Announcement

Collapse
No announcement yet.

Windows 7 screens look like KDE 4!!

Collapse
X
  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #31
    The "trollish" post has a point though. Linux feels amateurish. It's a fact. The main reason is somewhat kludgy APIs in X. Due to that, Linux lacks in Desktop performance. I can't watch HD movies, I can't play games at the speed I do in Windows, my PC hangs more often than with Windows due to shitty ATI/NVidia drivers. Just to name a few. Windows beats Linux in this respect. It actually doesn't just beat it, it also stomps on it.

    And right now we're at a point where Windows is far more stable than Linux. The days of Windows 95 are over. Ever since XP, one of the main benefits of Linux vs Windows - stability - disappeared. Not only that, but the situation is reversed due to drivers.

    PS:
    You don't get to hear stuff like this from kernel devs though. They don't care about desktops. If it's rock solid on their servers, then that's it. That also means that Linux might be doomed on the desktop. If the component that's at the core of a system (the kernel) doesn't give a damn about desktops, then it's simply not going to make it.
    Last edited by RealNC; 01-17-2009, 11:50 AM.

    Comment


    • #32
      ATI/Nvidia drivers are shitty on the other side too; there was a chart of all reported Vista crashes and over half of it was due to these two drivers.

      In my experience I had way more crashes on the windows side. Also I'm very damn glad it's not even possible for me to see the "Registry is corrupted, recover from last backup" error anymore (no registry! yay!)

      Comment


      • #33
        Originally posted by curaga View Post
        ATI/Nvidia drivers are shitty on the other side too; there was a chart of all reported Vista crashes and over half of it was due to these two drivers.

        In my experience I had way more crashes on the windows side. Also I'm very damn glad it's not even possible for me to see the "Registry is corrupted, recover from last backup" error anymore (no registry! yay!)
        It's the reverse here. No crashes on Windows but crashes/hangs on Linux. It's been like that for quite some time now. I'd say about 4 or 5 years. I don't dare doing anything "advanced" on Linux due to fear of the drivers crapping out.

        Comment


        • #34
          Well it's all very dependent on the hardware and software being used. Windows as an OS has been very stable for quite some time now. A lot of the "linux is way more stable then windows" rhetoric is as outdated as the "linux is hard to use" crud. I haven't seen a bluecreen in windows for quite a few years now that wasn't a result of something such as a failing power supply or an unseated component. The weakest stability factor in any OS is still it's end user.

          As far as the comment made earlier on commercial software being more stable on linux that is a real hit or miss. Ultimately it's the application code and the quality of the port that determines it's stability. Maya for example suffers from flakyness on linux vs it's windows or mac os counterparts as did Pro/E. These apps did not suffer from driver issues but just bad porting in general. Maya's rendering backend does seem to be more reliable then it's windows counterpart but the gui is totally the opposite (not to mention looking and feeling like it's still 1995 with the tcl/tk ui).

          While MS does take more of a reactive approach to bugs, linux isn't that proactive either. The only ones that are really proactive in bug squashing and security issues seems to be the BSD crowd (aka the masterbating monkeys).

          Comment


          • #35
            Well... if we're already at it:

            Originally posted by galynda View Post
            If the day ever did come when there was enough people using Linux to make it worth the while for the hackers/criminals, rest assured, you would no longer have that excuse to throw at Windows users, because Linux would be getting targeted by the hackers as well, the only reason it doesn't now is that comparatively speaking, no one uses Linux (</= 1% FACT)
            I think hacking Linux is actually more appealing to hackers, as somebody who'd find a way to get root permissions via a security flaw in the Linux kernel would get damn much reputation in the scene. That argument has been brought up so many times now, and I never really thought it holds.
            Also, Linux and *BSD are still the number one decision for servers, did I miss anything or don't crackers care about servers anymore?

            However.. back to "topic":
            Linux for my needs is just sooo great, but its greatest bottlenecks IMO are:
            - the graphics stack is just... crap... (including the situation about binary blobs)
            - which brings me to the kernel and distro policy about binary elements... Honestly, Linux is about freedom, and if some people want a 100% free system: Okay, but now the other people have no freedom of choice to pick a binary driver
            - sound... pulseaudio improved that, but it just seems like a dirty hack. Application developers still don't have a feature rich and clean API
            - range of software: it's good to have an alternative for many Windows applications, but what do we need 3 or 4 which do all the same? Ah yeah, one that uses GTK and one that uses QT, perhaps another one using wxWidgets...

            Wow, when I come to think about it I really get the feeling Linux is crap
            However, we all know that things are improving and just because there are a lot of disadvantages, that doesn't mean there aren't advantages, too

            Comment


            • #36
              Originally posted by deanjo View Post
              Well it's all very dependent on the hardware and software being used. Windows as an OS has been very stable for quite some time now. A lot of the "linux is way more stable then windows" rhetoric is as outdated as the "linux is hard to use" crud. I haven't seen a bluecreen in windows for quite a few years now that wasn't a result of something such as a failing power supply or an unseated component. The weakest stability factor in any OS is still it's end user.

              As far as the comment made earlier on commercial software being more stable on linux that is a real hit or miss. Ultimately it's the application code and the quality of the port that determines it's stability. Maya for example suffers from flakyness on linux vs it's windows or mac os counterparts as did Pro/E. These apps did not suffer from driver issues but just bad porting in general. Maya's rendering backend does seem to be more reliable then it's windows counterpart but the gui is totally the opposite (not to mention looking and feeling like it's still 1995 with the tcl/tk ui).

              While MS does take more of a reactive approach to bugs, linux isn't that proactive either. The only ones that are really proactive in bug squashing and security issues seems to be the BSD crowd (aka the masterbating monkeys).

              I've got different feeling. I 'use' Win xp (I don't have even my wireless card configured on it right now) for games and Linux for everything else. XP crashed frequently and some time ago, when I had internet connection configured, it crashed just few seconds after launching a boinc manager. On Linux I can run boinc and launch a game at the same time and it's stable as nothing else. An only reason when Linux crashed were nvidia binary blobs. Btw. you could hang this masterbating monkeys system by typing simple command some time ago.

              "linux is way more stable then windows" rhetoric is as outdated as the "linux is hard to use" crud.
              It depends on lot of factors - binary blobs, resistance for broken hardware etc. And Linux is still hard to use for some people.

              EDIT:

              @NeoBrain

              PulseAudio is crap. It takes about 10% of CPU on my box when game is running.
              Last edited by kraftman; 01-17-2009, 12:52 PM.

              Comment


              • #37
                Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                PulseAudio is crap. It takes about 10% of CPU on my box when game is running.
                Yeah, that's why I called it a hack - It does things which are self-evident on other platforms, i.e. make it possible for all apps to run with any sound driver. On top of that, it's actually still more in a development status (it doesn't even provide bass adjustment, setting up surround is a pain, etc) but is already used by most major distros (Ubuntu afaik, Fedora; Debian doesn't use it I think, and that for good reasons)

                Comment


                • #38
                  Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                  I've got different feeling. I 'use' Win xp (I don't have even my wireless card configured on it right now) for games and Linux for everything else. XP crashed frequently and some time ago, when I had internet connection configured, it crashed just few seconds after launching a boinc manager. On Linux I can run boinc and launch a game at the same time and it's stable as nothing else. An only reason when Linux crashed were nvidia binary blobs. Btw. you could hang this masterbating monkeys system by typing simple command some time ago.

                  It depends on lot of factors - binary blobs, resistance for broken hardware etc. And Linux is still hard to use for some people.
                  That's exactly what I mean, a lot of people blame the OS when stability issues are a result not so much the OS but supporting software. Crappy code exists in all forms including opensource. Bad code is just bad code period. The systems out there vary so greatly that YMMV on any OS. You haven't heard for example Windows "bricking" hardware but that has happened recently in linux despite it's being opensource. There has been tones of bad code out there that causes all kinds of stability issues, if there wasn't you wouldn't see huge bugfixes constantly in kenel changelog for example, if it was bug free all you would see in those logs would be enhancements and features being added.

                  Comment


                  • #39
                    Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                    There has been tones of bad code out there that causes all kinds of stability issues, if there wasn't you wouldn't see huge bugfixes constantly in kenel changelog for example, if it was bug free all you would see in those logs would be enhancements and features being added.
                    Yeah, because there are tones of supported architectures . And those huge bugfixes can be in great way just better replacements for old code.

                    Comment


                    • #40
                      Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                      Yeah, because there are tones of supported architectures . And those huge bugfixes can be in great way just better replacements for old code.
                      The can be just replacements for better code but there are many issues past and present that that are a "oops, that was bad regression". Heck Linus even made a comment to that effect in the last LKML kernel release message. Shit in will always result in shit out.

                      Comment


                      • #41
                        Originally posted by deanjo View Post
                        The can be just replacements for better code but there are many issues past and present that that are a "oops, that was bad regression". Heck Linus even made a comment to that effect in the last LKML kernel release message. Shit in will always result in shit out.
                        Definitely...there needs to be better testing and debugging of code submitted.

                        Comment


                        • #42
                          I bet that if we had a similar public changelog from all vendors, including Microsoft, it would look equally bad

                          Comment


                          • #43
                            Originally posted by curaga View Post
                            I bet that if we had a similar public changelog from all vendors, including Microsoft, it would look equally bad
                            Equally? Wishful thinking

                            Comment


                            • #44
                              Originally posted by kraftman View Post
                              Equally? Wishful thinking

                              Your right, closed source corporate development does have better bugtracking then what is typically found in opensource projects. Patches and shit in a corporate development team isn't spread through a bugzilla db, forums, mailing lists, blogs, etc. They are usually more organized then their open counterparts.

                              Comment


                              • #45
                                I understand the OP's frustration. I recognize it and dare I say, it's of a frustrated Linux user who has given up. If he was hired to rant, well, it doesn't change anything really.

                                He was right in one respect, bashing the poster doesn't do Linux any favours. Think about it: he is not going to convince anyone to drop Linux. Most people in 'Linux-oriented' forums are die-hards and most are adept enough at it despite whatever issues they run into. A small, minute minority might look at the post and think he has a point but if you have trouble with Linux, you'll give up because you're too frustrated not because of some rant you might agree with.

                                My point is that Linux is great but the fact remains, the corporate computer world supports Windows and that does contribute to the differences. If you were paid a hundred grand a year to support Windoze software, you probably would do a more substantial job than if you are doing it more or less for yourself and you can decide when to work or how to do it. In the Windows world, Mikeysoft says 'jump' to their employees and they say in response: "how high?!?" Microsoft has marketing and corporate support and most of Linux doesn't, save Canonical and RedHat. Linux developers have to reverse-engineer a lot of hardware/drivers and Windows/Microsoft has the info in front of them. If I'm wrong or inaccurate, please correct me. This is a noob's P.O.V. and I'm trying to be objective.

                                I've had experiences in which I've been so frustated, I wanted to throw in the towel but I kept telling myself, that Linux had its advantages and in the long run, it's probably a bad situation or development if there is no competition to Microsoft. Let's face it.

                                Comment

                                Working...
                                X