Why Linux is Better

[guitarist549]

Ok, I know that this may be slightly off topic/abuse of the forums, but I ask in advance for your forgiveness.

In my uni writing class, I'm supposed to write an evaluation paper over the topic of our choosing. I was originally writing about why I despise iPods, but found out that most of the problems with iPods have been fixed, so I had to choose a new topic.
So, in a stroke of genious, whilst perusing these forums, I thought "I should write about why Linux is better than Windows!"
"Where does this involve me?" You ask? Well, I'm asking if you guys will help me think of all the reasons that Windows should bite it...

Please?
Thanks in advance.

[matthew]

The topic is okay, but it belongs in the cafe...I'll move it for you.

[Epperly]

no viruses, spyware, adware...

[rfruth]

GNU/Linux is better than Windows cause it's not a shrink wrapped 'solution' some group waiting for 5 o'clock thought was best for me :mrgreen:

[Mathiasdm]

Perhaps it would be better to call it a 'decent alternative to Windows'.
If you sound too preachy, you scare people away.

Or at least, that's my opinion ;-)

[BarfBag]

Be sure to make clear that if they're satisfied with what they have, they probably shouldn't switch. That's one of my problems. I convert people... for a week. They expect it to work 100% like Windows, and when it doesn't; it sucks. :rolleyes:

[seijuro]

It's FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEEE and more customizable, more secure, handle's cpu loads better, you can install ubuntu 7x in the space windows vista wants, bug/security updates are produced quicker, and uh oh yeah IT's FREEEEEEEEEEEEEEE!!!!!!!!!

[guitarist549]

Be sure to make clear that if they're satisfied with what they have, they probably shouldn't switch. That's one of my problems. I convert people... for a week. They expect it to work 100% like Windows, and when it doesn't; it sucks. :rolleyes:

Yeah, that was what it was like with me at first. I installed and not everything worked but I stuck it out for some reason and I love it. I guess I like the challange of having to fix everything yourself.

[doobit]

It has a cute mascot. :)

Seriously, "better" might not be the best word. It is a functional, solid, operating system, and you can get it in a variation that suites your needs without being asked to pay for anything.

[petersjm]

Perhaps it would be better to call it a 'decent alternative to Windows'.
If you sound too preachy, you scare people away.

Or at least, that's my opinion ;-)

I agree with this. Don't tell people that something is "better", you start sounding like a geek (don't we all?!) and people will dismiss you entirely.

You should look into the background of Linux and compare it with Windows. Think of Linus Torvalds (or however it's spelled) and that GNU bloke (sorry, forgotten his name - oh the shame!). You can even discuss its rise through the ranks. Not to do your homeowrk for you, but you can even point out that many people use Linux but don't even know it -- think POS.

Then delve into the lack of viruses (virii?), spyware and malware -- but be careful here. Many people will simply say "yeah, that's because hackers aren't coding viruses for Linux because hardly anybody uses it!" This is true, to an extent, but mention the way in which Linux distros have a "super user" or administrator, and without granted access (by default) there's not a lot you can do to mess up the software (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).

[aysiu]

I hope this doesn't come off as mean, but... do your own homework.

If it's your paper, and you're being graded on it, I think you can come up with enough reasons on your own.

[doobit]

I hope this doesn't come off as mean, but... do your own homework.

If it's your paper, and you're being graded on it, I think you can come up with enough reasons on your own.

I think asking users about their opinions and experiences is a legitimate part of homework.

[guitarist549]

I hope this doesn't come off as mean, but... do your own homework.

If it's your paper, and you're being graded on it, I think you can come up with enough reasons on your own.

I'm not asking for people to do my homework for me, I'm just asking for opinions and whatnot. I already have much of it written but I'm basically asking for some technical comparisons, etc...

[LLRNR]

I'm a CS student and my favorite professor often says :


"The main difference between Windows and Linux is that WINDOWS WAS DESIGNED BY ENGINEERS WHILE LINUX WAS CREATED BY REAL IT PROFESSIONALS."

Yeah, I guess one might say he's kind of a geek, but man do I just loooove hearing him saying this ! :mrgreen:

[aysiu]

I think asking users about their opinions and experiences is a legitimate part of homework.
It depends.

It's very easy, even with good intentions for paraphrasing to slip into plagiarism.

I've said my piece.

[guitarist549]

I'm a CS student and my favorite professor often says :



Yeah, I guess one might say he's kind of a geek, but man do I just loooove hearing him saying this ! :mrgreen:

Yeah, I said something like that in here:

"Being that Linux is open source, anytime a problem comes up, anyone in the world is free to change the software in order to fix the problem. With Windows, you have to wait until Microsofts limited amount of programmers get around to updating the code, but with Linux, there is a virtually endless number of people willing to spend many hours of their free time contributing in order to fix problems for other people."

[lyceum]

I started using Linux because I wanted to find out what it was. I started using in full time for the following reasons:

1. Saftey. I don't want to worry, and anti-virus software is like birth control (sorry if this offends, let me know, I will edit). It is never 100% effective. Bottom line, I just don't want to think about it. I want to surf the web download and life like free of illness.

2. Control. I make it look and feel the way I like. This is important, as I have to look at it all the time. I want my OS to function in a way that is easy for me and look good when I turn it on. I think Windows 98 was the last OS Microsoft made that had the customer in mind. XP looked nice, but you could not customize it. At least, not like you could with 98 with out it looking like 98. To do anything more with XP you have to give them more money. Seeing that they have the leading market share and XP home is $200 how much money do they need?

3. Ease of programs. I am in school. I may need a program for one class then never use it again. It is nice to add a program and then just remove it again without spending $100. This is also nice time when people need to use my PC and I don't have a program installed they might need. I add it and remove it. No worries. I also hate going to the store, reading the back of the box and seeing the pretty pictures, getting home and feeling like I just threw my money out the window (no pun intended).

4. Making the world a better place. Why does Microsoft keep their code closed? If I find a problem with their code, why can't I fix it? I paid $200 for this program that I can use the way I want to? But I can get Ubuntu for free and do anything to it I want? I have a problem shelling out money and that item not really being mine. That is why I own a house, not a condo, I bought my car, I do not lease and I use Ubuntu, not XP as much as I can.

Why is Linux better? It is a comunity effort, not a corporate desition. It is mine just as much as it is anybody elses. If something doesn't work, I can talk to people about fixing it. If something does work, I know that it is just going to keep getting better. That is the price of freedom.

Hope this helps.
__________________

[56phil]

Why is Linux superior?


You can do more with less.
You don't have to defrag your hard drive every time time the wind changes direction
It's free.
It's more customizable
Users have less exposer to viruses, etc.


I hope this gets you started in a good direction.:)

[LLRNR]

@ Guitarist459: Yup, I guess it doesn't sound as harsh as my prof stated it...


Then delve into the lack of viruses (virii?), spyware and malware -- but be careful here. Many people will simply say "yeah, that's because hackers aren't coding viruses for Linux because hardly anybody uses it!" This is true, to an extent, but mention the way in which Linux distros have a "super user" or administrator, and without granted access (by default) there's not a lot you can do to mess up the software (someone can correct me if I'm wrong).

I have some reviews here, if I'm allowed:
- hackers don't code viruses (I once read that hackers ARE the ones who make the net roll...);
- [offtopic?]Google servers are based on Linux[/offtopic?];
- virus-coders or however you want to call them are usually very very intelligent people (I mean I love assembler but still I'm not able to create a good virus even if I wanted to - which I don't) who do this either because they're pissed off either because they want to be creative (if they're pissed off then this applies to MS producs and if they want to be creative by not doing harm, being so skillful, they'd choose to help Linux development in general);
- since virus-coders have a specific target it's logical enough that they only create viruses for a certain filesystem and MORE important for a certain executable structure (this being PE = Portable Executable, it's the structure of executable files given by Microsoft);
- the way that files in general and executables in particular are treated in UNIX-based systems has nothing to do with the MS-way; this is why Windows viruses are not "portable" to UNIX/Linux systems... If they just can't "read" the known structure, which they were designed to attack, then they cannot act in any way (of course a Linux system can be a "carrier" of viruses, but not a "victim").

There'd be much more to comment on, but I think these are some things to consider in a short essay.

[petersjm]

I have some reviews here, if I'm allowed:
- hackers don't code viruses (I once read that hackers ARE the ones who make the net roll...)

Of course you're allowed! :D
I'm never one to hold back criticism and I expect the same. In fact, for clarification's sake, I'd like to point out that "hackers", in the true sense, are pretty amazing guys, but "hackers" in the Joe-public, Windows sense (AFAIK) means virus-coders and people who "break" websites. How often have you heard the uneducated (and I mean that in the nicest possible way) call anyone who does something naughty with viruses or websites "hackers"? That's the point I was getting at. If that makes sense...?

[guitarist549]

Of course you're allowed! :D
I'm never one to hold back criticism and I expect the same. In fact, for clarification's sake, I'd like to point out that "hackers", in the true sense, are pretty amazing guys, but "hackers" in the Joe-public, Windows sense (AFAIK) means virus-coders and people who "break" websites. How often have you heard the uneducated (and I mean that in the nicest possible way) call anyone who does something naughty with viruses or websites "hackers"? That's the point I was getting at. If that makes sense...?

That is true... tell one of your non-computer savvy friends that you're a hacker and they'll quickly ask you "which website?!"

[LLRNR]

For clarification's sake, I'd like to point out that "hackers", in the true sense, are pretty amazing guys, but "hackers" in the Joe-public, Windows sense (AFAIK) means virus-coders and people who "break" websites. How often have you heard the uneducated (and I mean that in the nicest possible way) call anyone who does something naughty with viruses or websites "hackers"? That's the point I was getting at. If that makes sense...?

Yes, that actually makes sense to me, I know how the average-Joe thinks, I understood what you meant... but I wanted to de-misify, to draw an un-average-Joe distinction between "bad virus-coders" and true hackers (http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/hacker-howto.html) (YES! I finally found that link :D GOTTA read the article, it's so damn good!)

Thanks for posting back, Petersjm, it's good to know there are some people out there who don't treat hackers as criminals ;)

Cheers !

LLRNR

[petersjm]

Thanks for posting back, Petersjm, it's good to know there are some people out there who don't treat hackers as criminals ;)

You're very welcome. Never mind the "hackers as criminals" analogy, the main reason I posted back was to thank you for your post, which forced me to clarify my own. People who can't take criticism (I've seen to many of them - I'm a member of a writers site and we get all sorts of people who think their writing is wonderful no matter what you say to them, and there's no changing their minds!) aren't very nice. More people need to admit when they are wrong, or at least "unclear" in what they say. Mind you, I'm never wrong... LOL! :D

Anyway, that was off topic. I do apologise. Back to the discussion at hand... :)