Why Linux is the best - Help me write my article for college!

[DS McGuire]

Okay, I have to write an essay for college about different Operating systems and their functions and I was wondering if you guys woulds like to chip in on some facts about Linux and why you think it's much better than Windows 7 and Mac.

The reason I want this forum to help out is I want to explain to my tutor and the rest of my I.C.T class [who by the way ALL run windows 7] why Linux is far superior to the other Operating Systems and I don't want to miss ANYTHING out.

If this kicks off then I'll upload my paper when done too you guys for your reading pleasure :D

Have fun!

[Buntumatic]

There are many reasons, but just one will suffice.

SECURITY. Windows platform cannot be secured, anti-virus is working based on blacklisting and that approach is flawed of course because everything unknown slips thru, heuristics based scan is estimated to catch 65% of threats, doesn't that say enough?
As a result Windows is wonderful base for all kind of cybercrime.

Windows computers should not be allowed online as unlicensed drivers are not allowed to public highways. Because they pose danger.

Above I said Windows computers cannot be secured, that's because Windows has countless vulnerabilities and MS is not keen fixing them. Some time ago MS patched a flaw that existed for 19 years, starting with DOS.

Linux can be secured, as can other POSIX compliant operating systems.

[3Miro]

You can pick either the Freedom aspect (Google "Free as in Freedom" and "GNU Project"). Or technology aspect like the general Unix architecture and that Linux runs on 457 of the top 500 largest Supercomputers in the world (top500.org) also the gigantic servers of Google, Amazon, eBay as well as the Hollywood studios (i.e. Avatar was made on Linux).

[DS McGuire]

There are many reasons, but just one will suffice.

SECURITY. Windows platform cannot be secured, anti-virus is working based on blacklisting and that approach is flawed of course because everything unknown slips thru, heuristics based scan is estimated to catch 65% of threats, doesn't that say enough?
As a result Windows is wonderful base for all kind of cybercrime.

Windows computers should not be allowed online as unlicensed drivers are not allowed to public highways. Because they pose danger.

Above I said Windows computers cannot be secured, that's because Windows has countless vulnerabilities and MS is not keen fixing them. Some time ago MS patched a flaw that existed for 19 years, starting with DOS.

Linux can be secured, as can other POSIX compliant operating systems.

Ah, I'm glad you brought security aspect into this because that's one of the main topics I have to compare them on so thank you! But as a follow up question we know that Linux is a lot more secure than Windows but what about Macs? I was thinking that because all the eyes on are the code here on Linux it would be harder for anything nasty to slip through, would that be the case?




You can pick either the Freedom aspect (Google "Free as in Freedom" and "GNU Project"). Or technology aspect like the general Unix architecture and that Linux runs on 457 of the top 500 largest Supercomputers in the world (top500.org) also the gigantic servers of Google, Amazon, eBay as well as the Hollywood studios (i.e. Avatar was made on Linux).

I didn't know almost any of that and I think the Avatar part will really pack some punch into my paper, thanks!

[F.G.]

You can pick either the Freedom aspect (Google "Free as in Freedom" and "GNU Project"). Or technology aspect like the general Unix architecture and that Linux runs on 457 of the top 500 largest Supercomputers in the world (top500.org) also the gigantic servers of Google, Amazon, eBay as well as the Hollywood studios (i.e. Avatar was made on Linux).

indeed.

also, i guess it's written by a really large number of developers, they are self motivated and care about the code and what they contribute, also it's shallowly tested by a really large number of people. altogether that seems work really well.

being open source it's entirely editable and customizable, so you get loads of variations developing. i guess it's pretty similar to the evolutionary benefit you get from sexual rather than asexual reproduction, open source stuff can 'cross pollinate'. So you get a myriad of linuxes, from 'damnsmalllinux' and 'tinos' to 'Ubuntu Ultimate', and it's uses range from microcontrollers in embedded systems to super-computers.

oh yes, and it's free.

[3Miro]

I didn't know almost any of that and I think the Avatar part will really pack some punch into my paper, thanks!

If you are talking to non-Tech people, then you should concentrate on the Freedom aspect. I think this would be more appealing. You can just mention the supercomputers and servers as proof that the Freedom philosophy can and does produce top quality software.

Other examples of Freedom software are Firefox and VLC media player.

[DS McGuire]

You can pick either the Freedom aspect (Google "Free as in Freedom" and "GNU Project"). Or technology aspect like the general Unix architecture and that Linux runs on 457 of the top 500 largest Supercomputers in the world (top500.org) also the gigantic servers of Google, Amazon, eBay as well as the Hollywood studios (i.e. Avatar was made on Linux).


If you are talking to non-Tech people, then you should concentrate on the Freedom aspect. I think this would be more appealing. You can just mention the supercomputers and servers as proof that the Freedom philosophy can and does produce top quality software.

Other examples of Freedom software are Firefox and VLC media player.

Considering I am one from top of the class and I am EXTREMELY techie they are surprisingly very non-tech people. For example; I was asked today "if Linux is so good and it's free why is it not the industry standard? And why is Windows all anybody wants?" I was left so flabbergasted by the question I laughed and walked away. So I will concentrate on the 'Free' aspect of Linux more than it's shear awsomeness! HAHA.
Thank you :)

[jjex22]

If I'm completely honest I don't think its far superior - I still love OSX, and I can't say I have any issues with Windows 7... I don't use it really - now we don't have it at my current work, and I only have it on one machine it's sort of slippped by the wayside on my machine, but in all honesty this is just my personal preference - I've not really had any major issues with windows since the 90's, when windows 98 caused us to switch to Mac os8 and I think we all felt a little like that back then - at school I had NT, at home I was still using a DOS GUI. I suppose I never had Vista, and I didn't use XP until we got bootcamp and intel processors, but win 95 and 98 used to drive me up the wall with software I bought causing conflicts, changing things and then breaking things when they were uninstalled - or just crashing; I think they've all got better... I can't remember the last time I had a pc crash like they used to - just freeze and do nothing for ever until you took the plug out, then get told you didn't turn it off properly!

As for your essay, I'd advise caution - a collage essay should be critical - in order to win your argument you must list the flaws of Linux also - hardware support for example. You also need to be careful you're being honest - in an unbiased critic windows and OSX inparticular are going to hold the picture cards - avoid general topics such as security, these are esily beaten down, the ace that GNU/Linux / BSD hold is user configurability - it's the only one to go for, almost any Unix over NT argument will find OSX or Solaris trumping Linux, and Windows isn't weak by any chalke

You have to think in terms os what we "put up with" that you wouldn't if you'd payed $200 for your OS? What we do have is power - we can change almost anything - the desktop environment, heck even the kernel itself - and you can even customise this by compiling your own kernel with things you don't want disabled and things you do want enabled. Draw attension to the GPL and the open source philosophy, and don't forget that Linux isn't quite finished yet.

I love linux and It's my primary OS by far - apt or rpm based distros, arch and gentoo, but I'm far from saying it is without falt, and I find the journey and the speed of development one of the key things that keeps it exciting.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

You were asked to write about "different Operating systems and their functions". You what to turn that into "Why Linux is the best" or "Linux and why you think it's much better than Windows 7 and Mac". Stick to the subject of what you were asked for if you what a good grade!

Edit: a short version of what jjex22 wrote above.

[DS McGuire]

If I'm completely honest I don't think its far superior - I still love OSX, and I can't say I have any issues with Windows 7... I don't use it really - now we don't have it at my current work, and I only have it on one machine it's sort of slippped by the wayside on my machine, but in all honesty this is just my personal preference - I've not really had any major issues with windows since the 90's, when windows 98 caused us to switch to Mac os8 and I think we all felt a little like that back then - at school I had NT, at home I was still using a DOS GUI. I suppose I never had Vista, and I didn't use XP until we got bootcamp and intel processors, but win 95 and 98 used to drive me up the wall with software I bought causing conflicts, changing things and then breaking things when they were uninstalled - or just crashing; I think they've all got better... I can't remember the last time I had a pc crash like they used to - just freeze and do nothing for ever until you took the plug out, then get told you didn't turn it off properly!

As for your essay, I'd advise caution - a collage essay should be critical - in order to win your argument you must list the flaws of Linux also - hardware support for example. You also need to be careful you're being honest - in an unbiased critic windows and OSX inparticular are going to hold the picture cards - avoid general topics such as security, these are esily beaten down, the ace that GNU/Linux / BSD hold is user configurability - it's the only one to go for, almost any Unix over NT argument will find OSX or Solaris trumping Linux, and Windows isn't weak by any chalke

You have to think in terms os what we "put up with" that you wouldn't if you'd payed $200 for your OS? What we do have is power - we can change almost anything - the desktop environment, heck even the kernel itself - and you can even customise this by compiling your own kernel with things you don't want disabled and things you do want enabled. Draw attension to the GPL and the open source philosophy, and don't forget that Linux isn't quite finished yet.

I love linux and It's my primary OS by far - apt or rpm based distros, arch and gentoo, but I'm far from saying it is without falt, and I find the journey and the speed of development one of the key things that keeps it exciting.

That was a great read! And yes I am going to keep this as unbiased as possible and Linux does have it's faults because nothing is ever perfect. I never had Windows Vista but I have had 7-XP and 98 [I'm only 17 :L] And I personally never had a problems with any of them but I know because I was often called to fix them Windows PC fail if the suer doesn't know what they are doing. With XP the amount of calls I got from my family to come and fix their blue screen was appalling. I did have 7 a few months ago but because I built a new PC I didn't have a Operating system but I found a old Lubuntu disk under my bed and because I never really needed it I never used it but I put it in and used Lubuntu for a few days, then I got the PPA for Ubuntu 11.10 OO and the rest is history. Apart from Microsoft office which I only installed last week using Wine I do not miss Windows at all and like you said the rate of development is always exciting XD.

I haven't really 'experimented much' I haven't even tried another distro yet but I feel like if I let go of Linux now I will miss out on all this and I really want to use Linux forever :)

The normally, average user will always stay with Windows because that's what they are used too, they wouldn't be able to adapt to something so new, so fresh and so breakable (:L).

[DS McGuire]

That was a great read! And yes I am going to keep this as unbiased as possible and Linux does have it's faults because nothing is ever perfect. I never had Windows Vista but I have had 7-XP and 98 [I'm only 17 :L] And I personally never had a problems with any of them but I know because I was often called to fix them Windows PC fail if the suer doesn't know what they are doing. With XP the amount of calls I got from my family to come and fix their blue screen was appalling. I did have 7 a few months ago but because I built a new PC I didn't have a Operating system but I found a old Lubuntu disk under my bed and because I never really needed it I never used it but I put it in and used Lubuntu for a few days, then I got the PPA for Ubuntu 11.10 OO and the rest is history. Apart from Microsoft office which I only installed last week using Wine I do not miss Windows at all and like you said the rate of development is always exciting XD.

I haven't really 'experimented much' I haven't even tried another distro yet but I feel like if I let go of Linux now I will miss out on all this and I really want to use Linux forever :)

The normally, average user will always stay with Windows because that's what they are used too, they wouldn't be able to adapt to something so new, so fresh and so breakable (:L).




You were asked to write about "different Operating systems and their functions". You what to turn that into "Why Linux is the best" or "Linux and why you think it's much better than Windows 7 and Mac". Stick to the subject of what you were asked for if you what a good grade!


It wasn't as if I titled it that or anything... -_-
No, but I am going to do this as fair as possible but I know that Linux will come out on top I just want to make sure I get all its best features so I don't miss anything tasty :grin:

[oldos2er]

Considering I am one from top of the class and I am EXTREMELY techie they are surprisingly very non-tech people. For example; I was asked today "if Linux is so good and it's free why is it not the industry standard? And why is Windows all anybody wants?" I was left so flabbergasted by the question I laughed and walked away.

Seems like a perfectly valid question to me (yes, it's "non-techie", but then so are most people). I think I would've answered something like "Linux is the standard among server software..." and take it from there.

You might want to read the Security sticky too: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=510812

[Ctrl-Alt-F1]

Seems like a perfectly valid question to me (yes, it's "non-techie", but then so are most people). I think I would've answered something like "Linux is the standard among server software..." and take it from there.
http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=510812
And embedded devices. And Android.

[ElanCompaq]

Its free! ( Or atleast alot of it! ) And there all kinds of apps to use and try. And there are great forums like this one for linux! It is also different from the other os'

[Torchwood5]

Honestly I have basically read a lot of crap in this post.
Windows 7 has really cleaned up their act and with Security Essentials they have made it worth while.
Linux/Ubuntu are basically to complicated for your standard or business user. I use all OS's because my job requires it and I run W7 and different flavors of linux on my machines.As far as security goes lets not be to uppity, OSX was and now the list of hacks and virus's is growing daily. Unless you are a "Fanboi" all OS's have their ups and downs and depending on your use and knowledge it is very difficult to really say "This is best" I have installed Ubuntu on many machines for friends and customers and I can safely say that only 10% of them stay with it. Not everyone is comfortable with using command line and many just want to download and install and poof it works. Yes I love that its free and yes I can run command line but honestly if every one could I would be out of a job.

[Copper Bezel]

You were asked to write about "different Operating systems and their functions". You what to turn that into "Why Linux is the best". Stick to the subject of what you were asked for if you what a good grade!

Indeed. I think the motivation for trying to stick it to your Windows-using compatriots is wrong. One of the key disadvantages in using Linux as an operating system is a tendency to produce an intolerable superiority complex and tendency to talk about using Linux as an operating system.

Recognize that there are advantages to other operating systems, and you're far more likely to convince others that yours is an operating system, rather than a pet advocacy project.


If you are talking to non-Tech people, then you should concentrate on the Freedom aspect. I think this would be more appealing. You can just mention the supercomputers and servers as proof that the Freedom philosophy can and does produce top quality software.

Other examples of Freedom software are Firefox and VLC media player.
The Mozilla project is the textbook example. There are plenty of precedents to point to in academics outside of, and prior to, computer science (that instruments are developed to be published, rather than to be patented.) And to me, the shining star of open-source thinking is not Linux or Mozilla, but Wikipedia.

Edit:


And embedded devices. And Android.
That's the Linux kernel, but Linux as a desktop OS is (with notable exceptions) GNU, with the Linux kernel. I mean, OSX and Ubuntu have more components in common with each other than Ubuntu has with Android - like X11 and GTK+, even if OSX doesn't make much use of them, and most of the bash toolkit (which can be installed on Android but isn't the same thing.) It's best not to treat these as having identity with one another in that sense.

That is, you're reinforcing the idea that Linux is an operating system along with OSX or Windows, which isn't the case.

[Torchwood5]

Well said and I agree with Grey Wolf.

[DS McGuire]

Seems like a perfectly valid question to me (yes, it's "non-techie", but then so are most people). I think I would've answered something like "Linux is the standard among server software..." and take it from there.

You might want to read the Security sticky too: http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.php?t=510812

It was a valid question yes, but after a few hours of 'debate' I had to walk away. I did mention that their Android phone ran on a very old Linux kernel but they sort of ignored that because they think Android is great.

To everybody else thinking I'm going to be really biased I'm not :L I named this thread 'Why Linux is the best - Help me write my article for college!' because I wanted only support for Linux and not really bashing any other OS.

Sorry if it came out that way :(

[Copper Bezel]

To everybody else thinking I'm going to be really biased I'm not :L I named this thread 'Why Linux is the best - Help me write my article for college!' because I wanted only support for Linux and not really bashing any other OS.
Oh, I see - so you're probably asking elsewhere for why OSX is the best, why Windows is the best, and so on. I still think "best" is less useful than "best suited," for a particular task, but I see what you're getting at.

I think beyond the philosophical difference of open source development, Linuxes do have the advantage of the Unixy architecture, which they share with OSX, and their modularity, which doesn't exist in Windows or OSX. That means that the software can be fit to the hardware, and the OS to the applications, instead of the other way around, which is why Linuxes thrive in unusual configurations.

Getting into security advantages is still a bad idea. The security philosophy of Windows and that of the Unixes do differ, but the idea that one or the other is better is arguable, particularly since the actual effective security of a system is a matter of how much time passes between a threat emerging in the world and the appropriate fix hitting the end-user's system.

[bruno9779]

Remember your 17 y/o target, if you want to be fair.

I mean, Linux is the backbone of very many essential components of our digital life, but your highstreet games and apps aren't going to work (even with wine) in a satisfactory enough way. And if they do, they are going to require x% more CPU/GPU power.

Probably you will not "convert" many of your friends to linux this way, except the ones that are looking to work in this field. Also, your teacher is likely to approve the focus and fairness of your essay.

Just my 2 cents

[DangerOnTheRanger]

I mean, Linux is the backbone of very many essential components of our digital life, but your highstreet games and apps aren't going to work (even with wine) in a satisfactory enough way. And if they do, they are going to require x% more CPU/GPU power.


That's not completely true; the only extra system requirements WINE brings in is for WINE itself - remember, Wine Is Not an Emulator.

[Ctrl-Alt-F1]

That is, you're reinforcing the idea that Linux is an operating system along with OSX or Windows, which isn't the case.
I'm aware of all that. I was referring to an earlier post where someone mentioned that people act disinterested in Linux. No better way to arouse someone's interest than to relate the conversation to something they're actually interested in. People are surprised to find out that they've actually used a Linux device, and I do mean the Kernel that's why you won't find a single reference to GNU/Linux in my post.

But alas, I've digressed. I agree with whoever the many people were that said in a college paper you need to be fair to both sides.

[Copper Bezel]

Okay, I see what you mean, and you're right - that's an excellent starting point.

[DS McGuire]

Oh, I see - so you're probably asking elsewhere for why OSX is the best, why Windows is the best, and so on. I still think "best" is less useful than "best suited," for a particular task, but I see what you're getting at.

I think beyond the philosophical difference of open source development, Linuxes do have the advantage of the Unixy architecture, which they share with OSX, and their modularity, which doesn't exist in Windows or OSX. That means that the software can be fit to the hardware, and the OS to the applications, instead of the other way around, which is why Linuxes thrive in unusual configurations.

Getting into security advantages is still a bad idea. The security philosophy of Windows and that of the Unixes do differ, but the idea that one or the other is better is arguable, particularly since the actual effective security of a system is a matter of how much time passes between a threat emerging in the world and the appropriate fix hitting the end-user's system.

For the other OS's I know what they are best at because I have used Mac and Windows for many years but Linux I have only used for 3 months I wanted to know all the features I would have found if I had been using it for the same amount of time as Windows and Macs.

[stalkingwolf]

Remember your 17 y/o target, if you want to be fair.

In and of itself that statement is unfair. Having recently taken classes i found the age range to be surprising. Basically from 17 to 70. If you direct a talk, a paper or other communication and a specific group you will
by default alienate other groups.

Define certain parameters and definitions.
First and most important "Linux, or Gnu Linux" is not and operating system
as such. It is the primary building block on which many varied systems are built.

Linux is used on everything from phones to fire control systems, to entire cities.

Why is Windows the best known? Because MS and manufacturers have the same simbionic relationship that lobbists and politicians have, The same
that Drs and pharmaceutical companies have.

They got it the old fashioned way, they bought it.

Lets be fair, Windows is the best anti virus ever. It gets them all.

No matter what the arguement for or against a particular OS, at the end of the day the marching order is the same. Use what works for you.

Or as my Dr. told me , You own the computer it doesnt own you.

[Erik1984]

I haven't read all the posts in this topic yet (I will do, this subject is interesting :P) but I agree on emphasizing the freedom aspect. There are of course lots of other aspects but it's all harder to prove that Linux is better in those areas. Security is one of such things. Sure Windows has more viruses but you can't conclude from that fact that Windows is intrinsically less secure.

[DS McGuire]

I haven't read all the posts in this topic yet (I will do, this subject is interesting :P) but I agree on emphasizing the freedom aspect. There are of course lots of other aspects but it's all harder to prove that Linux is better in those areas. Security is one of such things. Sure Windows has more viruses but you can't conclude from that fact that Windows is intrinsically less secure.

I had always thought that because Windows has a larger share of the market is if you develop a virus for Windows the chances of hitting a Windows PC then a Mac or Linux. That should be the case right?

I don't think any OS is virus proof but Windows gets attack more because it has 90% of the market share.

[whiskeylover]

There are many reasons, but just one will suffice.

SECURITY...

Law #6: A computer is only as secure as the administrator is trustworthy.
Nobody can completely prevent you from installing a malicious deb on your Linux installation and messing it up.


Windows computers should not be allowed online as unlicensed drivers are not allowed to public highways. Because they pose danger.
:confused:


Some time ago MS patched a flaw that existed for 19 years, starting with DOS.
Yeah, because that bug was discovered in 2010. NOT because Microsoft didn't want to fix it. Way to spread FUD.

[Rubykuby]

Consistency and integration.

Though the selection of applications and programs on Linux is smaller than on Windows, the quality, consistency and integration of your choices is way superior. Ubuntu comes with the most simple PDF reader out there, but it integrates so well into the system that it makes any other choice look like garbage.

To unzip something on Windows, you have to go all over the internet to first find, then install a third party application that doesn't do half the job at integrating. 7-zip is a good choice, but there are so many bad choices out there. On Linux, you just unzip it.

In Windows, playing media is a total disaster. If I install GOM player, which I tend to like most, I still get whatever crappy thing comes installed with Windows bugging me all the time and there's no sane way to get rid of it. Getting subtitles to work is even worse and I've yet to have had the pleasure of just turning on the media player on Windows without having to tweak something. On Linux, quite literally, I just double-click and it works. And if I don't like the default application, I can fully remove it and try something else. And even if I chose not to remove the default application, it wouldn't be bugging me all the time. Though, that's my experience.

[Basher101]

Consistency and integration.

Though the selection of applications and programs on Linux is smaller than on Windows, the quality, consistency and integration of your choices is way superior. Ubuntu comes with the most simple PDF reader out there, but it integrates so well into the system that it makes any other choice look like garbage.

To unzip something on Windows, you have to go all over the internet to first find, then install a third party application that doesn't do half the job at integrating. 7-zip is a good choice, but there are so many bad choices out there. On Linux, you just unzip it.

In Windows, playing media is a total disaster. If I install GOM player, which I tend to like most, I still get whatever crappy thing comes installed with Windows bugging me all the time and there's no sane way to get rid of it. Getting subtitles to work is even worse and I've yet to have had the pleasure of just turning on the media player on Windows without having to tweak something. On Linux, quite literally, I just double-click and it works. And if I don't like the default application, I can fully remove it and try something else. And even if I chose not to remove the default application, it wouldn't be bugging me all the time. Though, that's my experience.

i had pretty similar expiriences, espacially better ones when i had to fix something. On Ubuntu i just googled what was not working, pasted some commands in the terminal and it was fixed. On windows it sometimes takes me ages to find where the problem is at all...and i have been using windows for 10 years and ubuntu for 6 months.

[szymon_g]

For the other OS's I know what they are best because I have used Mac and Windows for many years

what a BS. so- in your opinion- all major operating systems are "the best", right?


the quality, consistency and integration of your choices is way superior.

you are joking, right?

[DS McGuire]

what a BS. so- in your opinion- all major operating systems are "the best", right?



you are joking, right?


OK, first chill. I missed a word in that so let me re-type it:

"For the other OS's I know what they are best *at* because I have used Mac and Windows for many years"

Better? I will go back and edit my post too.

[Copper Bezel]

i had pretty similar expiriences, espacially better ones when i had to fix something. On Ubuntu i just googled what was not working, pasted some commands in the terminal and it was fixed. On windows it sometimes takes me ages to find where the problem is at all...and i have been using windows for 10 years and ubuntu for 6 months.
I'd agree that this is probably the biggest perk to using Ubuntu and other GNU Linuxes - the transparency and configurability of the system combined with the knowledgeable support communities. It adds up to control over your system and the ability to fix problems when they arise, instead of just working around them. Otherwise, there's a lot of stuff I'd miss in Windows or OSX, and there are a lot of things that just work the way I think in Linux (specifically Ubuntu) that don't elsewhere, but that's all fairly subjective.

[robgraves]

http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/ :guitar:

[jimv]

Consistency and integration.
To unzip something on Windows, you have to go all over the internet to first find, then install a third party application that doesn't do half the job at integrating. 7-zip is a good choice, but there are so many bad choices out there. On Linux, you just unzip it.


Windows has been able to unzip files since XP (for 10 years now).


In Windows, playing media is a total disaster. If I install GOM player, which I tend to like most, I still get whatever crappy thing comes installed with Windows bugging me all the time and there's no sane way to get rid of it. Getting subtitles to work is even worse and I've yet to have had the pleasure of just turning on the media player on Windows without having to tweak something. On Linux, quite literally, I just double-click and it works. And if I don't like the default application, I can fully remove it and try something else. And even if I chose not to remove the default application, it wouldn't be bugging me all the time. Though, that's my experience.

Is your experience from 1998? Windows Media Player is a fine player with decent library support, and you do just "double click and it works". It can also be removed in the Windows Features control panel.

You need to stay away from hyperbole when writing this. Here are a few actual reasons that you could use to say that Linux is the best choice: cost, performance (especially on older hardware), freedom, customization/theming/modification, powerful command line and scripting languages by default, and the use of trusted software repositories makes it safer than Windows.

[Torchwood5]

Consistency and integration.

Though the selection of applications and programs on Linux is smaller than on Windows, the quality, consistency and integration of your choices is way superior. Ubuntu comes with the most simple PDF reader out there, but it integrates so well into the system that it makes any other choice look like garbage.

To unzip something on Windows, you have to go all over the internet to first find, then install a third party application that doesn't do half the job at integrating. 7-zip is a good choice, but there are so many bad choices out there. On Linux, you just unzip it.

In Windows, playing media is a total disaster. If I install GOM player, which I tend to like most, I still get whatever crappy thing comes installed with Windows bugging me all the time and there's no sane way to get rid of it. Getting subtitles to work is even worse and I've yet to have had the pleasure of just turning on the media player on Windows without having to tweak something. On Linux, quite literally, I just double-click and it works. And if I don't like the default application, I can fully remove it and try something else. And even if I chose not to remove the default application, it wouldn't be bugging me all the time. Though, that's my experience.

Are you freakin high? Last os you had to download a ZIP program was 98SE. and Windows media Player and Media center will play anything you throw at them (altho I recommend downloading the Divx codex) Seriously sounds like you have no experience with the newer OS's. I am an avid user of Ubuntu on my netbook and to tell the truth have had many issues with unzipping files. Also if you boyhered to look you can uninstall all windows applications, IE,Media Player ETC. :confused: IMHO dont bash if you dont know! I have to deal with several OS's Vista,7,OSX and Linux and I find good in all and some bad in all. Just depends on what you want from it.

[Old_Grey_Wolf]

It wasn't as if I titled it that or anything... -_-
No, but I am going to do this as fair as possible but I know that Linux will come out on top I just want to make sure I get all its best features so I don't miss anything tasty :grin:

I work in IT. Sometimes Linux doesn't "come out on top". It all depends upon what the systems will be used for. For example, if it is an accounting system for a large business; then, Linux will loose. There aren't corporate class accounting programs available for Linux that accountants know how to use, if they exist at all. If the system is for file servers, web hosting, infrastructure services; then, Linux will probably "come out on top".

If the assignment was to compare the capabilities of the operating systems then create a table with the capabilities listed in one column and the operating system's ability to satisfy that capability in the other columns.

Examples of capability:


CAPABILITY WINDOWS OSX LINUX
Access Controls
Authentication Controls
Malware Protection
Applications
Services (DNS, NTP, etc.)
Configuration Control
Patch Management
Backup/Disaster Recovery
etc...

[SeijiSensei]

I was asked today "if Linux is so good and it's free why is it not the industry standard? And why is Windows all anybody wants?"

Answering those questions would take you away from techie things most people don't care about and into industrial politics which some people might care about. I think these are very valid and significant questions that you should give some serious thought to when writing your essay.

[Gone fishing]

Sorry but I utterly reject some comments here, such as Linux being too complicated for personal or business use – when did we get all these MS fan boys on this site? Not long ago I had to read that Linux was at least as bad as Windows for security – rubbish.

I would also suggest that Linux mint or Ubuntu with only a little research would be at least as easy as Windows to administer with it’s plethora of necessary security apps needed to keep it safe. Obviously any idiot can have a security compromised slow copy of XP just about capable of running Word or IE.

As for business - ladp, with home mounted on nfs with squid and a suitable mail server and linux clients would be ideal for many businesses and easier to administer than a Windows environment and much cheaper and some organisations, businesses and countries are beginning to appreciate this. The weakness Linux has in this area is supported applications – it is possible that the accounting application you need is Windows only, which is a shame as with Linux as a supporting OS it would be better.

I would also argue that the open-source GNU nature of Linux is innately better than proprietary systems for two reasons. Firstly it introduces to software something akin to the peer review system used in science that encourages cumulative and collaborative development – something that has been so extraordinarily successful in science - ultimately I feel this will produce better software than the closed proprietary model. Finally with open source it is less likely that your software producer will cease to trade or develop your software leaving you high and dry.

[DS McGuire]

Answering those questions would take you away from techie things most people don't care about and into industrial politics which some people might care about. I think these are very valid and significant questions that you should give some serious thought to when writing your essay.

I think I will take these questions head on and finally put them to bed. I'm sick of hearing these sort of questions, just because something isn't popular doesn't mean it isn't good!

[Paqman]

Ubuntuforums is not here to do your homework for you. We can discuss generalities, but that'll be so vague it probably won't be much use to you.
You might want to think about tightening up your focus. a "compare and contrast" for several operating systems would either have to be very long, or only touch superficially on each aspect. I agree with the folks above, just answer the actual question you've been set. Pushing a preference for a system may fall within that scope but it might not, so be careful.
There's not much point in asking people here for there opinions, because the only stuff that should be going into your paper should (I assume) be things that you can actually provide a supporting reference for.

[stalkingwolf]

Is your experience from 1998? Windows Media Player is a fine player with decent library support, and you do just "double click and it works". It can also be removed in the Windows Features control panel.

I recently discovered this statement to be untrue. I installed xp sp3 on an Hp zt3300 laptop. Had some one come to look at it and discovered that windows media player would not play DVD movies without adding a "decoderpak".
which of course i had to go on a quest to find because it wasnt included in any of the updates.

But i must admit that the result was good for me. instead of a tv i traded for a desktop system.

[jimv]

Sorry but I utterly reject some comments here, such as Linux being too complicated for personal or business use – when did we get all these MS fan boys on this site?

You don't have to be a fanboy to be honest. Switching to Linux for a business is not as simple as just switching to a different OS. There are compatibility issues to be addressed with third-party software, office software, printers, etc. Users also would need to be re-trained to navigate the new system. These are not trivial things.


I would also suggest that Linux mint or Ubuntu with only a little research would be at least as easy as Windows to administer with it’s plethora of necessary security apps needed to keep it safe.

A plethora? A firewall (built in these days) and an antivirus. That's not quite a plethora. Most infections are prevented by removing administrative rights from users (which any sane IT shop does) anyway.


As for business - ladp, with home mounted on nfs with squid and a suitable mail server and linux clients would be ideal for many businesses and easier to administer than a Windows environment and much cheaper and some organisations, businesses and countries are beginning to appreciate this. The weakness Linux has in this area is supported applications – it is possible that the accounting application you need is Windows only, which is a shame as with Linux as a supporting OS it would be better.

If you think managing a bunch of Linux desktops would be easier that Windows, you've probably never tried ActiveDirectory. It's the gold standard for managing user accounts, machines, and policies. There's a reason that I've yet to see an organization using Linux on all of their desktops (not to say that such places don't exist, but I've never seen one).


I would also argue that the open-source GNU nature of Linux is innately better than proprietary systems for two reasons. Firstly it introduces to software something akin to the peer review system used in science that encourages cumulative and collaborative development – something that has been so extraordinarily successful in science - ultimately I feel this will produce better software than the closed proprietary model. Finally with open source it is less likely that your software producer will cease to trade or develop your software leaving you high and dry.

I agree with some points here, but I've worked with a lot of niche software packages that there are simply no open source alternatives for, and probably won't ever be. Sometimes there just has to be a profit motive driving development to make it worth someone's while to build it.

[jimv]

I recently discovered this statement to be untrue. I installed xp sp3 on an Hp zt3300 laptop. Had some one come to look at it and discovered that windows media player would not play DVD movies without adding a "decoderpak".
which of course i had to go on a quest to find because it wasnt included in any of the updates.

But i must admit that the result was good for me. instead of a tv i traded for a desktop system.

A lot of Linux distros do not come with DVD codecs either, due to licensing issues. KLite codec pack usually fixes that on XP.

[stalkingwolf]

A lot of Linux distros do not come with DVD codecs either, due to licensing issues. KLite codec pack usually fixes that on XP
Windows actually has a pak called dvd decoder pak.

Im sure there are , I do remember installing codecs and such back in 8.04,

but i started using super and UE and the like.

[Gone fishing]

You don't have to be a fanboy to be honest. Switching to Linux for a business is not as simple as just switching to a different OS. There are compatibility issues to be addressed with third-party software, office software, printers, etc. Users also would need to be re-trained to navigate the new system. These are not trivial things.

Possibly I was being a little over aggressive, however, I do find it irritating on an Ubuntu site for people to argue that Linux is too complicated for the average user, or that its security is a least as bad as Windows. Ubuntu is not too complicated for the average user and whilst I agree there are compatibility and training issues, Linux can work and be used in by the average user and I say this as some who has recently introduced Linux as a work place solution. For many users Linux works well.


A plethora? A firewall (built in these days) and an antivirus. That's not quite a plethora. Most infections are prevented by removing administrative rights from users (which any sane IT shop does) anyway.

Plus malware removal tools. The AV, Firewall and malware removal tool all need to be updated, usually independently, and do you find that often when you reboot Windows 7 it take 15 minutes to restart as its installing updates? – very annoying. Many users are also using a firewall probably not need as they are sitting behind a router and Windows has a firewall but nevertheless this looks like plethora in comparison to Linux - particularly if we look at services running to protect Windows. I don't think I've ever seen a home computer running Windows where the user is not running as Admin - infact some software wont run properly if its not run as Admin.



If you think managing a bunch of Linux desktops would be easier that Windows, you've probably never tried ActiveDirectory. It's the gold standard for managing user accounts, machines, and policies. There's a reason that I've yet to see an organization using Linux on all of their desktops (not to say that such places don't exist, but I've never seen one).

If you think running nfs and ldap is difficult have you done it? Linux servers are very stable although I’m running FreeBSD at the moment – I very happy with the control I have over user desktops and the fact that the users homes are server mounted is very cool feature. Samba also allows integration with Windows systems including acting as a domain controller and obviously that also integrates with ldap. Squid, postfix etc are also more than competent and all this is free. I admit to not having run a Windows server for years but I know that running a Linux / FreeBSD server is not all pain and suffering and I’ve seen plenty of Windows servers causing pain and suffering. Oh and Samba 4 will offer much of the AD functionality.

If you want to find large organizations using Linux based systems Google it there are many – and there are many smaller organizations that could and would probably be better off using Linux. Obviously many organizations are using a mixture of systems hence the need for Samba and the like.



I agree with some points here, but I've worked with a lot of niche software packages that there are simply no open source alternatives for, and probably won't ever be. Sometimes there just has to be a profit motive driving development to make it worth someone's while to build it.

I agree too there are people who simply need some Windows software and hence need to run Windows or at least some Windows systems. However, my point is that in many cases Linux can provide a viable solution and is not too complex of difficult for users or administrators.

[jimv]

@Gone Fishing

Your reasonable and pleasant reply is a breath of fresh air :)

[Torchwood5]

I guess if I was going to start a company off and train them with linux I could see it but most people are already using and very used to windows or OSX. Biggest problem is trying to get that person who has been using MS or OSX to change. Very hard to do with the standard desktop user, another thing Admins and Co. security dont like is the term "Open Sorce" seems that I run into the problem of security and bean counters alike worried that the average Joe Shmoe is going to screw with the companies code. Ha let alone a Apple Head (and you think MS people are fanbois) to change his way of thinking. JMO.:)