Linux vs. Windows

[TomTab]

A year ago, a friend of mine who is very experienced with PCs both windows and Linux, partitioned my hard disk (C drive) and installed Suse 8.2 (windows XP on another partition). Broadband cable modem was set up using ethernet card and all seemed to work well. I was encouraged to try and work with SuSe 8.2 which seemed fine as a total beginner. I could open my Office XP data files saved on a seperate drive (D drive) from Suse. All seemed working well specially the Internet which seemed faster and safer. Until for some unknown reason to me the Ethernet Internet connection stopped working for both windows XP and Suse.

I managed to re-connect broadband on windows using USB connection but don't have a clue how to sort it out with SuSe. Without broadband connection on SuSe it became somewhat inconvenient to switch between windows and SuSe. I would like VERY much to switch away from windows due to viruses, crashing, etc. Any advice is highly appreciated.

[xequence]

Originally Posted by TomTab

A year ago, a friend of mine who is very experienced with PCs both windows and Linux, partitioned my hard disk (C drive) and installed Suse 8.2 (windows XP on another partition). Broadband cable modem was set up using ethernet card and all seemed to work well. I was encouraged to try and work with SuSe 8.2 which seemed fine as a total beginner. I could open my Office XP data files saved on a seperate drive (D drive) from Suse. All seemed working well specially the Internet which seemed faster and safer. Until for some unknown reason to me the Ethernet Internet connection stopped working for both windows XP and Suse.

I managed to re-connect broadband on windows using USB connection but don't have a clue how to sort it out with SuSe. Without broadband connection on SuSe it became somewhat inconvenient to switch between windows and SuSe. I would like VERY much to switch away from windows due to viruses, crashing, etc. Any advice is highly appreciated.

USB modems arnt the best for any linux distro, though you could try many different ones. Youd be suprised how different they are with hardware detection. I recomend Ubuntu.

[mshah007]

Currently looking at SUSE running VMware player (freeware) and using a pre-built virtual machine.

Everthing seems to run ok and the apps are pretty good. But installing new application I find is a pain, I just see to be installing RPMs left right and center. The dependancy issues really wind me up.

[s7p9a2m4]

That is the problem with the big boys like Suse, Mandrake, Ubuntu, and Red Hat/Fedora. They will not offer any media support in their free versions. So, without proper packaging installing apps you need can be a nightmare.
That is why I stay with the little guys who give me most everything I need on one cd including multimedia support.
PCLinuxOS is tops right now. Built on Mandrake but enhanced and improved.

[mshah007]

Well I've just download a trial version of vmware workstation so I'll give PCLinuxOS a try. From the website it does look appealing.

Does anybody know if there is an free alternative to vmware?

[s7p9a2m4]

There are a few but I'm not familiar with them. Xen is one of them designed to run on linux or bsd systems. There are some more for windows too being developed by open source.

[xequence]

Originally Posted by mshah007

Well I've just download a trial version of vmware workstation so I'll give PCLinuxOS a try. From the website it does look appealing.

Does anybody know if there is an free alternative to vmware?

Qemu is a free one.

[rock4p]

I use both Windows and Linux.

I run Windows XP on a computer with a 1.8GHz processor, and Linux on a computer with a measly 800MHz processor. I find that Linux runs quicker than Windows.

Although I prefer the programs that you get on Windows, I still have alternatives on Linux, which work almost as well.

Linux can literally run for hours without even a sign of slowing down, yet Windows slows down noticeably after just half and hour.

Ark Linux, which is what I use, is set out well, provided me with loads of programs pre-installed, and is highly customisable.

I still use Windows for some tasks, but a lot is easily accomplishable on Linux, and Linux is free, Windows isn't. Plus, Linux doesn't give you crappy warnings all of the time.

[Mabonyo67]

Hi,

I agree that Linux is secure and stable than Windows. Anyway, I’ve Master Microsoft products & now in the process in Mastering Linux (Fedora 6) . I've installed Windows XP Pro (SP2), Vista & Linux (Fedora 6) on my machine.

Compaq EvoD310
1.70GHz
1016MB RAM
HDD1 80GB (XP & Vista) & HDD2 40GB (Linux).

Eric Mbela
Nairobi, Kenya

[harry12]

Hi guys - as a failed Ubuntu user I hang my head in shame.....went back to WIn98SE - that's committment!

Still with the delays in VISTA the Linux fraternity had a golden opportunity to start folk on Linux - but by arguing amongst themselves progress in very slow.
I know nowt about PCs other than a few tricks (and looking/asking here!)...and I settled on Ubuntu because it appeared to be a sensible collection of the necessary programs needed to run an average PC. Unfortunately they chose some difficult programs and no-one spotted the error.
It seems to me the test should be this:
With a blank HDD - and a working motherboard etc. . . . how quickly can you get the PC up and running?
A test of this might be to take a still photo of something and change the brightness/colours/focus before sending it to a friend over the internet...they reply by email telling you what the picture is.
Now how long should an OS take to install?
Could I suggest 1 hour max?
The first hurdle where Ubuntu falls is the HDD partitioning - I ended up with a right mess as I wanted to split the disc so I could store music files (and separately) jpeg pics...so these could be used by Windows - that is I didn't want "my files" saved on the same partition as the Linux system....I might be wong, but that's what I wanted.... Curiously Linux needs a small partition for swaps and a GiG or so for the becomming bloated software -plus some spare for extras - so maybe 10G
Partitioning was a nightmare - indeed I ended up with one partition that was completely unreadable - just junk! What sort of program will make a HDD unusable?
(er, without telling you so...but why)
The connection to the internet was easy enough, giving my ISP details I think and things like thecable-modem were dealt with. The USB worked and briefly the printer post LPT1 - but there is an issue with printer Drivers - If you have HP/Cannon/Epson then you are OK as these companies supply drivers or have enough following for drivers to be available....but my Lexmark effectivly killed any notion of colour printing - indeed I had to use the Win98SE program to print my Linux-saved pictures - it was a nightmare - the free OpenOffice was a fine program, until you want to print it...but again I could transfer files...but who would want to?

The future?
I read that Google (?) was about to introduce software as a terminal - you log-in, use the software, save to your HDD and exit. Your file contains the updated (eg photo) and you can print it at home, or on-line. The advantage being that if you want a fantastic feature - instead of paying a commercial price for the software you can use it practically for free! I guess the only downside is the ads and they probably want you to use their photo-express printer.
For may speciality programmes - like arcitectural previews, or weired maths functions . . . what a great idea!
Now this begs the question:- do you need an OS?
Let's put to one side that the PC contains some DOS housekeeping routines - either in Unix/Liinux?or Win - it shou;ldn't matter - it would be a standard that all hardware would meet so it can be put into use.....then you use the internet and process your pics on-line...write your memoirs....design a building....do research, or listen to music/video. The notion that we each need to own a special program is Old-Hat - Google can bring us V1 and we pay extra for V2 - when V3 arrives the thing shifts up and yu get the improvements for that subscription.....
That's the future - or am I dreaming...too soon?

[thenewguy]

hi guys,

well atleast there are a few ppl who dont think that win are pure evil.

i think trying to decide which is better is difficult coz different users have different needs. i have worked with both linux and win is large and small environments.

for example, sound engineers, video & photo editors will prefer the power of the Mac.

if u have worked in an environment of 100+ desktops and laptops, then WinSever 03 and xp for the clients, s my first choice. i just love the control i have over the domain.

[harry12]

LINUX - Windows - the view from UK -

Here we pay nearly dopuble the US-price for MS and Windows software - so Linux makes a lot of sense!
However, even in 2007 it is almost impossible to buy a Linux-PC, indeed the chattering-classes don't know of anything other than windows and associate that desktop as being "A Computer"
Microsoft supplies OS and software to Schools so children are hooked on do things that way - and who can blame them?
However, I have tried Linux with only a small success - this communication is via Win98SE although I have a working PC with Ubuntu606 (the long-term support version) - this software is really good and has managed to sort out the hardware I've thrown at it. That is except the printer - a simple Lexmark which my local Store stocks ink-cartridges, ( along with Canon, HP and Epson). The printer probl;em is best sumarised as this - buy HP, failing that Cannon and failing that Epson - Lexmark is almost entirely dependant upon Windows drivers, even though there is some HP-compatability claim in the Manual, it doesn't appear to work even under windows.

Reactos - a name that may come to replace Windows - I doubt it, it is an alternative but somehow appears to lack a good name and clear purpose/strategy. (please DYOR_) it seems they are rewriting the OS, making it similar-looking so users will feel "comfortable" and which will take the supplied Windows drivers - this of course makes it streets ahead of Linux IMHO.
But I'm not convinced - try their website - (Google Reactos) and see what you think.

Some sweeping claims are made for Linux like its stability and virus-proof ( well it did have a major flaw with some Java-issues...) - and the fact is that Windows accounts for 95% of all virus software and hacking...and Linux represents only about 1% of the whole...so even if they were equal Linux might appear to be very much better. I suspect Linux has some strength in insisting upon Passwords to operate the "core"....but this is set to be copied in the next Windows - ie after Vista, probably before 2012. So far Linux hasn't really caught on because there are so many different people shouting "Try this Distro" ...this is a waste of effort and should have been sorted out years ago.
My preference is Ubuntu - not because of any technical edge (and frankly I don't understand the subtle differences between the various Linux camps)...but Ubuntu has a clear mission and a reasonable structure...you can get a Live-CD to run on your PC without altering the HDD - it will connect to the internet and you can check out some of the programs, although it's not spectacularly fast, being limited by the CDROM-drive. But heck...it's good to play with.
Then, if you like install Ubuntu from the other disc and use it for real.
My only concern is the partitioning tool and for this reason (as well as fear), I prefer to install a ne OS on a clean HDD....they are cheap enough and with care you can share files, such as pictures, memos and such.
Also I had past-issues with reading .PDF files - but this is resolved and they read just fine with the supplied viewer. The remaining issue is JAva - which I've never installed - and I have tried almost every which way....it has me beat and I need it for my day-job so for the moment my Win98SE PC has an edge!
Oh and it boots quicker. Still the Ubuntu package includes a reasonably competant photo-editor and many games (which I don't want) as well as Firefox which is claimed is better at rendering compared with IE...but I'm no expert...You will have to try it.
When you log-in it offers Updates and will clean up your instalation - one bonus is that Linux-HDD don't need defraging - ah that's better!
With some limitations....it isan OS that anyone with reasonable PC skills should try....you can always wipe the HDD, which neesds to be about 20G as a basic minimum...memory of 256k is good enough and almost any processorwill do. - all IMHO...but as a free OS it's worth a try... fiddle for a week, say.....but it should be working within a couple of hours using the Ubuntu Install CD. If you get it from a Magazine-cover then you need to create a CD from the ISO and frankly - that's something I've never done...it hurts my head, but you can get genuine Ubuntu CD's for free...order from their website I think.

[Raikko]

Hello everyone I am new here..

I definitely agree to most of you. Linux is far better than Windows. One thing I love most about it is that we do not need to deal with anti-piracy schemes and those additional 'hoop jumping'.

[apocalyptic]

Well. I love Linux.

[Disk_Contented]

Windows is for the average Joe and games, where linux falls flat.
Linux is for more knowledgeable folk, though even the normal user versions are now user friendly. Though too much command line. Why don't all remote administered linux installations come with a built in web interface?
Ubuntu without the interface? sigh?

The firewalls have one, so why have to resort to an add-on web interface for others. Command line is a stumbling block to new users, including myself, who find it a nuisance in a secure setting.

Windows V Linux as a secure OS isn't clearly defined anymore. Linux is open to exploits, just as is windows. Ubuntu servers were taken down not to long ago, I believe.

Linux is a free OS, but proper support isn't. If you use it in a business environment and want real support, then you pay, just like windows users.

I use "Clarkconnect". A rather nice home server solution, It's free as a community product. Support costs money.