What is Digg?80 Comments
- TheZorch, on 10/12/2007, -5/+20@astrosmash
"How does linux win on technical merits?"
Unlike Windows you can do everything short of recompiling the kernel and never need to reboot. In Linux just shutdown a process, update it, and restart it without needing to reboot. You even restart XWindows without a reboot. Windows Vista is the last of its kind. - thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -2/+16@Linkage155
Seriously now, when will people start to realize that it is the game companies, not Linux, to blame for the lack of gaming?
Linux isn't not supporting games, game companies aren't supporting Linux. - Renolc, on 10/12/2007, -2/+12@Linkage155: "make their own directx-like API for games,"
OpenGL?
Seriously though. That's why I have a console. I use my PS2/DS for gaming, and my computer for...well...computing. :) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+11@Linkage155:
If people switched to Linux, developers would make more games for it. - darkzealot89, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9LAMP for one...
Linux is a very powerful server platform. Without servers, the internet as we know it would not exist. Many web developers and Webmasters prefer linux over Windows. Why? For one with the upcoming Vista MySQL server will NOT work on windows. Linux knows that PHP and MySQL are very important to the marketplace. Linux has a bunch of distros to run, and if you cant find what you need, you can always rewrite it to your want. With windows you often have to pay for programs and services. Linux makes it simple to the point any one can run a server. I use windows for my desktop operations, and Linux for my server applications and development environments. - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -1/+7@Technopundit:
I have never seen a Linux forum where somebody said, and seriously meant, "RTFM"
They would most likely get banned if they did so.
Linux users don't do ***** like that. They're helpful.
As for configuring drivers and video settings, have you never been to the Windows Control Panel? Control Panel is a driver configuration space for Windows, with the exception of maybe `Add/Remove Programs' - Roger, on 10/12/2007, -3/+9@LocutusB:
I'm not gonna argue with you about that. If you find it intuitive, then fine. But it isn't for many people.
I'm sure you'll admit its no better than Windows labeling drives A, B, C, etc. - thtroyer, on 10/12/2007, -0/+6@Linkage155
It's obvious that Linux isn't better at _everything_, but that claim has never been made. The article is about which OS itself is built better.
In any case, I too am a PC gamer. I'm willing to dual-boot Linux and Windows, only using Windows for games, and Linux for everything else. Sure, it's a small hassle, but seriously, not that much of one. - redhatcat, on 10/12/2007, -1/+6@astrosmash
GNU/Linux is, and was always, built to be a adaptable, modular, scalable, secure, multiuser, multitasking platform.
Windows was not made to have these qualities originally and Microsoft struggles today to make it's flagship even comparable to Linux, and other Unix-like platforms, in these qualities.
This is basically what the article says also. - xenoNfluX, on 10/12/2007, -2/+7Exactly what I was thinking.
I love and use Linux myself, but this article is filled with too much fluff and not enough real meat. Change the scenario to something a little darker and depressing, add a little black eyeliner and lipstick, and you'd have a fitting livejournal entry... full of drivel that just makes you want to shake your head in shame. - Schpariel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+7Oh really? So you think that Windows' directory structure is better?
It isn't, just look at your /system32 folder, it's just a big pile of unorganized ***** (with useless stuff like edlin).
In Windows, almost every single system file/shared library gets dumped in /system32
In unix, at least you know that /etc is for config files, /usr/lib and /lib are for shared libraries, and /bin is for the program's executables. There is no problem once you "get it" - Roger, on 10/12/2007, -7/+11I smell a zealot.
- xenoNfluX, on 10/12/2007, -0/+4Were you using apt-get? It should grab all dependencies necessary for each package when it is installed.
If you want a pretty GUI, you don't want the server version of Ubuntu. - Roger, on 10/12/2007, -4/+8@dgh1973:
I said I COULD say that, if I was trying to make as asinine an argument as the author is. - Roger, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Renolc:
That was a big problem a couple years ago. Not all applications used the same X clipboard or something so copy-paste didn't work between alot of programs. Its less of a issue now, but I'm sure it still arises from time to time. - dxprog, on 10/12/2007, -4/+7digg = the new slashdot
- Roger, on 10/12/2007, -9/+12No, but comparing recent versions of Windows to DOS does.
I could say Linux will never be a desktop OS because UNIX wasn't designed for the average computer user. Thats the kinda argument the author is making. - Renolc, on 10/12/2007, -0/+3@Roger
Ah. Ok. Now I understand.
Thanks for that little bit of history.
:)
My apologies icoms. - Roger, on 10/12/2007, -5/+8@atdigg:
Yeah, I'm sure you knew from birth which apps belong in /bin, /usr/bin and /opt/bin - Roger, on 10/12/2007, -2/+5@LocutusB:
(Sorry, I meant to say device.)
> "Still that is the beauty of linux you can make it work however you want to."
Yes, I agree with you 100% on that.
> "I am sorry but with windows you are stuck with what they give you."
Unfortunately with a closed source OS you often end up trading flexibility for usability. But that isn't a problem for the average user. - Renolc, on 10/12/2007, -1/+4@Linkage155
Yes I do see your point (and I dugg you up for a point well made).
But as mentioned previously, it is ultimately the game devs who are lacking support and not linux itself. Just like it is not Sony's lack of support when games are made for the Xbox exclusively.
OpenGL is behind DirectX in comparison, but if more devs were behind OpenGL and crossplatform gaming, then OpenGL and Linux would be just as game-able (for lack of a better term) as Windows and DirectX.
:) - inactive, on 10/12/2007, -6/+9This is just one more reason linux will never be taken as seriously as everyone wants. Flame wars bring out the idiots in both communities.
- webmathwiz1, on 10/12/2007, -7/+10Saying that unix is better than dos does not constitute a zealot.
- kd1s, on 10/12/2007, -0/+2The new administration coming into my office is petrified of Linux on our servers. Our new director may be a purely windows guy which frosts me to no end.
Supposedly the new administration asked the current boss how much it would cost to transition to all windows and Microsoft product. $800K was the conservative estimate. My estimate is approximately double that because that money only accounts for new hardware and licenses since we can't shut down services to re-build them on other hardware. So I say $1.6 million.
We'll see how it goes. - littlebit, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3_Somehow_ I can unterstand you. "Linux freaks" love to tell us how good their system is. I believe them. But... Linux is still far away from being a system which is simple enough for the average user. A 08/15 user wants his hardware to work without having to configure. He wants to play his dvds without having to intstall the codecs... He wants to select his primary audio device with only one click. He wants to use his ipod with his OS... He wants to have simple access to his music library. He wants to blablabla... We all know it.
Perhaps life would be easier if Linuxer could copy MS ideas as easy as MSler can copy Linuxer's ideas ;)
I use both OS. But Linux is still not my favorite _Desktop_ OS. Hope it will be soon! :) - Roger, on 10/12/2007, -5/+7@LocutusB:
NTFS allows you to mount a directory anywhere you want, just like UNIX. So Windows is just as flexible in that respect.
> "As from birth knowing what goes where. Nobody does..."
Of course, but the normal UNIX directory layout is far from perfect. Thats why OSX doesn't use it (or at least tries hides it) and thats why distributions like GoboLinux were created.
Just read this:
http://www.gobolinux.org/index.php?page=k5 - schestowitz, on 10/12/2007, -10/+12Linux wins on technical merits. If only Linux enjoyed the marketing budgets of Microsoft (or even Apple), then Gates and the gang (c/f http://badvista.fsf.org/ ) would be crying foul over the monopoly GPL leverages.
- Daniel0, on 10/12/2007, -1/+3I'm not saying which one is better, but how do you know which methods Windows use unless you got the source code...?
- LocutusB, on 10/12/2007, -8/+10@Roger
Whats confusing about it? /var for variables, /etc for all the configuration files /usr for all the user programs /opt for optional programs. It all seems vary logical to me.
Just a second hasn't windows started to mimic that behavior? It has "program files" and "documents and settings". Unfortunately configuration and program files are still spread all over the place like a mad woman's s...t. - Linkage155, on 10/12/2007, -3/+5>>@Linkage155:
>>If people switched to Linux, developers would make more games for it.
If people switched to Linux, developers would make more games for it.
If developers made more games for Linux, people would switch to it.
Return();
See my point, which side will change first? - raptordrew, on 10/12/2007, -4/+6This article is a decroted piece of Linux fanboy crap. If it's always going to be better, explain to me why it isn't being offered standard on manufacturer computers, why it doesn't have even 30% of the market, and why Windows is still continuing to be profitable? I use Linux, but I'm not going to be half-assed in my thinkings and say it's "always going to be better;" Oh, and if we're going to compare current Linux to DOS, how about we make the comparison of Vista to command-line Linux? Vista looks a lot better, doesn't it?
- Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1"I don't think my mom would know what the hell went in /bin. Program Files is a little more descriptive than /bin and Documents and Settings is a little more clear than /home."
Wtf is your mom doing with Program Files? Is there really a need? I don't think I've ever actually gone into /bin... wtf for? When you install a program it is globally accessible from th command line by just typing its name. You never have to go into the directory to remove it since Package Managment Systems are put in place to automate that for you. Of course, in Windows you don't have these things... you have to muck around with the system to get it working like you want it to... it's kind of ironic since that's what people say about Linux.
"If you hide the insides of the OS from the average user, but still let advanced users get inside, it'll work much better."
Yeah, great... so average users don't see the "clutter" and "complexity" of a few folders, which are basically remapped to other folders in the system anyway. But the downside is that the more advanced users get pissed off trying to change one linee configuration file because they can't find /etc. This is one thing I HATE about Mac OSX. - KrashTheMighty, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Look an article bashing Vista how original!
- gharding, on 10/12/2007, -4/+5I don't think my mom would know what the hell went in /bin. Program Files is a little more descriptive than /bin and Documents and Settings is a little more clear than /home.
- icoms, on 10/12/2007, -2/+3You cant compare linux with vista, better ? worst? you cant tell, depends on the point of view, give linux to a standard office/home user and he will be clueless, you cant even copy paste from a browser to another application, you buy a new wireless card, plug it, and there is a great chance it wont work immediatly.
On the other hand, linux is great for server services, if you know how to do it. - dankers, on 10/12/2007, -3/+4I agree these guys have been pushing their pro agenda articles on Linux so much around here.
Ok we get it that Ubuntu is now the desktop that is better than Windows and that you guys are better.
This place used to have some good articles from places like Hackaday.com and other cool stuff that had to do with Technology. Now it is just the nerds pushing their agenda and being the usual nuisance; I am a nerd but sometimes these guys got their heads so far up their asses. - kindkodiak2314, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1Good point
- Roger, on 10/12/2007, -1/+2If only it was that simple.
Application locations even differ between distributions. Even the manufactures can't agree on where everything belongs.
Read that link I posted before from the GoboLinux guys and you'll see what the problem is.
http://www.gobolinux.org/index.php?page=k5 - Xilon, on 10/12/2007, -0/+1About gaming on linux: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_games_using_SDL
Some companies are very Linux (cross-platform) friendly, like id software and Raven.
From what I've heard id software has sworn to always use OpenGL, and I respect them for that.
Once DirectX stops having a monopoly, there will be more games on linux, and when that happens there will be more people switching.
I doubt this will happen any time soon... - kill4killin, on 10/12/2007, -0/+0@thtroyer & Linkage155 about gaming, when thtroyer said:
>"I'm willing to dual-boot Linux and Windows, only using Windows for games, and Linux for everything else."
Technically you don't really even need to do THAT as long as you have the resources or the know how. If you had the resources to do so, IE: 2GB of RAM or more, you could run windows inside of VMware and install and play your game there. If you don't have the resources then you can learn how Wine works and install and play your games using that (though I understand some games are not supported.)
I personally use the first method for my gaming since I do not run very heavy games (usually only HL2 is the hardest game) and it works perfectly fine for me. You won't likely get the super high FPS like you could if you ran it running only windows, but who needs more than 60FPS anyway...I still think it would be nice if windows did not have DirectX proprietary only and that game developers made games for linux, but that day will not come until more people adopt linux. Just like main stream software will not become available for the same reason. - kill4killin, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1"He wants to play his dvds without having to intstall the codecs"
VLC media player needs no codecs to play virtually any movie.
"He wants to use his ipod with his OS"
There are applications for linux to do this, and I think Apple even has iTunes for linux as well now.
"He wants to have simple access to his music library"
You only have to make a /music and put your music there....
"Perhaps life would be easier if Linuxer could copy MS ideas as easy as MSler can copy Linuxer's ideas ;)"
That would be lovely, but the reason Linux can't copy half of MSes Ideas is because most of the stuff MS pumps out is protected under patents and copyrights. MS can copy Linux ideas because Linux developers will not sue MS for taking an idea and re-doing the code in their proprietary language and re-selling it. MS on the other hand took the double click to court... - redhatcat, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Wow! Somehow this article was buried, even though the points were valid.
It's a shame that Digg is infested with paid Microsoft shills these days. - Schpariel, on 10/12/2007, -3/+31) You're in the Linux/Unix section
2) Filter this section out if you don't like it
3) Shut up - LocutusB, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@Roger
Quote "NTFS allows you to mount a directory anywhere you want, just like UNIX.". Do you hear what you just said :)
I do know about Gobolinux. It is a take off from a package management used in the linux from scratch hints. With all of those symlinks you are just adding an extra layer of complexity and just another link that can break in the chain of things. Still that is the beauty of linux you can make it work however you want to. I am sorry but with windows you are stuck with what they give you. - Nmcsween, on 10/12/2007, -3/+3@Roger
Theres nothing wrong with the unix file system hierarchy its just normal users are brain dead. oh and /bin is for binaries that are needed for the root file system which is / and /opt/bin is for programs that install by them selves ( like windows ) and /usr/bin is for everything else. - HonoredMule, on 10/12/2007, -1/+1Vista was made from scratch, but apparently it's still based on a hack-for-an-OS from over 20 years ago...mac OS X has been based on unix and BSD, but that doesnt' count either, apparently.
This is all just mudslinging *****. All modern operating systems are based on modern OS principles. They've all evolved in almost exactly the same direction each (under the hood that is); the minor differences are things such as process scheduling algorithms and various timings. Windows has been lagging behind in some modernizations, by far most notably with the driver model, but Vista brings them up to speed. The only real differences are the API's, system libraries, filesystem layout, and eye candy/interface (the last being by far the least mature across all systems...duh, it's also the newest concept). But even those differences don't stop them all from accomplishing the same capabilities in performance, stability, and (to a lesser extent) features, with the exception of .NET and tailgating clones thereof holding a very bright future in the changing OS landscape. - dgh1973, on 10/12/2007, -8/+8"I could say Linux will never be a desktop OS because UNIX wasn't designed for the average computer user. Thats the kinda argument the author is making."
Tell that one to Apple who uses UNIX as a desktop OS, dummy. - lengau, on 10/12/2007, -2/+2Personally, I like the UNIX-style layout, but I like what Kubuntu (and probably Ubuntu/Xubuntu, too) have done. The layout is still there, it's just (like with OS X) hidden from the user. Average users never want to see the insides of the OS - Windows, UNIX, VMS, whatever.
If you hide the insides of the OS from the average user, but still let advanced users get inside, it'll work much better. -
Show 51 - 80 of 80 discussions
Browsing Digg on your phone just got easier with our enhancements to the 
© Digg Inc. 2009
— Content created and posted by Digg users is