Happy Birthday Linux
- Thread starter taper
- Start date
Mr. Keith
Bracketologist
Okay, Taper. Here is your chance to sell me on Linux. Why would a dude like me (who is somewhat tech savvy in general, but by no means a computer whiz) ever want to bother with Linux?
Granted, there is almost no chance that I will download Linux, but you have my attention at least.
Granted, there is almost no chance that I will download Linux, but you have my attention at least.
Aramazd
Deity
taper
Meet Tux
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2002
- Messages
- 1,463
Glad to explain the benefits. The biggest is that Linux is free. Not costing money is nice, but I mean free in that you aren't tied down to whatever someone else says. Like a certain version? You will never be forced to upgrade.(Unlike XP to Vista) Don't like a certain feature or program? You don't have to install it, and you can remove virtually anything.(Unlike many things in Windows) Want something that isn't currently available? You are free to modify Linux in whatever way you see fit, for any reason.(Unlike everything Microsoft(or Apple) sells)
Linux on the desktop is very easy to use. Many people I've introduced to it are surprised, thinking it would be much harder. Some distros, like Ubuntu, are pretty much point and click for everything. You can even get a liveCD and try out many distros with no change to your existing system or files. A very large number of popular Windows programs either have free, fully featured equivalents in Linux, or run very well using WINE.
Protected Video Path, which Microsoft plans to enable sometime in 2010(and is already in Vista, just not turned on yet), is reason enough for me to stay away. In short, if you don't have the "right" hardware, you can't view HD media like Blu-Ray on your computer. It also prevents you from your Fair Use rights under US copyright law.
Mr. Keith
Bracketologist
What programs do you use for your word processing / spreadsheeting? How do you deal with any compatibility issues with Microsoft Office?
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
I imagine Linux people use OpenOffice, which can save to MS Office format. I've switched to OO myself, since my version of MS Office is old. Open-source programs are great in the way that you can use them for nearly whatever you want. For example, if a business needs an open-source program to have a certain function, they could just get a programmer to code it in for them. (I've heard about non-programmers paying programmers to edit open-source software.)
I tried to use GIMP (Photoshop wouldn't be appropiate) to draw a birthday hat on Tux the Penguin, but I just ended up deforming him.
I tried to use GIMP (Photoshop wouldn't be appropiate) to draw a birthday hat on Tux the Penguin, but I just ended up deforming him.
taper
Meet Tux
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2002
- Messages
- 1,463
Open Office has everything you need. It can read and write just about any format, including .doc and .docx. Writing docx can take some work though, mostly because of the way Microsoft licenses it's "open" format. I'd expect that by the time .doc is fully replaced by .docx by the public they'll have it all straightened out. Abiword, Gnumeric, Staroffice and KOffice are other options, as well as online ones like Google Docs.
The GIMP is a great alternative to Photoshop for most uses. If you still prefer PS, it runs quite well in WINE, so your options are open.
Maniacal
the green Napoleon
I'd try Linux, but I have everything I need on Windows XP, and I play a LOT of games some of which may or may not work well (if at all) in Linux (yet). As well my XP disc should still work for a long time, heck I still have a win98 disc around. Although if/when I get a laptop I'd like to put Linux on it.
Happy birthday Linux!
Happy birthday Linux!
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
I'd like to dual-boot Linux sometime. Or if I get a laptop (not for a while, yet) maybe put Linux on that. Trying to decide on a distro -- I've heard that Knoppix, Ubuntu & PCLinuxOS are good for beginners.
If you aren't ready to move to Linux, nothing we say will convince you otherwise.
MS Windows is still the right OS for some things. Gaming in particular. This is because of the near-total lock-in that Windows has with game developers. There are also a few other specialty niches that will remain Windows-only for quite some time. Certain medical and legal fields come to mind, for instance. This is because nobody has yet written the necessary Free/Libre Open Source Software for those fields. Also, for large businesses, MS Office is still the choice. I will be the first to admit that doing things the MS-way is deeply ingrained in Corporate America. Plus, in some ways OpenOffice doesn't scale quite as well as MS-Office. (Try working with spreadsheets that have 60000+ rows of data. Despite everything I dislike about MS, OO just doesn't handle those as well as Excel.)
Still, anyone who wants to check out the scene can easily download a live-CD, and play with it without ever touching the Windows files on their system. PCLinuxOS 2009.1 was just released, and is, IMHO, a blockbuster. Stable, easy to use, KDE-based, it is perfect for the new Linux user. Ubuntu and its derivatives are also quite good. Knoppix is excellent, as are Mandriva and Mepis.
Despite the "feel good" marketing MS uses, they are not really interested in making the customer happy. They are out to make $$. That is MS' sole reason for existence. They (and "they" means everyone from MS execs down through their distributors, and even to the "Geek Squad" kiddies) will deliberately "lie" to you to make their money. They will sell you an inferior product, and then force you to purchase an "upgrade" just so you can do what you originally bought the product for. They tout how much improved their security is, and point to their silly UAC as proof, meanwhile, they knowingly leave security holes big enough to drive a Mac truck through. They pushed through the "Trusted Computing" idea, which boils down to "if it isn't running on a verified Windows system, it won't be allowed to run". This is to be implemented via hardware, and, in fact, much of that hardware has already been slipped onto some motherboards - the functionality is just turned off, for now.
Linux is based on the idea of Freedom. You bought the computer; you should be able to use it as you see fit. If something doesn't work the way you want, you should be able to change it so it does. And you should be able to let other people make use of the changes you made. Linux, being originally a "Unix work-alike", was designed from the ground up as a multi-user, network-safe system. Along with it's cousin, BSD,and Uncle Unix, it is the backbone of the Internet. Even MS still uses *nix servers for their mission critical network servers (although they have tried to obfuscate that fact since it was discovered).
There are no known viable Linux viruses to be found in the wild. There are other types of malware, like trojans and worms, but you have to be doing things in a very insecure manner to get bitten by one of those. Unlike Windows, where "insecure" is the default setting, and you have to make it secure, Linux, in most distributions, is by default "secure", and can be easily tweaked to "very secure". You have to deliberately take actions to make it less secure.
(I'll step down from my soapbox now.
)My Year of the Linux Desktop was 2003.
OpenOffice is the most common MSOffice-compatible suite used. It can, as has been pointed out, read/write pretty much any version of MS Office files. Admittedly, if you do a LOT of fancy formatting and such, you will find some divergence creeping in. The KOffice suite is making strides in that direction, as well. Also, abiword is able to read/write .doc formats. I'm not sure if it has .docx, yet, though.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
I like Linux because the developers are also end-users, so they know what the end-user wants, without being pushed by the money-making part. However, I'm sticking with Windows for now, mainly for the games.
I read somewhere there are about 40 Linux viruses, but most of them are "in the lab", and the few that made it out have been controlled quickly. Is it true that Linux doesn't even need an antivirus?
I read somewhere there are about 40 Linux viruses, but most of them are "in the lab", and the few that made it out have been controlled quickly. Is it true that Linux doesn't even need an antivirus?
The only reason for anti-virus in Linux is to be nice to your Windows-using friends.
Linux anti-virus tools look for Windows viruses in emails, so you don't unwittingly send them on.
Linux anti-virus tools look for Windows viruses in emails, so you don't unwittingly send them on.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
I'm surprised that not a lot of people know about Linux. (My school's technician says he knows about it, but there's some agreement the school board made to use Windows. However, since I gave the school board a CD of open-source software, I've noticed some of it on the schools computers.)
Genocidicbunny
Bug squasher
The school board probably wants to use as much free stuff as possible, after all, budgets are limited. at the same time, if they have an agreement with MS such as in return for Windows being installed, MS subsidizes the pc's, the school board can't very well just back out of that.
Mr. Keith
Bracketologist
Believe me when I say I have no love for Windows or Microsoft in general. Not to mention the hardware issues that my Xbox 360 has had.
It is funny that you mention the corporate America/Office thing. I am not an extremely advanced user of Excel, but I am pretty competent with it and that sure makes life a lot easier in my job.
It is funny that you mention the corporate America/Office thing. I am not an extremely advanced user of Excel, but I am pretty competent with it and that sure makes life a lot easier in my job.
Padma, well said.
As aimee was saying, the developers are in touch with the users and they truly want to help.
@ the Russian background image on the last page (I don't want to derail the thread over a joke background) it isn't communist to care, and not expect to be paid for it.
As aimee was saying, the developers are in touch with the users and they truly want to help.
@ the Russian background image on the last page (I don't want to derail the thread over a joke background) it isn't communist to care, and not expect to be paid for it.
Genocidicbunny
Bug squasher
Well, I find that sometimes its actually opposite of that, especially when it comes to things like the GUI.
When its a company trying to make a profit off a program, they have to at least have some semblance of a usable GUI. On the other hand, with an OSS program, there is no incentive to make it user-friendly. A lot of the apps/programs start out as something the dev needs for him/herself and thus the GUI ends up being what the dev needs/wants. Now, this in no way applies to 100% of the OSS out there, but certainly a good part. Then again, I've seen some terrible GUI's on commercial programs.
aimeeandbeatles
watermelon
- Joined
- Apr 5, 2007
- Messages
- 20,112
I once seen an awful GUI on a commercial program shareware on my mom's computer. It was see-through and there was no way to change the opacity. Just ugly.
Sometimes the best programs don't have eye-candy GUIs. Take VirtualDub -- it doesn't have any fancy skins, yet it's one of the most popular free video editors around.
Sometimes the best programs don't have eye-candy GUIs. Take VirtualDub -- it doesn't have any fancy skins, yet it's one of the most popular free video editors around.
taper
Meet Tux
- Joined
- Jul 27, 2002
- Messages
- 1,463
This is one of areas being worked on. Both KDE and GNOME have GUI standards they're pushing developers to follow, and it is getting better. In the end, I'd like to have both functionality and good GUI, but if I can only get one, I know which I'd pick.
BTW, the Interface Hall of Shame is a good comparison on how far GUIs in general have come.
Similar threads
- Sticky
- Sticky
