Comments on: Debunking Linux/Unix “Disadvantages” http://pthree.org/2006/07/09/debunking-linuxunix-disadvantages/ Linux. GNU. Freedom. Tue, 02 Dec 2008 14:19:31 +0000 http://wordpress.org/?v=2.7-RC1 hourly 1 By: Cary http://pthree.org/2006/07/09/debunking-linuxunix-disadvantages/#comment-1206 Cary Wed, 26 Jul 2006 17:15:02 +0000 http://www.pthree.org/2006/07/09/debunking-linuxunix-disadvantages/#comment-1206 Ubuntu Linux (dapper drake) is far easier to install than Windows XP, and adding software is easier, and with most hardware you won't have to install drivers like you do with Windows XP. And for free there is so much more software. I do anything I want with Linux, including taking video from my camcorder and making DVDs, scanning photos and doing OCR on documents, watching DVD's, listening to MP3's and CD's, watching videos and TV programs, software development, documents, web browsing, email, EVERYTHING and ANYTHING. And another big advantage is that it uses less resources than Windows. When I have my laptop (which dual boots) running Windows, it usually has to up the processor speed and run the fun, while on Linux it rarely breaks a sweat (compiling, data processing, are the acceptions), and the fan rarely goes on. Give me my Ubuntu ANY DAY over Windoze!!!! Bill and Steve can go pee on each other. Ubuntu Linux (dapper drake) is far easier to install than Windows XP, and adding software is easier, and with most hardware you won’t have to install drivers like you do with Windows XP. And for free there is so much more software. I do anything I want with Linux, including taking video from my camcorder and making DVDs, scanning photos and doing OCR on documents, watching DVD’s, listening to MP3’s and CD’s, watching videos and TV programs, software development, documents, web browsing, email, EVERYTHING and ANYTHING. And another big advantage is that it uses less resources than Windows. When I have my laptop (which dual boots) running Windows, it usually has to up the processor speed and run the fun, while on Linux it rarely breaks a sweat (compiling, data processing, are the acceptions), and the fan rarely goes on.

Give me my Ubuntu ANY DAY over Windoze!!!! Bill and Steve can go pee on each other.

]]> By: Aaron http://pthree.org/2006/07/09/debunking-linuxunix-disadvantages/#comment-994 Aaron Thu, 13 Jul 2006 06:29:39 +0000 http://www.pthree.org/2006/07/09/debunking-linuxunix-disadvantages/#comment-994 Sorry Matt, but you are wrong. Installing software in Linux is soooo much easier than Windows! Only if you are using Slackware or some obscure distro like Jedi Linux is it even half-way difficult. For one, you won't have to reboot just because you installed some app. Second, available apps to install are in a nice GUI. Just click a button, and you're done. I have been using Linux religiously for almost 5 years now, and while it may have been difficult in the past, it certainly isn't that way now. Dependancy-hell is such a thing of the past! True, things can go wrong with apt-get, aptitude, yum, urpmi and any other tool that manages dependancies. But it is the extreme exception and not the rule. Don't forget that Windows has more than it's fair share of installation woes. Lastly, you are right, CompUSA isn't going to carry the software. But that isn't where you should be looking for it. The hundreds of thousands of software packages available for Linux aren't in retail stores. They are online in repositories. Anyone who has run Linux for any decent amount of time can tell you that. Sorry Matt, but you are wrong. Installing software in Linux is soooo much easier than Windows! Only if you are using Slackware or some obscure distro like Jedi Linux is it even half-way difficult. For one, you won’t have to reboot just because you installed some app. Second, available apps to install are in a nice GUI. Just click a button, and you’re done.

I have been using Linux religiously for almost 5 years now, and while it may have been difficult in the past, it certainly isn’t that way now. Dependancy-hell is such a thing of the past! True, things can go wrong with apt-get, aptitude, yum, urpmi and any other tool that manages dependancies. But it is the extreme exception and not the rule. Don’t forget that Windows has more than it’s fair share of installation woes.

Lastly, you are right, CompUSA isn’t going to carry the software. But that isn’t where you should be looking for it. The hundreds of thousands of software packages available for Linux aren’t in retail stores. They are online in repositories. Anyone who has run Linux for any decent amount of time can tell you that.

]]> By: Matthew Kimber http://pthree.org/2006/07/09/debunking-linuxunix-disadvantages/#comment-963 Matthew Kimber Mon, 10 Jul 2006 14:51:00 +0000 http://www.pthree.org/2006/07/09/debunking-linuxunix-disadvantages/#comment-963 I just wanted to say that installing software on a Unix/Linux machine is indeed difficult. Even with apt-get things can go wrong. I have definitely run into that problem when working on a *nix machine. Dependencies aren't packaged with the install (with good reason as they are "separate") and it is hell to find the right packages most of the time. I think his point on that is definitely true. And as for the available software he is right there as well. I don't know of very many places that carry in-stock *nix software (i.e. brick and mortar stores - CompUSA and the likes). I just wanted to say that installing software on a Unix/Linux machine is indeed difficult. Even with apt-get things can go wrong. I have definitely run into that problem when working on a *nix machine. Dependencies aren’t packaged with the install (with good reason as they are “separate”) and it is hell to find the right packages most of the time. I think his point on that is definitely true.

And as for the available software he is right there as well. I don’t know of very many places that carry in-stock *nix software (i.e. brick and mortar stores - CompUSA and the likes).

]]>