GeForce 8600GTS takes up too many molex connectors therefore I don't have enough power to use my IDE drives.

Also tried Wubi but its really weird and the hardware support is messed up. i.e. I can install my video and sound drivers just fine in Ubuntu but in Wubi I install them and nothing changes.

Great article. I liked the 13 reasons why not as well. I can definitely identify with number 6: "On closer inspection, you find that there are 500 versions of the product. When you try to understand the subtle differences between them, you become confused. Your enthusiasm starts to flag. "