What can Linux do that Windows cannot?

[PrimoTurbo]

Is there anything that linux can do that windows cannot? Curious if there are any exclusive software, or not.

[-grubby]

I'll name one thing: change your DE (windowblinds doesn't count)

[lyndaj70]

---Play *.wma files without Windows media refusing and nagging you that you don't have the rights.....

---convert midi files so that you can burn them to cd.... (well, in my experience I found a proggie that would do it in Windows but they wanted $30 and timidity was free)...

---scan a buddies' hard disk for viruses without worrying about catching them yourself.....

--- And as far as my kids are concerned, between the two operating systems, my kids can crash Windows in a heartbeat without even trying, but they have yet to even faze a linux install... which is what first got my attention when I started playing with it years ago :lolflag:

It's not for everyone, I'll admit -- but it is definitely something to at least try on for size :D

~Lynda

[lyndaj70]

I'll name one thing: change your DE (windowblinds doesn't count)

That one, too.....

[HermanAB]

It is not so much that Windows cannot do something. It is that Windows cannot do anything well.

[lyndaj70]

Oh, yeah -- and Linux will let you see the source code behind the operating system, so that you (and everyone else) can verify that it's not revealing your personal information to a big company without your permission... (ask M$ to show you their sorce code for Windows and see what happens (grin)

[-grubby]

(ask M$ to show you their sorce code for Windows and see what happens (grin)

I think that you can BUY Windows source code

[lyndaj70]

It is not so much that Windows cannot do something. It is that Windows cannot do anything well.

And the programs you have to buy to do most everything are so EXPENSIVE!

[lyndaj70]

I think that you can BUY Windows source code


Would it be worth what they ask for it? (What do they ask for it btw?)

[ofb]

What can Linux do that Windows cannot? Well, it lowers my blood pressure! I've run Windows since 3.1 and relative lack of trouble is a great relief.

But if you're only asking if Linux has any major applications that Windows lacks, generally I'd say no. Most of the big or key open source projects have been ported. There's a long list of smaller utilities and /preferred/ applications, but exclusive big apps for the general user, I don't think so.

Edit: Synaptic & the repository system! Not having to keep track of all my little app updates is a major feature.

[klange]

There's nothing that Linux does that Windows can't.
It's more a matter of what Linux will do that Windows won't.
Windows has all of the potential, just look at all the crap you can pay money for.
As long as Linux remains what Linux is - open source - Windows will be able to do the same things.

Final word: Nothing, it's what it will do that matters.

[arsenic23]

This may sound funny, but one of the things that really impressed me back when I first started using linux was that Gnome (with comix installed) would look at the first page of comic files and use it to make a thumbnail. I just loved being able to see the covers of my scanned coimcs while browsing my folders. It made it so much easier to find an issue I was looking for.


Many of the things people claim can only be done in linux can be done with WIndows, sometimes its more difficult then it should be, but Windows can do a lot more then the majority of the linux comunity give it credit for. With Windows, I spend my time avoiding problems, with linux I spend my time fixing them. That being said, I still don't think there is any possiblility of displaying the covers of .cbr/cbz files as icons in any version of Windows.

[aaaantoine]

Ubuntu does a lot of things without additional software that Windows cannot.

For example: workspace switching. And being able to restart the GUI without restarting the full OS.

[peitschie]

I can throw out a few mor ideas there:


Update software on multiple computers from a local cache (using apt-cacher) WITHOUT requiring all the BS of a Win2k3 licence and a MS SUS server
Perform flashy effects on my 1.8Ghz laptop with 512Mb ram without killing it or even slowing it down (in fact, it feels faster using compiz ;))
Run 4 virtual desktops each with 5-6 programs running on them including web-browsers, code editors, music & multimedia applications etc., without slowing the computer to a crawl when switching workspaces as any hacks on windows seem to do
Allow recovery from a bad programming mistak e in c++ that causes a program to recursively call itself all the time *embarrased*... using the linux magic keys i can shutdown all the gui stuff using alt+sys rq+r & alt+sys rq+e, get back to command line, then a quick sudo /etc/init.d/dbus restart, sudo /etc/init.d/gdm restart to get back into the GUI
Remote debugging for a friend via ssh+tunnelling... since linux is CLI based it means most problems can be diagnosed and repaired using ssh+shell... the equiavlent setup in windows using VNC or remote desktop doesn't function well when you need to work on a 128Kbps connection :S
Proper thread seperation! So when one of my applications crash, I DON'T LOSE THE WHOLE OPERATING SYSTEM


There would be more if I spent more time working on this... but a large one is the feeling of power. I like being able to customize my desktop, I like being able to boot up in under 30s after 6months of usage, I don't mind the struggle required getting some hardware to work (this is getting less frequent too).

Linux makes me happy :D

[Peter Mount]

How about not having to defrag the hard drive in Linux? With my confusor being so slow (Pentium 2-350) that's no small thing.

[Sn3ipen]

It can change almost any aspects of the desktop without having to install any apps.

[Rhubarb]

You can copy by selecting some text, then paste using the middle mouse button
You can select a line of text by triple clicking on it
You can make any window always on top

[^^Snoop^^]

You can copy by selecting some text, then paste using the middle mouse button
You can select a line of text by triple clicking on it
You can make any window always on top

You can select a line of text by triple clicking in XP too.

[aysiu]

You can select a line of text by triple clicking in XP too.
Cool trick. I didn't realize that could be done in Linux or Windows.

[OrangeCrate]

Cool trick. I didn't realize that could be done in Linux or Windows.

+1

[georghess]

Really the answer to that is easy in my mind .... :-)
Linux can give you a stable platform for the same kind of great programs that you can use under windows BUT they are FREE and they are being continuously improved on.

Thats enough for me. :)

[pwn]

Linux can run virus free and spyware free without any antivirus installed.

[PmDematagoda]

1) Linux can remain just as responsive as the first day you installed it regardless of the period of use, the changes you do, and the number of programs you installed.

2) Distro's like Ubuntu have repositories which makes installing applications a real breeze. :guitar:

3) You can see everything the OS does with little/no sugar coating(Very important since this is very useful in finding the roots of problems and solving them easily). Try doing this in XP or Vista, all it will do is say that there is a problem and will submit an error report to MS and not allow you to fix the problem on your own which would probably be faster.

:lolflag:Viva la Linux:lolflag:

[inversekinetix]

However, linux is equally capable of creating almost cult like bashing of other OSs. It also excels in making some seasoned users look down on new users.

:=)

[AndyCooll]

Use the same installation disk to install on as many pc's as you like.

And the whole area of virtual desktops (and I'm not talking about VNC here) is something that is practically alien to the Windows home environment.

I'm also not sure whether it's possible to run a Windows app on one machine but have the graphical display show on another. You can do certainly do this on Linux.

And when it comes to Vista, you can install any flavour of Linux as a virtual machine but you can't install Vista as one unless you pay for the ultimate licence.

:cool:

[Telecaster72]

Use a separate "home" partition, make a clean install of the OS and still come back to the same desktop, apt-get the software you had before the clean install and when you run the software all your previous settings are already there.

[lyndaj70]

Use the same installation disk to install on as many pc's as you like.

And the whole area of virtual desktops (and I'm not talking about VNC here) is something that is practically alien to the Windows home environment.

I'm also not sure whether it's possible to run a Windows app on one machine but have the graphical display show on another. You can do certainly do this on Linux.

And when it comes to Vista, you can install any flavour of Linux as a virtual machine but you can't install Vista as one unless you pay for the ultimate licence.

:cool:

I'm running Vista Home Premium in a virtual machine on my desktop now.. Tho I use Win2k for the apps I have yet to port to Linux cause it's WAY faster... Mainly have Vista so I can learn the tricks to fix it when it breaks:KS

~Lynda

[lyndaj70]

One thing that Linux does that you have to have an external program for in Windows is it will allow you to mount an *.iso image to your filesystem and use it like another drive, which is a great timesaver if you download a ton of apps like yours truly :popcorn:

[inversekinetix]

Use the same installation disk to install on as many pc's as you like.

And the whole area of virtual desktops (and I'm not talking about VNC here) is something that is practically alien to the Windows home environment.



There are lots of virtual desktop applications available. Microsoft even has a free one for download on its website.



I'm also not sure whether it's possible to run a Windows app on one machine but have the graphical display show on another. You can do certainly do this on Linux.



Remote desktop? Built into XP pro.




And when it comes to Vista, you can install any flavour of Linux as a virtual machine but you can't install Vista as one unless you pay for the ultimate licence.




How much do the linux distros pay their developers?


Microsoft is and always has been a for profit company, how can you compare it to a community based project?

I wonder if there are as many people complain about the inefficiencies of the internal combustion engine and the profiteering of gas companies as there are other OS users who bash windows.

[inversekinetix]

One thing that Linux does that you have to have an external program for in Windows is it will allow you to mount an *.iso image to your filesystem and use it like another drive, which is a great timesaver if you download a ton of apps like yours truly :popcorn:


daemon tools was a great free app. you have to pay for the new versions, but good on the guys who made it.

you could try
http://www.tech-recipes.com/rx/620/xp_small_free_way_to_use_and_mount_images_iso_file s_without_burning_them

which is free from MS


from where and what kind of apps do you download as iso's_?

[santiagoward2000]

apt-get moo
I can't do anything this useful in Windows!

[popch]

How much do the linux distros pay their developers? - Microsoft is and always has been a for profit company, how can you compare it to a community based project?.

Can you cite references which show that the employees of Canonical, SuSe, RedHat, Zend and mySQL actually work without any compensation?

[inversekinetix]

Can you cite references which show that the employees of Canonical, SuSe, RedHat, Zend and mySQL actually work without any compensation?


I can't, can you cite references saying they do? I based my assumption on the oft heard remarks on the forums and irc that people volunteer their time to the cause. I didn't think volunteers required a salary. Was ubuntu set up to make a profit? I really dont know. How many employees does canonical have?

[aysiu]

I can't, can you cite references saying they do? I based my assumption on the oft heard remarks on the forums and irc that people volunteer their time to the cause. I didn't think volunteers required a salary. Was ubuntu set up to make a profit? I really dont know. How many employees does canonical have?
From Mark Shuttleworth's blog (http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/47):
There are a couple more job postings up on the Ubuntu employment page, and I thought I would blog about some of them in particular because they demonstrate what I hope will be a role model for the synthesis of paid, professional work and the best of free software volunteerism. You can check out job postings for Ubuntu:
http://www.ubuntu.com/employment

[inversekinetix]

From Mark Shuttleworth's blog (http://www.markshuttleworth.com/archives/47): You can check out job postings for Ubuntu:
http://www.ubuntu.com/employment


not very many, check out microsofts job listings.

[aysiu]

not very many, check out microsofts job listings.
Microsoft makes much more than just Windows.

Microsoft also is closed source and so must produce everything itself.

Ubuntu benefits from the work of other Linux companies and volunteers, just as those same other companies and volunteers benefit from Ubuntu. Do you know who designed the Network Manager icon? A Red Hat employee. Do you know who funds Evolution development? SuSE.

Ubuntu has few employees, because Ubuntu does not have to create everything itself. That is the whole point of open source--you stand on the shoulders of giants. Ubuntu is built on Debian. Ubuntu's applications come from all over.

Microsoft has to employ a lot more people, because it has to create everything from scratch. It also makes more than just operating systems (think XBox, think Zune, think Microsoft Office, Hotmail, MSN Search, etc.).

[SomeGuyDude]

Microsoft has to employ a lot more people, because it has to create everything from scratch. It also makes more than just operating systems (think XBox, think Zune, think Microsoft Office, Hotmail, MSN Search, etc.).

Y'know this is a reason I think people should lay off MS or Apple in general (but chiefly MS since they get a lot more flak). If a Linux developer has something that isn't working, he can look around at all the other distros and if something works better on one of them he can simply snag it and mold it into his own. Someone really likes KDE they can build one on whatever's model and use the KDE desktop.

If MS has a feature they don't particularly like or needs fixed, and see that another system does it a lot better, they can't assimilate that feature into their own or they'd violate copyright. So they're stuck trying to build their own version from the ground up.

I wonder how well the various Linux distros would be doing today if each one had to design and code everything from scratch without overtly copying anyone else.

[inversekinetix]

Y'know this is a reason I think people should lay off MS or Apple in general (but chiefly MS since they get a lot more flak). If a Linux developer has something that isn't working, he can look around at all the other distros and if something works better on one of them he can simply snag it and mold it into his own. Someone really likes KDE they can build one on whatever's model and use the KDE desktop.

If MS has a feature they don't particularly like or needs fixed, and see that another system does it a lot better, they can't assimilate that feature into their own or they'd violate copyright. So they're stuck trying to build their own version from the ground up.

I wonder how well the various Linux distros would be doing today if each one had to design and code everything from scratch without overtly copying anyone else.

Well said. I find it funny that in the Other OS >>> Distributions section, there is a warning not to use the area as a bashing ground, still people say some (i'm no lawyer but) things verging on libel.

So as Aysiu pointed out, linux people can stand on the shoulders of giants whereas M$ has to stand on its own two feet and do everything itself or buy up other companies for their technology. Theres something that linux can do but windows cant. Another thing Windows can do that linux cant is supply its founder with billions of dollars which the founder pumps into charitable organizations. Can't fault gates, the man is a saint.


MS and Linux are different breeds, saying one is better than the other is a waste of time.