What's Keeping You On Windows?

schnell asks: "Here's something I've wondered about for a long time. While it seems that the majority of Slashdot readers are no fans of Microsoft, recent polls show that 47% of Slashdot Users are using Windows as their main OS (and I bet that number is much higher in server logs). So I have a two-fold question: 1) Is it just the 'vocal minority' that favors alternate OSes over Linux and 2) if not, what's keeping you from 'putting your money where your mouth is' - why are you using Windows? My own situation is that I use an IT-mandated Win98 (ugh) laptop at work, but at home I'm Mac OS X all the way. While I did pay Microsoft for Office for Mac, I try to avoid filling their coffers whenever possible, so for all the family/friends who rely on me for computer recommendations I recommend Mac or Linux. Do people like using Windows? Are games the driving factor? Or is it just 'the right tool for the job?'" It's a perennial question, and one that is fitting to review every so often, if only to see how far Open Source has come, and how far it needs to go.

Comments

What keeps me on windows?

[Real World Stuff]

Why the Microsoft ads on Slashdot of course!

Brought to you by the Friday Burn!

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[comradebren]

i just want to help keep the economy afloat, and microsoft employees out of the unemployment line.

Re:What Keeps Me on Windows?

[unsinged int]

which are a neccesity(namely certain CD-R software, and file-sharing software).

Ever heard of grip or gtk-gnutella?

Re:What Keeps Me on Windows?

[Auckerman]

I'm sitting at an OS X machine in a multi-lingual institute. Each user has the ability to choose language preferences for their desktop/apps, and even set an order of preferences if the language they desire isn't available for a specific App. The Chinese, Japanese, and Thai nationals I work with, use OS X to send and receive all their e-mails back home and not a single one users any of the Win2K or XP machines for Asian language input. Not knowing any asian languages myself, I can't speak directly about it, but I have not heard a complaint from them.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[dhsmith]

Funny you should mention the Photoshop vs Gimp thing. Photoshop is the thing that keeps me on Windows. I've been using it for my graphics stuff for about 7 years now.

Recently I needed to do some graphic work and didn't have access to Photoshop so I downloaded the Gimp. Honestly, I hated it. But I've been exploring it's features off and on for a couple of weeks now and I'm starting to find that the Gimp is not as weak imitation of Photoshop as I thought. All of the most important tools are there, and the majority of them work as well as the ones in Photoshop.

Basically I'm finding out that the Gimp is indeed suitable for many kinds of real work.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Anonymous Coward]

Exactly. I actually agree with both of the above. For print work, Gimp sucks ass compared to Photoshop. For most web stuff, it's nearly equal (but not quite). For me, personally, it's far better than Photoshop due to the price tag. As always, use what's best for you.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Malcolm Scott]

Gimp is an incredibly weak imitation of Photoshop. It's not suitable for any real work.

I beg to differ. I do a fair amount of graphics work, and I find The Gimp indispensible. It's as complete, functional, and feature-rich as anything else I've used. Admittedly, for a first-time user, the interface is terrible - it took me a long time to get to grips with it. But it was worth the effort.

I even use The Gimp as my graphics tool of choice when forced onto Windows.

AFAICS, Gimp's only major shortcoming is in printing. I generally need a little more control over my printouts than a standard "Print X Copies to Printer Y [OK]" box.

Re:What Keeps Me on Windows?

[cuyler]

I'm not sure if the CD-R software would work but I've have a lot of success with win4lin when I need a piece of windows software run.

There are two big disadvantages. First, this software doesn't help run directx (or any 3d) games but that's what I use winex for. Secondly, it requries a windows license. Chances are that you have one - regardless of if you want to or not.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[ChannelX]

Of course what is even more amusing is that Photoshop is not the only, nor necessarily best, tool for web graphics. I think Fireworks is a far better tool for web work than Photoshop (or ImageReady) though its far from free ;)

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Alex Belits]

AFAICS, Gimp's only major shortcoming is in printing. I generally need a little more control over my printouts than a standard "Print X Copies to Printer Y [OK]" box.

Then change the printer type from "Postscript" to whatever hardware you use, and discover that gimp-print will do all that stuff better than Windows drivers would (not necessarily faster though).

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[facelessnumber]

Photoshop kept me on Windows for a long time. The interface is the only thing that really bugged me about GIMP. Having used Photoshop for about as long as you have, it just never occured to me that I should right-click on my work to save it. Maybe it would if GIMP didn't have a "File" menu in plain sight already. Then I might have thought to look for the option that way, but at first I didn't. Once I learned that "works like Photoshop" doesn't mean "acts like Photoshop" I started liking it a lot more. I still prefer Photoshop, but it's not what keeps my machine booting Windows; it's what keeps me using VMware.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[ruriruri]

It's not suitable for any real work.

i think you're mostly right, but when it comes to designing icons for the web, gimp equals or exceeds photoshop. admittedly this is one of the simplest tasks (from a technical viewpoint) for a raster program.

on the other hand, if you want to take full advantage of your tablet, photoshop is it.

and speaking of that, two major improvements in the unstable 1.3.x gimp are redone XInput support and, finally, CMYK color space. what i'd really like to see is an improved bezier curve editor. raster and vector programs are evolving into single combined entities. be nice if gimp was there too...

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[angel'o'sphere]

the interface is terrible

Yes. Thats the problem. A friend of mine was telling me that I had at least to admit that at least GIMP was a GNU software wich rocked.

Sorry. Its the terribelst thing I've ever seen.

a) the UI is UGLY, *U*G*L*Y*.
b) everybody claiming that GTK is FAST, .... we had that discussion in QT versus GTK ... well, GIMP on my machine is not only UGLY, its incredible slow in window redraws and menu openings.
c) Linux simply offers NOTHING windows does not offer as well.

History:

I admined about 40 SunOS 4.3 and 20 DEC Ultrix machines. I worked with slackware linux kernel version 0.91 or 0.93. My first "big computer" after my Apple ][ clone was a Mac.

I do not switch to linux for three reasons:

i) everything which is unique on linux (and good working versus other OSes implementation) does
-- not interest me (I do no video editing)
-- is incredible difficult to use (e.g. GIMP)

ii) I have a running Windows system. Why should I kick everything I have on it?

iii) everything which is similar on linux, KDE for example, I allready have on Windows.

Well, I come from MAC. I go back to MAC now where it runs basicly NeXT Step/OS X (BSD).

The whole GNU/Linux movement just behaves as if 30 years of user interface design research never had happened.

One third just does what it likes.
One third sticks to old standards because they think better a standard than nothing (X11/Motive)
One third coppies primaryly the bad examples of Windows(KDE).

None of them can get me into the hazzle of wasting 3 or 4 hours installation of a dual boot system.

Furthermore: how to configure a linuy system?

Its not like BSD, its not like System V, its not like AIX, its not like Solaris.

Even worse: every linux system thinks it has invented the holy gral of how to admin a system.

Today I try to work with Mandrake(my DSL router is a mandrake system) tomorrow I like to use Suse.

I can not copy a single config file from Mandrake to my Suse System ... because both keep their config data in totaly different stores.

BTW: GIMP, how do you draw a straight line? Start point -> End Point?

You cant do that without reading the manual. The simplest thing, the first thing every user attempts, is impossible without reading the manual.

And in the manual you can not look under: line, straight line or something. No, you have to read it from front to end to stumble over the point where you finaly figure that you have to use the alt key.

I have to admind, I did not figure that my own, no, I had to ask one.

I spend 3 or 4 hours with GIMP, trying to make some smal PNGs. I gave up.

Well, now you come and tell me: most is OS or even GPL; take it and change it.

Sorry, YOU wrote it. If you like ME to USE it, write it in a way that I want to USE it.

If the surface of your software sucks, I do not even like to look into the source code.

Yes, when I work on *nix I use VI.

regards,
angel'o'sphere

Re:What Keeps Me on Windows?

[Spunk]

What about Asian-based distros? Red Flag, for example.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Theom]

Gimp is an incredibly weak imitation of Photoshop. It's not suitable for any real work.

So movies aren't real work?

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Ponty]

Maybe I'm the only one left, but I can't fathom printing from Photoshop _or_ the Gimp. That's what your page layout program is for. If you care enough to waste paper and ink/toner on something, you should care enough to put it on the page properly. I have once (just once) in ten years of doing this semi-professionally, printed something from Photoshop. I quickly realized what a mistake that was and have had no need to go back.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[1lus10n]

"I can not copy a single config file from Mandrake to my Suse System ... because both keep their config data in totaly different stores."

thats wrong. if you switch from SuSe to Gentoo or Gentoo to Redhat , you can VERY EASILY copy/keep your (standard.) configs. if your having a problem finding it do '$ locate x.conf' wala copy your old config over the new one. [dont forget to make a backup]

(obviously this only applies to things that are availible on EVERY distro. (and are standard) such as xfree configs , sendmail, or .bashrc etc....)

copying a redhat specific config to slackware wont do you much more good than it would for you to copy a windows XP config to a windows 95 box. or a 3.1 config to a 2k box.

obviosly the "well engineered" projects will make/keep standard configs/backwards compatibility (to a certain degree anyway.)

oh and one more thing ---- once LSB becomes more common and people *cough* REDHAT *cough* stop bastardizing everything then what will your reason be ?

"ii) I have a running Windows system. Why should I kick everything I have on it?"

probably the same reason most people do - it sucks. face it windows is good only for people who turn their PC's off at night and use them one hour a day. (and gamers) windows allows you NO GROWTH. they think they should control your whole damn system. when you update , how you update, what you update.(even if it breaks the hell out of something) do they control everything yet ? nope. will they ? probably , has long has people like you keep paying to upgrade to the next security bug.

and no i dont do windows. havent touched windows in over 2 years, and probably never will again.

oh and let me ask you something.
when you first started learning on a computer did you automatically "know" everything about it ? or did you have to learn about it ? did you sometimes get frustrated ? okay if you are like most people you got frustrated, confused etc. so why is it you expect to learn a completely new OS/setup and not have the same problems ?

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[coryboehne]

What? What _new_ technology has M$ made? They
only steal technology from others, bastardize it,
then pass it off as there own. Please enlighten us
to the "Technology" that M$ has contributed to the
world.

If by bastardize it you mean change it to suit their needs, the needs of their users, and make several big improvements - you are very right...

You see, the problem with your comment is that it's way too left-wing to ever be completely true, while Microsoft has definately done some things that are a bit (ok, in some cases a lot) underhanded, that doesn't have anything to do with the quality of their software, which is getting better every release and starting to rival Linux on several very important issues.

On a different note: There are currently 1847 comments on this story, a few more and it's on the HOF list.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Please. There's so much work going on in visual effects these days that you can find a few examples of every tool, no matter how shabby, being used on some major feature film. Seriously, somebody out there used Corel Draw or Paint Shop Pro on FOTR. That doesn't mean anything.

When Gimp has replaced After Effects, Photoshop, Shake, Inferno, or any the other high-end tools for compositing, we'll have something to talk about. Until then, this example is just plain meaningless.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[accessdeniednsp]

Three words for you:

RedHat Linux 8.0

(ok the last one was a floating point integer, but you get the idea)

It addresses every issue you pointed above. I challenge you to install RedHat 8. I'm certain that each of your points above have been addressed and a solution is available.

Happy Hacking!

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Twirlip of the Mists]

First of all: remember my last post. I said that the use of a tool in visual effects means nothing. There's so much work going on that every tool will be used by some group of people in the industry.

Second: desktop Linux at places like Dreamworks and ILM is based on the "economy of scale" model. The first Linux workstation they deployed at ILM cost them a fortune; none of the graphics drivers worked properly, there were NFS bugs out the wazoo, the list goes on. They spent a ton of money sorting out those problems, so the first Linux workstation deployed at ILM cost them dearly even before you figure in the man-years spent trying to find, port, or build tools that worked worth a damn. But the hundredth Linux workstations is cheap, because the software is free and the hardware is commodity. Linux on the desktop at places like DD, Dreamworks, ILM, Pixar, Disney is an economic choice, nothing more.

To put it another way, Linux is cheap enough, being free, to justify the vast amount of work those places had to put into it. But the numbers don't start making sense until you get up into the hundreds of instances.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[shellbeach]

BTW: GIMP, how do you draw a straight line? Start point -> End Point?

You cant do that without reading the manual. The simplest thing, the first thing every user attempts, is impossible without reading the manual.

No, I'm sorry, but I worked it out instantly - you use the pencil or the paint tool, click at the start point and hold down shift ... you see the outline that shows you where the line is with a cross at the pointer ... then click again and you've drawn a line. But it gets better! Hold down shift again and you'll get a straight line from the last point ... and you can keep doing this all day if you want.

Now, you say this isn't intuitive? But then how do you select a block of files in a file manager? You select the start point, hold down shift and select the end point, and all the files in between are selected. How do you select a block of text? You click the start point, hold down shift and click the end point, and all the characters in between are selected. So what more obvious way to paint all the pixels between two points than to use click, shift-click? How could it be easier?

(Don't know where you got that stuff about the alt key from, btw ... alt gives you the colour picker tool ... :)

BTW - how do you change the dpi of a graphic in Photoshop? Ever tried it? Or tried looking it up in the help system, either? Did that make sense to you any less than drawing a straight line in the Gimp?

Each to his own, I guess, and if you're happy paying thousands of dollars for photoshop then it's your loss. (mind you, I also don't see why you'd use VI when there's a far better and open-sourced editor called VIM, so maybe you just like closed-source software or something ... :)

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[AstroDrabb]

M$ does _nothing_ to suit thier users.
Are you telling me their DRM crap is for users?
What about them forcing users to agree to a new
EULA that gives them the right to control/access
your PC? If you don't agree to the EULA, well
no new service pack for you. When they change
protocals or API's it has nothing to do with
their users. It is to allow them to knock
off any competition. This way no other software
is compatible and people have no choice but to
use M$. Name _ONE_ great product/protocal/etc that M$ has come up with? Look at their
SMB/NetBIOS crap. It is the most insecure
networking protocol around. They took BSD sockets and made them not standard. I am a programmer
and work with this everyday. To someone who
has used win95/win98, yes, 2k/xp is a big leap
forword in stabillity. M$ has been around
_a lot_ longer then Linux. Linux on the other
hand is very new in terms of an OS. It has advanced incredibly fast. It is more stable,
robust, and most importantly, it is non-proprietary. I have yet to encounter one
thing I can do in M$ that I cannot do in Linux.
People whine that Linux is harder to setup/etc.
This is just not true. It is just _different_.
People are so use to the M$ way that Linux
seems hard.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[ChannelX]

That designer was smoking crack then. Especially on v3 of Fireworks they made it *very* similar to Photoshop (so much so they got sued). Similar layout, menus, etc. That designer was just some doofus ;)

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[fferreres]

512 MB ram cost US$50, give me a break... :)

Re:What Keeps Me on Windows?

[ozbird]

I'd really, *really* like Unix (Linux, Solaris etc.) to support arbitrary non-English languages as simply as Windows. While you can display the fonts easily enough with Mozilla etc. but you can't print it!

The closest I've come so far is using the Solaris supplied (and well-hidden) copy of Xprt - it will at least print the characters instead of empty boxes, but ithasarealproblemwithspacesandformating. I've had to give in and install Windows for this role to keep the users happy. :-(

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Pooua]

Assertion: "What _new_ technology has M$ made? They only steal technology from others, bastardize it, then pass it off as there own."

Rebuttal: If by bastardize it you mean change it to suit their needs, the needs of their users, and make several big improvements - you are very right...

I am not certain where you are coming from, but it is an indisputable fact that Microsoft rarely (if ever) invents the technology that it markets. Back in the mid-90s, industry pundits used the term, "leveraging" to describe this behavior. Examples are, of necessity, numerous. Here are a few examples off the top of my head, that every computer hobbiest should know:

1) DOS and Windows both contain code originally written by Digital Research for CP/M. In fact, DOS is a CP/M clone, re-compiled for the 16-bit microcomputer.

"on July 24, 1996, Caldera Inc. filed a private Federal Antitrust Lawsuit against Microsoft Corp. for alleged illegal activities and unfair practices in the marketing of MS-DOS and its successors, including Windows 95 and Windows 98, both of which are still Digital Research CP/M at their essential core. The lawsuit was settled out of court in January 2000 at which time Microsoft Corporation agreed to certain terms and paid certain funds to Caldera Inc."

CP/M: The First PC Operating System

2) Visual Basic was derived from the work of Alan Cooper (aka, "The Father of Visual Basic"), who had created a new Windows shell he called, "Tripod." Microsoft bought Tripod from Alan Cooper and code named it, "Ruby."

Why I am called "the Father of Visual Basic"

3) File compression had a rough birth into Microsoft's official OS distribution. Originally, Microsoft did not offer any data compression utilities, but several other companies did. One company, named, "Stac," lent their disk compression utility for Microsoft to evaluate. Microsoft included Stac's code in MS-DOS 6.0, but Stac sued, claiming that there was no licensing agreement for distribution (IBM also included Stac's code in PC-DOS, but they had a distribution license, and so were not sued). The two companies settled out of court. Microsoft initially pulled its disk compression software off the market, but then returned it after the settlement.

You see, the problem with your comment is that it's way too left-wing to ever be completely true

Left Wing or not, he is reasonably accurate.

while Microsoft has definately done some things that are a bit (ok, in some cases a lot) underhanded, that doesn't have anything to do with the quality of their software,

Stating that Microsoft has not invented the technology it markets is not the same thing as claiming that the quality of their product is poor.

which is getting better every release and starting to rival Linux on several very important issues.

Considering that Microsoft had about a 15-year head start over Linux, you make a sad statement.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[coryboehne]

Ok, where do I start...

First off, I'm not arguing where their ideas / peices of source code come from, I'm only saying that they almost never take something without making significant changes to it (and these are generally very self serving, ie. make it work the way we want it to and the users want it to)

This entire thread is entitled "What's keeping you on Windows?" From reading the comments below, it seems that quality is a major player here.

Wow! I never knew that Microsoft was started around 1954! Because you do know that Linux is just another Unix (ohhhhh, gonna get flamed for that one) varient, and Unix was first created in 1969 by Ken Thompson.... Or maybe you did'nt know that and you really did think all this started in 1995......

I wouldn't take such a shitty tone, but you're attacking my intelligence and creditability here and I don't take that so very lightly.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Linux works for me, and I only have a couple of computers. So much for the "economy of scale" theory.

How much time are you willing to invest in setting up, maintaining, troubleshooting (when necessary), and just generally fiddling with your computers? If you're an average person, or a business, the amount is zero, modulo whatever maintenance and overhead might be unavoidable.

I'll bet you're willing to spend a heck of a lot more time fiddling with your computers than zero.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Pooua]

First off, I'm not arguing where their ideas / peices of source code come from, I'm only saying that they almost never take something without making significant changes to it (and these are generally very self serving, ie. make it work the way we want it to and the users want it to)

Why do you differentiate between "we" and "users" in your statement?

I would appreciate it if you would provide an example, because I am at a loss for one. In the examples I provided, Microsoft did not change the way the user interacts with the programs. Many of the changes that Microsoft makes to software is not to improve functionality, but to break compatibility (i.e., make the code proprietary).

This entire thread is entitled "What's keeping you on Windows?" From reading the comments below, it seems that quality is a major player here.

Quality has nothing to do with the fact that Microsoft is "leveraging" other people's work.

Wow! I never knew that Microsoft was started around 1954! Because you do know that Linux is just another Unix [www.cnam.fr] (ohhhhh, gonna get flamed for that one) varient,

You should be flamed, because Linux is not a UNIX variant. Linux is POSIX-compliant, and all POSIX-compliant OSes can interchange software (after recompiling). Coincidentally, most versions of UNIX are also POSIX-compliant. However, it is possible to make any OS POSIX-compliant (including Microsoft Windows). That doesn't mean those OSes are variations of UNIX. None of the code in Linux came from UNIX. Linux was written from scratch.

"Linux is not Unix! Unix is a proprietary OS, and its code can only be licensed by large companies. Linux is close to Unix in terms of architecture, because the same concepts were used to design both OS's. Linux is POSIX* compatible, so it is able to run the same software as the other Unix variants (HP-UX from Hewlett-Packard, AIX from IBM or Solaris from Sun for example); you just have to recompile your source code on a Linux machine."

Linux Pages for Beginners

and Unix was first created in 1969 by Ken Thompson.... Or maybe you did'nt know that and you really did think all this started in 1995......

Actually, Linus began working on his OS in 1991:

Date: 25 Aug 91 20:57:08 GMT
Organization: University of Helsinki

"Hello everybody out there using minix - I'm doing a (free) operating system (just a hobby, won't be big and professional like gnu) for 386(486) AT clones. This has been brewing since april, and is starting to get ready. I'd like any feedback on things people like/dislike in minix, as my OS resembles it somewhat (same physical layout of the file-system (due to practical reasons) among other things). I've currently ported bash(1.08) and gcc(1.40), and things seem to work....

"PS. Yes - it's free of any minix code, and it has a multi-threaded fs."

History of Linux

I wouldn't take such a shitty tone, but you're attacking my intelligence and creditability here and I don't take that so very lightly.

I am not intending to attack you personally, but I am sensitive to the mis-portrayal of the computer industry by certain political segments. My own sister, who otherwise knew virtually nothing about computers, dogmatically asserted to me that the only reason that Microsoft was being sued was its competitors were jealous. The reason she took that position is her conservative leadership told her these things, and she believed them. This is the same line that Rush Limbaugh and Libertarian commentators take-- and it's all political hysteria, spread by people who don't know and usually don't care about the accuracy of their statements.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Twirlip of the Mists]

No, you're misinterpreting. Linux, as a desktop operating system, won't be worth using until:

1. It's stable. The nightmare that was the 2.4 release family must never be repeated.

2. It's documented. There must be no more "coming soon!" pages in the documentation.

3. It's easy to use. KDE and Gnome need to be scrapped and replaced with a consistent, intuitive desktop environment.

4. It includes key features like color space management, intelligent typography, unified audio and video frameworks, a unified printing model, and some sort of display list rendering technology like PostScript or PDF.

That's just the short list; I didn't spend any time on it, so I'm quite certain it's not exhaustive. Until Linux has these, and other, critical features, there's simply no reason to even consider using it.

The hobbyists of the world will probably never understand that people don't want to use an operating system that's incomplete and inconsistent. Since the community has a terrible track record for completeness and consistency, Linux will never be more than a niche operating system.

It just doesn't offer anything at all to compel one to use it.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[ukyoCE]

Yea, not to mention:
Internet Explorer (netscape, opera),
MSN Messenger (AIM, of course),
Hotmail (bought, right?),
DirectX (opengl),
MSN (just another isp, but i expect some day they'll use some monopoly leverage to force people to use it) .NET (this is a ripoff of Java, right?)
ActiveX,VBscript (javascript, if i'm not mistaken)
Windows Media Player (expanded to copy Winamp)

Those are just off the top of my head, i might have the Java+javascript ripoffs mixed up, but i know Sun had to sue them and all for taking Java and adding MS proprietary non-platform-independent extensions.

So, what you have here is MS sees some good software, makes a near-exact copy of it, and starts including it in their OS. IE, Media Player and Windows Media files, Messenger, hotmail, etc. How is a company like Netscape or AIM supposed to compete when MS can not only charge money for their products, but also *force* everyone to buy their products, whether they use them or not.
(you know all these "free" MS products are being paid for by the increasing price of Windows, right?)

Yet people pretend like MS is a good-guy in wanting AIM to share its userbase with MSN Messenger. bullshit. Within a year of AIM opening their userbase, MSN Messenger would have most of the userbase due to it being shipped with Windows, and Microsoft would feel the sudden need to break the compatibility for some BS reason. Result? MS just used its monopoly to take over Instant Messenging. Thank god AOL is working its damnedest to keep MS away. I somehow don't think MSN will be too kind to letting GAIM use its network after its taken over the IM world. Just another technology in addition to web browsing, video gaming, word processing, and all the others, that MS wants to turn into their own proprietary format to force people into continuing to use Windows.

Of course its hard to blame MS for doing these things. After all, corporations exist only to profit, not to do good for mankind. But the government has already taken way too long to break MS up, and now it looks like MS might just get a slap on the wrist. Kindof like how the government was trying the music industry for price-fixing, but instead settled for some $$$. Leaving the record industry, i'm sure, wringing their greedy hands and laughing, saying "ha! that isn't even half the profit we made from price-fixing!"

The government needs to go after these monopolies and other BAD companies and FIX them instead of charging them money for being unethical/illegal.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[facelessnumber]

Works great for me - I do have 512mb, but only a quarter of that's allocated to VMware. If you're not sucking up most of that 128mb in the background running Gator, ICQ banner ads, a monstrous WinAmp 3 skin, Bonzi Buddy and AOL then you're fine. The trick to VMware is using a minimal Windows installation, running as few apps as possible and doing everything else in the host OS. I have three monitors configured without Xinerama, I run Vncviewer in fullscreen mode on the right side with VMware minimized so that I can share the mouse easily and still see my images in the proper size, and Windows still is actually running faster under VMware than it did natively because of its relatively basic "hardware" and low-calorie environment.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Pooua]

Why do I even bother arguing with an AOL user?

That's a cop-out. If your argument has merit, you need to support it. Your statement looks like you simply refuse to acknowledge the weakness of your own argument, and the strength of mine.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Pooua]

Yea, not to mention: Internet Explorer (netscape, opera)

I thought about including MS Internet Explorer, because it is such a great example of so much that is wrong with the business and society.

Microsoft Internet Explorer is based on the free-but-copyrighted code of Mosaic. If you go up to the "Help" button in IE and click on "About Internet Explorer," you will get the following blurb:

"Based on NCSA Mosaic. NCSA Mosaic(TM); was developed at the National Center for Supercomputing Applications at the University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign."

Now, at the time that Microsoft copied this code, Netscape had almost all the market share for Web browsers. But, what most people don't realize, a Web browser is only one side of the equation. There has to be a Web server on the other side, for the browser to work, by plugging into it and passing commands.

I remember listening to Rush Limbaugh as this issue came to public attention. He asked what the problem was, when Netscape was also free. Apparently, Rush didn't understand that Netscape's browser was not free--it was shareware, which meant people could use it for a few weeks to see if they liked it, then register it for $75 or so. Netscape didn't worry itself too much whether users actually registered their copy of the browser. The real money was in the Web server software that Netscape sold.

Microsoft initially downplayed the importance of the Internet, completely ignoring it in public. It wasn't until it suddenly released its free Web browser (based on the copyrighted code it took from NCSA) that it acknowledged the Internet had a future. All the Lim-zombies cheered that Microsoft deserved market dominance, that if the local gas station were to give away gas, they would be right there to fill their tank, and so what if the competitors went bankrupt. To these people, the battle was entirely between Netscape's Web browser and Microsoft's Web browser. What the Limbaughites neglected was the Web server, where the real money was made.

Microsoft did its thing in the Web browser area, putting in proprietary codes that only its free browser could understand. More and more people began using Microsoft's Web browser, which wouldn't work very well with Netscape's servers. Of course, Netscape's browsers wouldn't work very well with Microsoft's Web server, either. The solution to resolving this stalemate was getting people to use Microsoft's browser, instead of Netscape's, and the key was, of course, illegal bundling of Microsoft's browser with Microsoft's OS. Long before the courts ever reached a verdict, Netscape went bankrupt, and all those Libertarians and talk show hosts were too ignorant to know what happened. Microsoft's lawsuit was trimmed back to little more than a promise not to do it again, and the Conservatives (most of them, anyway, for I am a Conservative) cheered the success of the free market system and its level playing field. What a bunch of morons!

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[coryboehne]

You see, your argument does not have "strength" it simply has stubborness.

You refuse to admit that many parts of linux are incredibly similar (even identical in some respects) to Unix. As a matter of a fact, since it was only roughly based on Unix (read minix for the hopelessly anal) your argument that it was actually started around 1991 (the first public announcement and availability) then obviously Windows XP (which uses only small parts of the previous software) was started in 1999, therefore linux still has a full eight year head start, not the fifteen year gap favoring Microsoft that you would prefer to have us believe.

You refuse to admit that micrsoft does actually make good software. Let me ask you this, do you really think marketing is the sole reason for Microsoft's success? If you do then you should take a marketing class, then you will realize that it takes much more than good marketing to get to the point that Microsoft has.

How many developers does Microsoft employ? I'm not really sure how many they have, but I am sure that it is a far smaller number than the OSS community has working on Linux alone... So using this argument why is it that many more developers working on a project can't make something far superior to Windows?

You see, I would gladly accept Linux as my only operating system if it had four things that it really needs:

1: Better development tools
2: Easier configuration
3: Superior graphical user interface
4: More compatibility with native windows applications.

In short you refuse to accept what normal people would call the rules of debate. It is much like trying to argue religion, when you see things so one-sidedly that you will never even consider other facts or make certain concessions there is no reason to even try to have a reasonable debate with you.

In fact this is the case with a small but highly vocal and aggressive part of the OSS community, and I really am sorry to say that your attitudes will (if allowed to) hinder the progress of OSS rather than encourage others to see the merits of OSS (yes, linux does have a great deal of things that I do like very much, it's just not the tool for the job that I'm doing)

So, as a thought for you: in the future it would serve you well to learn the commonly accepted rules of debate, perhaps a speech and debate class would be a good place to start. And one more cheapshot, get a real ISP....... I have a hard time really respecting someone so vocal about the evils of big corporations when they choose to use AOL for their internet service.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[program21]

3. It's easy to use. KDE and Gnome need to be scrapped and replaced with a consistent, intuitive desktop environment.

I don't think that KDE and Gnome need to be replaced by a single app; I think they need to work together, and have their apps work together. Some people swear by Gnome, others by KDE; we saw with RH8 that some people get quite upset when you take away some of what each is.
One of the big draws (for some people) is the number of choices that they have. They're not locked into using a single WM, they can select from a few.

That said, I do believe there needs to be more standardization between Gnome and KDE, so that apps written 'natively' for one will run just as well under the other. (The clipboard comes to mind for this one.)

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Pooua]

You refuse to admit that many parts of linux are incredibly similar (even identical in some respects) to Unix.

The question is not about how similar Linux is to UNIX; the question is, How odd is your statement that you think Microsoft's OSes have become almost as good as Linux? Why wouldn't Microsoft's OSes be unquestionably better all along?

As a matter of a fact, since it was only roughly based on Unix (read minix for the hopelessly anal) your argument that it was actually started around 1991 (the first public announcement and availability) then obviously Windows XP (which uses only small parts of the previous software)

That's not what Microsoft claims--they claim that Windows XP is based on the Windows NT core. BTW, Windows NT is POSIX-complient, meaning that it should be possible to run UNIX software on Windows NT with a simple recompile. Of course, there actually is not such thing as perfect portability, so some code twiddling would still be necessary.

was started in 1999, therefore linux still has a full eight year head start, not the fifteen year gap favoring Microsoft that you would prefer to have us believe.

Why quibble? Let's say that Microsoft has only a 5-year head start! Does that change the question I posed earlier? Why wouldn't Microsoft's OSes be unquestionably better than Linux all along? Doesn't that seem odd to you? Here is a company with $100 billion in assets, several hundreds of full-time, highly-paid programers working under the guidance of a man who has been programming since 1968, bested by another man who wasn't even born until 1969.

You refuse to admit that micrsoft does actually make good software.

That wasn't the question; the question was, Who invents the technology that Microsoft sells?

Let me ask you this, do you really think marketing is the sole reason for Microsoft's success?

No, of course not; suing competitors into bankruptcy, stealing code, forcing retailers to agree to illegal resale agreements and just general dirty tricks, as well as more legitimate forms of craftiness, are at least as important as marketing for Microsoft's success. Oddly, the Conservatives are completely silent when Microsoft sues competitors into bankruptcy, but highly vocal with claims that competitors are trying to sue Microsoft into bankruptcy.

If you do then you should take a marketing class, then you will realize that it takes much more than good marketing to get to the point that Microsoft has.

I never claimed otherwise.

How many developers does Microsoft employ? I'm not really sure how many they have, but I am sure that it is a far smaller number than the OSS community has working on Linux alone... So using this argument why is it that many more developers working on a project can't make something far superior to Windows?

In time, I'm sure they could. The question is, why would you say that Microsoft already has fallen behind? There weren't always thousands of programmers working on Linux; at the start (in 1991), there was just Linus working by himself. Microsoft was already 16 years old when Linus began his project. Now, a mere 11 years later, you tell me that a group of informal, part-time programmers have cobbled together an OS that is better than Microsoft's full-time efforts.

You see, I would gladly accept Linux as my only operating system if it had four things that it really needs:

1: Better development tools
2: Easier configuration
3: Superior graphical user interface
4: More compatibility with native windows applications.

Fine, those are sufficient reasons. I'm glad that you have now chosen to address the question posed in the leading post of this thread.

In short you refuse to accept what normal people would call the rules of debate. It is much like trying to argue religion, when you see things so one-sidedly that you will never even consider other facts or make certain concessions there is no reason to even try to have a reasonable debate with you.

What most people call debate is really nothing more than spin and propaganda, and I won't accept it.

one more cheapshot, get a real ISP....... I have a hard time really respecting someone so vocal about the evils of big corporations when they choose to use AOL for their internet service.

Who said that AOL is my ISP? It isn't. I only use them for one of my e-mail addresses and a Web site. I bring my own Internet access, and I have many other connections to the Internet. But, you don't expect me to publish my more valuable e-mail addresses in a public forum, do you? I expect most of my junk mail to go to my AOL address, and that is the one I use most in public. I maintain my AOL connection because it has been active for several years, and people know where to find it.

BTW, I never said anything about "the evils of big corporations." I only discussed the evils of Microsoft. Is Strawman argumentation part of your approved method of debate?

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[coryboehne]

What most people call debate is really nothing more than spin and propaganda, and I won't accept it.

Well, there you go. If I understand this correctly you're saying that you admit that you play by twisted rules, and therefore no matter how valid or potent my argument in your eyes it will always be wrong. There is obviously no point in carrying this any further, it is like trying to convince a block wall to move.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[photon317]

1) They make signicant alterations to the veneer of things perhaps, but they rarely innovate, that's his point. Even when they seem to have innovated, if you dig deep enough you usually found it came from someone else legally or illegally.

2) Windows is not quality. Nobody believes windows is a quality peice of software. The reason people continue to use Windows is software compatibility and lock-in. Software compatibility is an issue because that's how they want it to be, they've built a monoplistic empire on making sure competitors can't compete on level footing because of compatibility problems. Any computer person with half a neuron knows that a linux kernel is vastly more "quality" than windows.

3) I won't flame too hard, but Linux is not just another offspring of 60's unix code. You could make a clearer case for that argument with the *BSD family, since they are actually derived from ancient BSD code. The linux kernel was a fresh start.

4) Linux didn't start in 1995. I personally installed my first slackware linux in 1994, and at that time I remember playing with the 1.1.xx unstable kernel series that led up to linux-1.2. I'm pretty sure the first 0.x kernels were around 1991 or 1992.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[Pooua]

The question is not about how similar Linux is to UNIX; the question is, How odd is your statement that you think Microsoft's OSes have become almost as good as Linux? Why wouldn't Microsoft's OSes be unquestionably better all along?

Where the hell did I ever say that I think Microsoft's OSes have become almost as good as linux?

Your statement on Friday, November 15, @ 09:31PM was:

"while Microsoft has definately done some things that are a bit (ok, in some cases a lot) underhanded, that doesn't have anything to do with the quality of their software, which is getting better every release and starting to rival Linux on several very important issues."

(emphasis mine)

I interpret the phrase, "starting to rival Linux" to mean that Windows is not as good as Linux.

How in the hell did you get a five year head start for microsoft? I'm saying that Unix had a full 20 year headstart over windows, or linux had a full 8 year headstart over Windows XP.

Ah, yes, I misread your statement. Please forgive me.

I must, then, point out that you have a most peculiar way of looking at things. You would have us believe that Linux had a head start on Windows XP, even though Microsoft was founded in 1975, and even though Microsoft produced XENIX (a UNIX clone) in 1980, both of which were long before Linus Torvald began writing code for Linux. Again, Linux is not UNIX, and was written completely from scratch, beginning in 1991. It looks to me like Microsoft had a lot more time to develop their code leading up to Windows XP than Linus had for his code.

You are highly intent on arguing, but you are wandering from point-to-point in your efforts. You lack coherency. The original statement was,

"What _new_ technology has M$ made? They only steal technology from others, bastardize it, then pass it off as there own."

You haven't done anything to show that Microsoft develops its own technology, rather than copying it from others.

Re:What keeps me on windows?

[coryboehne]

Of course I lack coherency! I'm arguing fifteen points in as many threads... lol..

Ok, first off you didn't resort to any crap in that post, so thank you for that... you are starting to become open to discussion. I like that, now we can actually discuss. I do see how you took what I had said to mean that Windows was behind overall, this is not the case, however I did indeed mean that there are things about windows that linux is ahead by a long shot on, not the least of which is EXT2FS and the stability of the operating system. However overall I do consider Windows to be a better operating system for me to base my work on, if only because of the idiot factor, there's a lot more to it than that,,, but I don't feel like going through it.

Do you really beleve that Microsoft has never innovated? If you do beleve that then let me give you one good example, Microsoft Office... Sure, there were and still are many other Word Processors, Spreadsheets, Databases, Presentation Software etc. But until recently (KOffice, Open Office, Star Office are actually taking key from Microsoft Office) there was nothing out there that even came close to the level of interoperability that Office provides. Now, if you don't call that innovation what is? I mean in today's software world it's pretty hard to be creative to the point of really breaking new ground and doing something REALLY,REALLY different, so even small improvements are important and I do think that Microsoft has made a fair share of them (not to say that the OSS community hasn't or that the Mac PPL haven't). And really... I don't think it's possible to create any software today that someone, somewhere hasn't at least created something similar....

And, if you feel like it respond to my accusations about your other comments.. I really would like to know where some of that crap came from... Don't worry though, I forgive anything that you may regret saying, and hope that you may do the same for me.

porn

[tuanjim_2001]

porn is keping me on windows.

Re:porn

[Mandi Walls]

Time for a Porn-on-Linux HOWTO. (or Porn-on-OpenSource, maybe...or Adult-Multimedia...)

You send me your notes, I'll compile the docs.

Think the ldp would post it? I have hosting space, though, if necessary.

--mandi

ps. I do not want you to send me porn. or spam. notes on how to set up software you use for multimedia viewing on non-luser platforms only.

Re:porn

[carpe_noctem]

ps. I do not want you to send me porn. or spam.

What about spam about porn? Or porn with spam in it? Are those acceptable?

Re:porn

[Mandi Walls]

No thanks. I have this many, many, many year old Hotmail account.

I won't tell you why i registered it, but suffice to say it gets about 25 Adult-themed emails a day.

Which isn't bad considering i only ever used it with one merchant, actually. :)

So you can keep all those great offers for yourself. I won't be jealous, i promise!

--mandi

Re:porn

[Fembot]

We should go one step furthur and have Open source porn I think actualy... mmm

Re:porn

[Ctrl-Z]

Yeah, GPL isn't free as in beer; it's free as in prostitutes.

Re:porn

[ReadParse]

Anybody ever meant a male named Mandi? Could this possibly be a female offering to maintain the Porn-on-Linux HOWTO? Gentlemen, your search is over. Make your move NOW.

Re:porn

[Faux_Pseudo]

plaympeg + aalib = ascii-vision pr0n.
I do it all the time. Just make sure you have aalib installed and then compile plaympeg.
If you are going to try and watch it from an term then do this
$ OLD_DISPLAY=$DISPLAY
$ unset DISPLAY
$ plaympeg file.mpg
# then when you are done
$ export DISPLAY=$OLD_DISPLAY

also jeck out jpig on freshmeat.net for pic viewing. there are better options but that one is no fuss.

Re:porn

[Faux_Pseudo]

A friend of mine broght this too my attention. I don't see your addy. mine is easy enough to figure out. I have automated the process of porn hunting with slrnpull, uudeview, a heck of a lot of scripting, crontab, so screen tickers to tell me how many pics, vids, mp3s, etc have been downloaded. multipal spam removal featurs[0] via the custome scripting and a killfile 3 years in the makeing. If you wan't to see who I did it let me know.
I would love to paticipate in a pr0n-HOWTO

[0] I am going to have to refine this a bit because some stupid anima site keeps spaming with randome titles but the same damn images. I thinks some size checking and md5 checking on same sized files should help get ride of that.

Games

[D3]

Games, interoperability with others at work (OpenOffice is good but not a perfect replacement), and the ability to maybe get a first post? ;)

Re:Games

[israfil_kamana]

Pretty much. I just re-loaded win32 to dual boot with OpenBSD on my laptop so I can feed my addiction to Civ3. (No FreeCiv is not as fun in my view...)

Anyway, where it counts (on servers) I push open solutions where they make sense, which is in most places in an enterprise config - at least as far as my previous work-places have gone.

Re:Games

[sniggly]

games here too - although i bought winex and it does a very good job of running windows games on linux.

Linux IS my favourite quake 3 platform, it runs it much better than windows!

Re:Games

[zapfie]

Yep, games for me too. Plus I still haven't found a VB equivilant for another OS.

Re:Games

[ajs]

At work, I'm 100% Linux. I used to vmware a Windows install to view some documents, but at this point, crossover gives me access to the very few things that the Linux desktop apps can't.

Evoultion was a big step. I've used VM, mutt, elm, pine, Mozilla and none of them gave me as much power and ease of use as Evolution. Good thing too, I was a hair's width from defecting to Windows to run outlook. For all that it's a piece of crap, I needed something that didn't think of mail as a pile of text that may or may not have a tarfile attached. :)

Re:Games

[blixel]

I don't know about board games but I could go for some good old pen and paper AD&D. I was involved in a small group when I was 15 but didn't really know what I was doing... but had fun doing it anyway.

Re:Games

[seanmeister]

I still haven't found a VB equivilant for another OS.

Stay tuned!

Re:Games

[bfree]

Excuse my ignorance, but two questions.

1. Can I redistribute my python/wxWindows written apps commercially under the license of my choice (at least for my code)?
2. Does it have an IDE that comes into the same category as the VB IDE?

Now I'm using VB at present for cross-platform RAD for many reasons, including the fact that one other person who will be working on the code knows Basic only as far as programming languages are concerned and that fact alone makes VB far more _R_AD than anything else I could come up with would be. Are you really suggesting that Python/wxWindows is comparable or are you saying that you could use them to write apps?

Re:Games

[gl4ss]

yeah, here too. it's the occasional (once per 6 months) _good_ game that keeps my faster computer on windows, btw, morrowind is that game for this year.

ok. having windoze for one good game per 6-12 months is not a good excuse, but you need it to test all those crappy games too(gaming news industry is NOT reliable enough to rely on info when's the time to boot into windows.)..

dual booting is not really an option anyways since i like to keep my machines (even windoze one) on 24/7(booting win2k takes 2 to 3 minutes, way too much hassle to boot to windoze.).

one more thing... generally people do take windoze as 'free' on their home computers. if i had to shell out 400$ for xp/2k/whatever, i'd skip the (new)games and have my mental wanking with nethack instead.

Re:Games

[Minupla]

Don't forget Empire... That game has eaten way too much of my time over the years, and I still can't get past round 5 :).

Re:Games

[bfree]

After the couple of reply's to my comments I went and had a look for the IDE tools available for RAD and I was far from convinced that they came up to the level of functionality proved by the VB IDE! The main thing that I find incredibly useful is the ability to debug run the programs within the ide with breakpoints and quickwatches, though also the documentation (ok it's crazy, but it's there and does provide the information you need eventually) and it's counterpart the autocomplete/pop-up references for functions and subs. I'm certainly going to look into this further as I would love to ditch VB for the work I have to do for a Free cross-platform development tool, though I cannot realistically do this unless it is not going to severly impact the main work (RAD for windows where 99% of our customers will be). I can't afford to spend any more time than I already do with VB trying to figure out how to get the system working as I need it, and my experiences (many and widespread) of OS/FS are that getting going takes signifcantly longer (though frequently once going you can keep moving faster). It certainly doesn't help me that boaconstructor isn't packaged in debian.

Cuz of all the warez

[gambit3]

Cuz most of the warez out there is for Windoze. ;)

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[8282now]

You too can become an honest man/woman/AI too! Just remove all the WAREZ you've been running all these years and become a GNU/FSF convert and make MS, Adobe, Macromedia, etc,... happy! No more s/w pirates! Yay!! --- Support the end of warez, use free s/w! :)

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[Anonymous Coward]

d00d go here 4 sum 3l33t 0-second warez. they r so kewl they even haked the progz n got teh sorce code!!!@#!

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[8282now]

Sorry you didn't get the sarcastic intent of the comment.
The idea was to simultaneously mock the anti-warez/anti-piracy tendency of some of the major s/w houses as being counter-productive in getting mind/market share in a highly competitve market.
I too realize that many people who would never have had the opportunity (due to price) to work with some s/w packages get introduced to them through less then approved means. I know I'm hesitant to purchase s/w without there being a way to really work the system through its paces in a production environment.
I am, fortunate, to be able to use, almost exclusively, open products (LAMP) in all my personal & professional needs. As such, I advocate their use as much as I can. ... just my 2 cents worth.....

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[einhverfr]

From the original: if not, what's keeping you from 'putting your money where your mouth is' - why are you using Windows?

Gampit3's reply--
Cuz most of the warez out there is for Windoze. ;)

I was going to say something sarcastic about Linux being free (as in beer and speech), but evidently that doesn't mean much....

I guess few people put their money anywhere ;)

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[stinky wizzleteats]

Support the end of warez, use free s/w!

Actually, that is precisely the reason I switched to RH8 on both my home and office desktops. I find it impossible as a professional IT person to use Windows without having warez of some kind. Since I can't afford to run clean and green with Windows, I am switching to Linux.

Hear that, Bill?

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[Phroggy]

Cuz most of the warez out there is for Windoze. ;)

Au contraire. Granted, the tides have shifted - four years ago the availability of Mac warez was simply AMAZING while getting Windows warez was a pain in the ass; it's now much easier to get Windows warez than it was, and increasingly more annoying to find good Mac warez. Still, there's a hell of a lot out there for the Mac, and 90% of all Windows software is CRAP.

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[mccalli]

Good post. I do this now for friends who ask me to set up machines for them - I will no longer install copies of 98 or whatever it is they've got - either they have the genuine Windows install disk, or I tell them it's illegal and offer to put RedHat on instead.

I'll have to find a different distro now due to RedHat's stance on multimedia, but the princicple will stay the same. Don't want to pay for Windows? Fine. Don't use it then.

For the record I run two XP boxes - one desktop, one laptop - and a few different Linux distros courtesry of Virtual PC for Windows

Cheers,
Ian

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[Billly Gates]

I just use the fsf tools on Windows. Its great if Linix is a pain to switch to and you need windows. The win32 native Perl 5.6 is there and free as well as python,tlc/tk,gcc,vim,xemacs,mysql,openoffice,xwin dows with cgywin. I like Linux but its a pain to setup and lacks printing support for my laserjet 1000.

I have actually paid for vc++ learning addition and vb learning addition so pirating is not a big problem for me.

My other apps that I use are all freware like jtext and netbeans and openoffice. I will be seting up my old pentiumIII soon as a headless linux box connected via vnc to my w2k workstation.

The reason why I use Windows is because of support for older versions of perl and python as well as supperior installations for these tools. Just point and click setup.exe. My books I use to learn programming require python 1.5.2 as well as perl 5.6x and apache 1.3x. RH8 does not support any of these and in my opinion makes it a worse environment to run any free software then windows. All of the cpan perl modules will break by installing an older version of perl and apache 1.3x modules are not support either. I also do not like the vritual desktops being striped off as well as the "cancle" and "ok" buttons being switched to the oposite places. I have clicked "ok" several times thinking I am clicking "cancel". Redhat goes agaisnt UI standards.

Re:Cuz of all the warez

[mccalli]

One thing, tho - what's the multimedia problem with RH8? The mp3 issue?

Yes, that's it. I should probably pick a default multimedia player and install that, but on the whole I like leaving distros in their default state for new users, in order that they can get support more easily. I don't mean unconfigured - obviously I set up their mail and show them around Open Office and what have you, but I do try not to install non-standard packages on installations meant for someone else.

Cheers,
Ian

Whats keeping me on windows?

[Rooked_One]

The ability to use just about any application in a crash free environment.

I've been using win2000 since it was leaked and the only reason why it has crashed (on two completely different platforms) is becuase of bad initial drivers back in nov of 1999.

Why would I use anything else? I don't run a server.

Simple:

[Dr. Bent]

Warcraft III
...and all the other PC games that I can't do without. I'm a Java developer, so when it comes to my professional life, I couldn't care less what OS I work on (whatever's cheapest usually wins). But when it comes to my personal life, I choose Windows because I'm a gamer, and windows makes gaming easy (at least, easier than it would be on Linux or a Mac)

Re:Simple:

[Elladan]

Warcraft III works fine on Linux.

Go to www.transgaming.com

Re:Simple:

[Dr. Bent]

I'm sure it does, but what exactly are the details involved in getting it to work on Linux(Using WINE, right?) I don't know, and I don't want to bother finding out. Call me lazy if you want, but I'd rather spend my limited free time actually playing the game than doing to research to figure out how to play it on an operating system that I don't even have installed. Maybe when Win2k gets too old to use, and I have to re-install my OS anyway, I'll think about it. But until then, i'm just a lazy user who doesn't care that it's POSSIBLE to play WC3 on Linux, just that it's not as easy as Windows.

Re:Simple:

[swv3752]

The hard details-
1. Give money to Transgaming
2. Download RPM (also debs an tarballs but not used in this example)
3. install rpm (rpm -i WineX.version.i386.rpm or use double click in the file manager of choice)
4. Install Warcraft (either right click and select Open With... and choose WineX or do it command Line)
5. Follow Install Shield Wizard.
6. Use Desktop Shortcut to Launch Warcraft.

Nothing more difficult than if autoplay doesn't work in Windows.

Re:Simple:

[Guppy06]

"Warcraft III works fine on Linux."

I'm still pissed off/annoyed that I have to use runas and play the game through an account with administrative privileges. And all I have to do for that is hold down shift and right-click (I give it another week or so before I give up and just change the shortcut, but I'll still have to keep typing in the password).

Now, do you really think I have the patience to get a game to run on a non-native operating system?

Re:Simple:

[Loundry]

I don't think Warcraft III runs as fast or as easily on Linux as it does on windows. To say it "runs fine on Linux" is fair. To say that it provides the eqivalent positive experience (ignoring all of the other shitty aspects of running a Microsoft OS) as it does on Windows is not not fair. I think it is important that Linux proponents (like you and me) be honest about things like this.

work...

[miTTio]

We are windows shop, but at home its mandrake. Not like I use the computer much at home...8-10 hours at work it enough for me (and my eyes).

Re:work...

[Blimey85]

It would be the same for me except I work from home.

But it sucks when my SO gets home and wants to play network games. She doesn't understand that there is only a certain amount of computer usage that a human body should be subjected to in a 24 hour period. And that amount is considerably less if the poor guy (or gal) has to use an MS product.

Has anyone tried running Serious Sam on Linux? That's the only thing I've been booting into Windows to play lately. Now that I have my laptop for Quicken, Quickbooks, occasional IE use, and graphics... this machine stays in Linux pretty much all the time.

Re:work...

[treke]

The serious sam port hasnt been completed, it's waiting on beta testing.

Games

[jasonditz]

I do fiddle around with Linux and FreeBSD, and have boxes dedicated to both (plus a Solaris box), but my most expensive system is a Windows box. And there's one reason: games.

The fact of the matter is games are just a lot cheaper and more plentiful on Windows than on Linux, or even a Mac.

For me, it is the games.....

[crumbz]

I dual boot Linux/Windows 2000 Pro and Windows is only started for games these days. I have finally converted to most of my day to day tasks to Linux apps and am generally happy with them. I think the last time I used a Windows app was about six months ago (Excel?).

I suspect laziness is a big factor, but I think that says more about me than the typical slashdot user.

Applications, baby, applications

[tinrobot]

We do lots of graphics work here. We need all sorts of apps -- Photoshop, After Effects, 3DS Max, Combustion, etc, etc... I can run all of them under Windows. Some aren't ported to Linux, not all run on the Mac, either.

It's always been the applications that have driven things. Still the same today.

Re:Applications, baby, applications

[blincoln]

It's always been the applications that have driven things. Still the same today.

Exactly. One-third* of the reason I run Windows is that it lets me use applications like Cakewalk Sonar and Photoshop. Sonar is the *only* MIDI/DA sequencer still on the market that I really like, so even OS X is not an option for me.

I predict that it will be a *long* time (if ever) before the majority of musicians would feel comfortable running Linux on their studio computers. There just aren't the apps, or the hardware support.

* The other two thirds are "I can't play all of the games I want to play," and "I just don't find any of the available ways of configuring X to be intuitive for me as a GUI."

Re:Applications, baby, applications

[Saturnlcs]

I've invested in RealOne's Superpass (newscasts and entertainment video feeds). If Linux had a *working* version of Real that could play the content that I purchase monthly, then I would have no other reason to use windows. Oh well, not as Often....I still need to run windows to use Solid Edge, a 3-d modeling engineering program for windows--for school. I do have both OSes installed though. Applications keep me from being a full time linux user

Re:Applications, baby, applications

[Dun Malg]

"XP is ROCK SOLID."
Cool. Maybe you can tell me how ActiveX remains broken even after a complete off-the-CD re-installation of XP on my machine?

Heh heh. "It must be user error, because it Works For Me".
Honestly, if I had a nickel for every time I've heard that...

Seriously though, what's ActupX doing to you?

Re:Applications, baby, applications

[Cpyder]

There *is* a Linux-version of RealOne available. I don't know if it works with the superpass, but it sure plays all the videos/songs I need streamed. Works like a charm on my RedHat 8.0 laptop. Also, instead of having to dig through the whole Real website to find a "free" version, nowadays they just link to the installation binary right from the front page. (And that is of course http://www.real.com)

Why isn't Slashdot using PNGs?

[Anonymous Coward]

Same reason people are still using Windows. Change is hard for all of us I guess.

Re:Why isn't Slashdot using PNGs?

[Zorikin]

> PNGs are a lot bigger than GIFs

It's not "a lot", it's around 50 bytes per image. Not kilobytes, bytes. That's an eyeblink on even the slowest connection.

This guy actually made a special effort to find gifs that are bigger than equivalent pngs, minus the png overhead. You can see for yourself how little success he has had.

Re:Why isn't Slashdot using PNGs?

[error0x100]

png does EVERYTHING gif does plus a lot more.

With one notable exception - animation. There is a related format, MNG, but theres not much support for it (yet?)

Apart from that, PNG is much better than GIF in every way. I converted hundreds of GIF files to PNG files on my web page, and got an average file size reduction of about 20 - 40%. All png files were smaller in filesize than the gifs I made them from. I used ImageMagick to convert them, its very easy, just "convert foo.gif foo.png", change foo.gif in the HTML to foo.png, and thats it.

Re:Why isn't Slashdot using PNGs?

[error0x100]

Sounds like something is wrong, I haven't had any problems like that, my PNGs always look exactly like I expect them to look, in both IE and Mozilla (at least the last 1 and a half years of Mozilla releases have been displaying my PNGs correctly). Could be the software you're using to encode is not setting the gamma setting properly. I remember an older version of Photoshop used to make my PNGs always look too dark, for example.

What you are describing will very likely also happen if you are viewing in a 256 colour or 16-bit colour mode. However, that seems unlikely to be the problem in this case, as you describe it, since you've tested on so many systems.

Well I'm not....

[drudd]

The only reason I even have XP installed on my laptop is because I was forced to pay for it, so I might as well have it if I need it.

My home computer and my work computer are both Linux, and I only boot my laptop into windows ~1/month.

Doug

Re:Well I'm not....

[drudd]

Yeah, I guess I wasn't clear about that... I AM dual booting, in fact I'm posting from linux on my laptop right now.

I only have windows dual booting since I paid for it... if I had had the option, I never would have even bought it.

Doug

Ballot Stuffers

[miradu2000]

It's because Microsoft's quite excellent PR Firm was paid to stuff the ballot box.

"This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane."

Oh no wait, they must of been stuffing the mac OS X one.. They always seem to get confused on which product they are tryign to advertise. Poor MS...

Two simple things...

[Dalroth]

1. Games
2. Work

1. Until ALL games run under Linux without much difficulty, I simply don't have any choice here. Nearly all the Xbox and PS/2 games in the world don't hold up to a single quality PC game.

2. I work at a Microsoft only shop. It's sad, it's infuriating, and I have little choice. To VPN into work, connect to source safe, upload code to the servers, run terminal services, connect to SQL Server 2000 (Microsoft's only GOOD non-gaming product) I have to use windows.

Re:Two simple things...

[Blimey85]

Nearly all the Xbox and PS/2 games in the world don't hold up to a single quality PC game

While I think that is a bit much to swallow, I do know where you are coming from. I like FPS games and for me they are a lot more fun using a mouse than they are using a controller. I did buy a controller for one of my computers when instead I should have bought a mouse for my PS2 but I don't think many games support a mouse for PS2. I've only seen one game that explicity stated it had support for a mouse.

MS has some good games that they put out and I'm sure they realize how important games are to their survival. If it wasn't for games and Adobe, I think a whole lot more people would make the switch. But until that happens, Windows still has a lot of uses that aren't filled, or aren't filled very well by other OS's.

Re:Two simple things...

[Phroggy]

To VPN into work, connect to source safe, upload code to the servers, run terminal services, connect to SQL Server 2000

FYI, there's a Remote Desktop (terminal services) client for Mac OS X, and I wouldn't be surprised if you can find a PPTP client.

Re:Two simple things...

[Inoshiro]

"Nearly all the Xbox and PS/2 games in the world don't hold up to a single quality [sic]PC game.

Compare: "Nearly all the PC games is the world don't hold up to a single, high-quality console game."

Yes, 90% of anything is crap, and that crap won't compare to the best of the best. JSRF sure kicks the ass of Daikatana, just like Half-Life kicks the ass of Azurik.

If you're going to troll, at least try and be good at it.

Re:Two simple things...

[ruiner13]

Nearly all the Xbox and PS/2 games in the world don't hold up to a single quality PC game.

How about the hundreds of PS2 (not PS/2... that is an old IBM computer)games (and thousands of PSX games) and the emm... dozens of XBox games? Surely there is ONE game you must like out of that selection. There are a TON of PC games that don't hold a candle to some PS2 games (or even gamecube...).

Re:Two simple things...

[jkujawa]

MacOS X 10.2 includes a PPTP client. It's in the Internet Connect application.

Re:Two simple things...

[cscx]

It's Sybase, repackaged

This hasn't been the case since after Microsoft SQL Server 6.0.

Try setting up MySql some time

Ahh, another free software zealot that's been brainwashed and blinded. Not to reopen the can of MySQL vs anything useful flamewar again, but let me say this now: MYSQL IS NOWHERE NEAR THE LEVEL OF ANY COMMERCIAL DATABASE SERVERS.

That is all.

Re:Two simple things...

[Sketch]

> 1. Until ALL games run under Linux without much difficulty, I simply don't have any choice here.

True, unless you're into first person shooters (which are one area where the PC definately beats consoles, as others have mentioned). That's the only game category I know of with a wide selection of popular games available under Linux.

> Nearly all the Xbox and PS/2 games in the world don't hold up to a single quality PC game.

The same can be said in reverse, as well. Nearly all the PC games in the world don't hold up to a single quality PS2 game. ;)

> 2. I work at a Microsoft only shop. It's sad, it's infuriating, and I have little choice.

> To VPN into work,

http://pptpclient.sourceforge.net/ (I believe there are others as well)

> connect to source safe, upload code to the servers,

I know nothing about sourcesafe, can't help you here.

> run terminal services,

http://www.rdesktop.org/

> connect to SQL Server 2000 (Microsoft's only GOOD non-gaming product)

http://www.freetds.org/

> I have to use windows.

But maybe not quite as much as you think... ;)

because my family friend would kill me

[Brigadier]

If I were to install linux a home after all that is 'my' computer. My gf would flip out even though all she does on the computer is browse the web and use word. My son would freak because all his games would no longer work. not to mention my duaghter who would skin me alive if her barbie thing game didn't work. As for my work environment as soon as AutoCAD is ported over to Linux I will happily port all our stations over. In the mean time only our firewalls and webservers are linux.

Re:because my family friend would kill me

[morgajel]

best advice:
Dual boot, make everyone an account. show them how to log in. do the whole "this is for work" line.
show your son the 70+ gamesthough not top of the line, they're still fun. the novelty of it will get him.show the gf mozilla and openoffice.
tell them they can always boot back into the other mode if they need to, but just try it.
every time the computer is free, boot it back to linux and see if they toy with it before rebooting.

Let's all say it together:

[Bonker]

One App:

Adobe Photoshop

Photoshop runs under Wine, I've heard, but not well. Also, type support, which is highly necessary for any kind of decent design work, is miserable under most linux WM's.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[Moloch666]

Fonts is a big deal for graphic companies. The company I work for does internet work and graphic work. The graphic guys cringe when a PC (Windows) job comes in. Mac OS just excels in that line of work. Linux and Windows have about equal font difficulties.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[teamhasnoi]

Gimp doesn't support cmyk. It also(linux) has crap for color management. Why not ask Adobe to port it?

Re:Let's all say it together:

[pmz]

Adobe Photoshop

Perhaps you can find an older version that runs on Solaris? I used Photoshop on Solaris a few years ago. People here will whine when I say this: Solaris, especially 8 and 9, makes a fine desktop OS. It's robust as hell and extremely well documented. Buy a used Sun on EBay or through mail order and be happy.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[siskbc]

Linux and Windows have about equal font difficulties.

That seems a bit generous. Out of the box, Linux (X) has the ugliest damned fonts I've ever seen. Admittedly, with some treaking, this can be alleviated, but that shouldn't be necessary. All things graphical have always been an afterthought with linux.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[skeedlelee]

My two apps...

Adobe Illustrator

and

the EndNote plugin as used in Word.

That said, I just spent like an hour browsing around trying to figure out exactly what was up with BibTex. Sounds functionally good enough but EXTREMELY painful to use. You really can't beat the triviality of bibliographies with the new XP implentation of EndNote. Of course there's a bit of a crashing issue, but there's a work around.

Let's say I go to the trouble of learning TeX/LaTeX/BibTeX etc. Then pretty much Illustrator is the only thing keeping me on Windows. Anyone run it under Wine and give it a good workout yet?

And the usual "what about Mac?" Well, I'm a cheap bastard and when I looked, getting what I wanted meant a PowerMac, which I just couldn't afford. So far though XP hasn't been bad, VERY few crashes (like 5 in about four months, three of which were EndNote's fault). I would like a Unix command line though...

Re:Let's all say it together:

[jaoswald]

BibTeX shouldn't be that painful, although you need to be pretty in tune with LaTeX customs to really feel comfortable with it. (That is, once you understand how LaTeX does tables of contents, etc., you can understand how BiBTeX fits into the workflow.) The bonus is that many source of citation information can give it to you in BiBTeX format, so you can quickly build up your database of sources you commonly cite.

My experience (like most people) was learning LaTeX & BiBTeX for my thesis, and I feel that the relatively small effort paid off because I avoided fighting Word. Sometimes you need to debug LaTeX (forget a brace), but it's like learning any other programming language: there are fewer than a dozen common ways for LaTeX to fail, and you learn how to find and fix the problems pretty soon. Then, the only thing left to learn is the final polishing of formula appearances, punctuation, etc., which only needs to happen if you really want things to look nice.

The problem with Word is that there are a lot of very strange behaviors that aren't easy to fix, especially as documents get large. There is a lot of hidden markup that eventually gets bunged up, and then no amount of fiddling seems to make it work again. And no amount of fiddling will make Word's formulas look like anything but crap. I've never had Emacs or LaTeX crash on me and cause me to lose work.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[T-Ranger]

While I cant speek to the specific requirements of the parent poster, Im sure he wants/needs the features of photoshop and not the warm and fuzzy feeling of using "Photoshop". Which means that he wants/needs the features of modern versions of PS. I dont know the last UNIX version of PS, but its probably at least 2 major version out of date.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[bfree]

So how come Linux is going onto the desktop of all the film production companies? How come filmGimp is taking hold? Oh yeah, I forgot that hollywood blockbusters aren't created by TRUE graphic artists, just MPAA drones! Now I'm not saying that the gimp is a match for photoshop in every way, but while perhaps the gimp is adequate for 90%, the remaining 10% are not going to all require photoshop (though some will) and the split of gimp/non-gimp suitable people is not going to be divided into FALSE/TRUE graphics artists.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[Zordak]

I keep hearing this, and I have no idea what people are talking about. The font on my terminal is as beautiful as it has always been. Are all of you using those outdated green-on-black monochrome terminals instead of these slick new 256-color white-on-black ones? I can even change it to amber-on-black, which is a little easier on the eyes, in my opinion, and reminds me of that awesome Hurcules graphics card I used to run!

Re:Let's all say it together:

[Zordak]

I would like a Unix command line though...

Two words: cygwin.

(Yes, I know. It's in homage to an old college roommate who could deliver the line with such a straight face, it was absolutley hillarious).

Re:Let's all say it together:

[danamania]

Technically you CAN print RGB - but only on photographic paper. Fujitsu and Durst (I think thats the company name) make machines that drop out this kind of output - "printed" with red green & blue lasers from RGB data.

Depending on your definition of "Printing" those machines will do direct RGB output - but it's hardly useful for magazines, flyers, newspapers, books, and printing on various objects like logos on appliances etc.

And to keep me vaguely on topic - I don't use windows at all. The last time I touched it for much more than showing someone else how to use their own machine was over a year ago.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[skeedlelee]

Well, I'm working on my thesis now and am unfortunately committed to my current way of doing things (Word etc.). I have looked into others, but I'm just too far along at this point. However, there have been a bunch of times when clearly some tag isn't quite set properly and it would have been nice to get in and just set some parameter manually. A favorite was placing a figure using their frames tool. The figure (and frame) was big enough to exactly fill the page. If you put it a little too close to the corner the whole thing would trigger some sort of infinite loop. You could then sit back and watch as the page count went up until you bailed on Word! The other tag issue I had was that WordXP uses tags a little differently and EndNote didn't quite get it right. Another infinite loop was triggered with their new realtime formatting stuff. Didn't notice that one until it used up 1/2GB of memory! needless to say I turned that off.

In general though I've been getting more and more interested in LaTeX, seems like most of the authoring features I've decided I can't live without were implemented in LaTeX in the mid-80's. Sounds like you (or anyone else who's reading this and has experience with it) have a bit of experience with LaTeX. You mention the TOC formalism, is it part of a generic tagging protocol that could potentially be implemented with anything (like say figure references or equation numbering schemes), or are there just a couple of fixed functions... TOC and references? Also, how well does LaTeX handle inserted figures, in particular rastered formats like TIFF and vector formats like EPS? Is it as simple as telling it where the file is and it sends it on to the printer, or does it have trouble with images? Seems most of the examples I've run into use LaTeX because they are using lot's of equations, not images. If it handles images well (sounds like it's used by a lot of professionals so it wouldn't surprise me if it did work well) then maybe it's time I gave up on the whole WYSIWYG dependence.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[teamhasnoi]

I'm going to go and get a CMYK Monitor - wait... I can't. Cause there is no such thing. Why? Because LIGHT and INK are two very different things.

What do you get on screen when you mix Red, Blue and Green? - White.

What do you get on paper when you mix Red(Magenta), Blue(Cyan), and Green(Spot Color or Yellow and Blue - Just like in primary school)? You get a muddy brown or black.

When you print a photo on your pc at home - It may start in RGB (on the Screen) but when its on paper it is CMYK. (BlacK is K) Look at your color cartridge, there is no green. Just like there is no white. White is the absence of color - if you are printing on white paper, otherwise, no white.

If you really care, I suggest googling CMYK, RGB, Offset printing, Color Space, and go from there. If you don't care, go be AC on k5.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[skeedlelee]

Actually had to read that a few times before I even noticed the joke. If you can say that like it is only one word then you probably don't speak english as a first language.

Yes I've got cygwin, mostly I was whining. I haven't really been using it seriously though. It feels strangely broken to me for some reason, too used to shells in Irix or something. Part of it is the division of the cygwin system and the rest of the file system I guess. Or me being lazy.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[Ulwarth]

There are many areas where the apps are lacking, but photopaint is not one of them. Scroll down towards the bottom of this and look for the quote about Photoshop vs the Gimp from a professional artist:

http://people.trustcommerce.com/~adam/office2.html

Re:Let's all say it together:

[Yakman]

You can add your cygwin\bin directory to your Windows path and use most of the commands from a normal Windows command prompt. The only stuff that won't work is stuff that's not an exe but triggered by a shell script or something. Works well for most things I use day to day like grep, sort, awk, etc..

Re:Let's all say it together:

[doug363]

LaTeX's TOC uses the sections/subsections that you divide up your document into. You get a heading (and section number if you like) at the beginning of a section, and if you put in a table of contents, it displays page numbers for the section (and subsections etc. if you like).

It has ways of numbering equations, figures and tables. There are also generic numbering systems that you can use for theorems/laws/whatever. There is a generic "label" and "ref" pair of commands which allow you to refer to a section number, equation number, figure number, list item number... whatever. There's also commands for automatically inserting a List of Figures, List of Tables, Bibliographies, etc.

LaTeX's inserted figures are always EPS figures. It doesn't actually do much in that regard except work out how big the figure should be. There are ways of getting raster formats like TIFF and JPG into EPS using graphics conversion tools (EPS files can have embedded raster images in them), and you can print to a file in Windows and Unix (in Windows, it has to be a postscript printer with an EPS option set). In general, LaTeX doesn't process the EPS file, it just works out how big it is and allocates space on the page for it. When you view the output, or create a PS or PDF file, the EPS gets included. It can be as easy as telling it where the EPS file is, but sometimes GhostScript (the PS viewer that I use) gets confused with certain EPS files, large ones in particular. Also, some apps produce EPS files that work well, some don't. In my experience, Matlab works well, things that come out of a "print to EPS" printer driver are ok, the GIMP produces good EPS files (although sometimes rather large), and other stuff is dodgy. There are also apps that do automated conversion from various types of graphics files to EPS files, but I haven't really tried them. Once you find something that reliably produces EPS files though, you're set. If you've got a good vector graphics program, then it'll almost certainly convert any vector or bitmap format to EPS for you nicely.

There are packages that let you use drawing commands directly in LaTeX, but I wouldn't recommend doing that... you can't see how your picture looks until you're finished :(. Also, LaTeX's normal figure tools don't give you a real lot of freedom in figure placement---it's not desktop publishing software. In general, text doesn't flow around figures, and you can't put two figures on the same horizontal level without getting extra packages... But I find that I don't need to have a real lot of control over images. It's figure placement is pretty intelligent, even though it's a bit inflexible at times.

That said, the main strength of LaTeX is its equation support IMHO. The cross reference stuff is pretty nice too, but if you use styles for headings in Word, you can get a lot of those benefits like easy TOC generation. LaTeX also has nicer page layout algorithms than Word, the end result is better typographically, and there are less problems with figures moving around and making the text look awful. You do get a more professional-looking end result with LaTeX, but at the cost of some flexibility.

Re:Let's all say it together:

[bfree]

I didn't say filmGimp had taken over, I said it is taking hold, BIG difference! it just demonstrates that the filmGimp is good enough for TRUE graphic artists! Anyway I'm also thinking of a Linux Format article (cover story) which discussed the use of Linux in Hollywood, I do read more than /. (and more than just Linux/GNU/OS/FS stuff).

Re:Let's all say it together:

[jaoswald]

It is not strictly true that all graphics in TeX are EPS. TeX/LaTeX do not know anything about graphics files except for "graphics" made by putting TeX primitives on the page.

What TeX/LaTeX can do for other types of graphics is include "special" commands which are picked up by the driver that processes TeX's .dvi output. The most common driver is dvips, which accepts special commands which refer to EPS graphics, which dvips can then incorporate in the PostScript output. By using different drivers, such as PDFTeX, one can incorporate other graphics types, such as JPEG, directly.

That said, .EPS is going to be the easiest way to go.

a life....

[Pfhreakaz0id]

-2 (too easy)

convenience

[Savatte]

I do all sorts of stuff with my computer, and I have no desire to search through text files or obscure documentation to find if a piece of hardware will work with my computer. I stick with Windows98se because I can watch Divx movies, edit my videos, make music with fruityloops, and do all the other things that probably work on linux, but work fine on 98. I dont need rock-solid stability since I turn my computer off at night, anyways.

well..

[nege]

Its about the games, as I am sure it is for many ./ers. I want to be able to play WC3, Sims, Neverwinter Nights and Unreal 2k3. You cant do this on linux, no way. Not even with WINE, (good luch getting it to work, and its no where near as stable as XP). And while you have the OS up for gaming, its just easier to keep it up for surfing and email etc. Before you know it, its your full time OS, except when you go out of your way to use linux. I do coding on my laptop, which runs linux, but I am not a full time coder, so XP gets more CPU Time.

Re:well..

[Elladan]

• WC3: Runs fine on linux, see www.transgaming.com
• The Sims: Linux port available, see www.transgaming.com
• Neverwinter Nights: Port is on the way
• Unreal 2k3: Runs perfectly on linux, the linux native version is in the box you bought at the store

Re:well..

[13Echo]

That's interesting. Every game that you list there is available (or will be next monthwhen Neverwinter Nights is released) for Linux except for WC3.

I can't personally suggest the Linux version of UT2003 over Windows though. The OpenGL wrapper is pretty bad on any platform.

Re:well..

[Colin Walsh]

Maybe you were just listing the games that you play regularly, and you already know this; but Unreal 2k3 has Linux support in the box on CD3 and (hopefully) Neverwinter Nights should have a Linux client that you can download here within the next few weeks.

As a Public Service Announcement(tm) to anyone who's into gaming and Linux, or is considering installing Linux, you should peruse Linux Games and The Linux Game Tome every once and a while. Maybe if people are more aware that commercial games are ported to Linux we can have fewer people trying to run Quake III in WINE (Ugh!).

-Colin

Re:well..

[Jugalator]

Before you see decide to mod this as flamebait, it isn't *my* opinions, but the opinions of many Windows users:

WC3: Runs fine on linux, see www.transgaming.com
The Sims: Linux port available, see www.transgaming.com

But... you need WineX... and does WineX come preinstalled with, say, Mandrake? If not, how do you install it? Type "install" or "setup"? Double click on an icon? It's harder than that? Do you need to configure it too?? Do you need more stuff as well? Do my video card driver work right with that... WineX? Hmm... I think I'll just dual boot with Windows. Yeah. I mean... It will work then and... Why bother? I want to play that game I bought this evening. I'll see about Linux some day I have more time. Yeah.

Neverwinter Nights: Port is on the way

But... I can play it months ahead if I dual boot with Windows... and who knows when it's out? It's on the way? Will it have bugs? Will it be less supported than Windows? Will its patches come later than the Windows patches? Do I need this... WineX thing for that too? Naahh... That sounds tricky, I think I'll stick with Windows.

Unreal 2k3: Runs perfectly on linux, the linux native version is in the box you bought at the store

Wow, that's nice if... Well, I like first person shooters.

Re:well..

[ubernostrum]

Hmm...I'll just install a game on my Windows box...what's this? Missing required DLL? Need to upgrade DirectX? Need to upgrade video card drivers? Need a better video card? Need to configure IPX support? What? Oh well, I'll stick to Linux, there I type 'rpm -ivh' or 'apt-get install' and it Just Works(TM).

Moral of the story: every OS has its hell. Maybe you like Windows, that's fine. But don't tout it as being a magical shiny place where nothing ever goes wrong, because it isn't.

Re:well..

[Elladan]

For the WineX supported games (eg. WCIII, The Sims) the performance will be reduced significantly, but it'll generally still be ok. This is still being worked on - there will probably always be a small amount of overhead if the game uses Direct3d, but other than that, there's no inherent technical reason that it should be slower under Linux (so consider this a bug).

For native games, such (eg. NWN (we hope), and UT2k3) the performance is pretty much identical if you're using an NVidia card. Well, identical or a little faster than windows, usually. The NVidia drivers are basically the same for Linux and Windows, but at least some games (eg. Quake3) have benched a bit faster under Linux.

Re:well..

[nege]

Runs fine on linux? MUAHAHAAHAHHA. You are dreaming if you think for a second that WarCraft will run nearly as well (or stable) as it will on XP. Call this flamebait if you want, but Linux is NOT a gaming machine. I love Linux as much as the next ./ person, but be realistic. You want MMORGS? How about just about anything else of the shelf? I'll give you Unreal 2k3, but anything not written for Linux is doomed to crash and take hours of fooling with it to get it to work as opposed to insert CD, play. I'll stick with XP for that, thanks.

Re:well..

[error0x100]

Unreal 2k3: Runs perfectly on linux, the linux native version is in the box you bought at the store

Ha ha .. he probably didn't buy a legal copy .. heres the crux, most people pirate most of their games AND applications. Warez is EASY to get for Windows versions of things, but its much harder to track down Warez for Linux or Mac versions of things.

Take an example, I use Photoshop occasionally. I can get a cracked version of the latest Photoshop from *several* "warez sources" at work (probably shouldn't say this), any time I want to, in under five minutes. I want to "switch to Mac". Now, Photoshop runs on Mac, sure, but damned if I'd have a clue where to find an illegal copy of it.

People say, the reason they use Windows is, "its the applications". What they really mean is, they reason they use Windows is, "its so easy to get cracked versions of the applications I want".

work

[tongue]

My situation is that my employer-provided machine HAS to run win2k, because that's our platform (not my call, believe me :)). My laptop runs Mandrake 9 right now, I'm considering switching back to gentoo. my gateway and fileserver is a linux box, which i also use as a desktop via the win32 x server from xfree86.cygwin.com. so i'm essentially a sheep in wolf's clothing, using linux as my primary desktop of choice, while doing what minimal tasks i have to in windows.

Office & Ease of Setup

[Planesdragon]

The biggest reason is, of course, Office--OpenOffice still doesn't handle emdashes, which means it's not worth the time to learn for me yet.

Ease of setup is the other big one--I don't want my computer to ever expect me to go into a command line to set something, and I don't have a desire to learn UNIX commands just to use my overgrown typewriter.

(That reminds me--gotta give Linux its fair chance this weekend, which means no writing in Windows for me... I'll post a journal to let y'all know if it works out bearably.)

that was me...

[matticus]

I was one of the slashdot users who did use windows even thoough I knew linux and have been running it off and on for five years. I know, I know.
But in May I discovered Gentoo, and I haven't booted to my windows partition since then. Not even for games.

16:27:40 up 71 days, 51 min, 1 user, load average: 0.48, 0.38, 0.27

That's enough reason for me to stay in Linux. I don't think I'll go back. However, when Mandrake first came out, I thought the same way. Mandrake was fast current RedHat, and I liked that. But I got tired of it. Gentoo opened my eyes to what a Linux-From-Scratch type distribution could be like intended for those who don't have time for LFS.
My recommendation for those who want Linux but keep hanging on to Windows is find a distro you like. I did, and I'm very happy about it. Please try, because you will be happy too.

VPN Client

[rizzo]

I use straight gentoo linux at work. At home however I'm on Windows 2000 because the MIS staff where I work is uses some Sidewinder firewall and they'll only support the Softnet VPN client. So I'm stuck on Windows for telecommuting. Of course the VPN works like crap anyway.

I suggested that they use the LEAF Project firewall so I could use any number of open clients. Not mention that LEAF is free. My boss considered it, but then realized that our MIS staff is a bunch of jackanapes and that they needed to pay for support. I totally understood.

So if anyone knows better than I how to connect to the Sidewinder firewall from linux, feel free to let me know.

Also Medal of Honor and Battlefield 1942 keep me entertained.

Re:VPN Client

[Tomun]

This Message will tell you how.
Google for sidewinder freeswan to find more, I did.

Re:VPN Client

[rizzo]

Alright thanks. I had checked out freeswan last year, but couldn't get it working.

I'd be interested if there was something that didn't involve kernel changes though. It'd be an easier pill to swallow.

Re:VPN Client

[Spock the Vulcan]

If you can ssh to your home machine from work, look at the -R option on the ssh manpage. It lets you set up reverse port forwarding, using which you can tunnel back in from home. If outgoing port 22 is blocked, run your ssh server on port 80 or something. If you still can't figure it out, reply to this thread and I'll post the script I wrote to do this.

X has kept me away from Linux

[Headius]

No matter how fast they make the drivers, no matter how much they optimize it - a client-server based desktop environment is ALWAYS going to be slower than a non-c/s solution. X continues to feel just a bit sluggardly on all my systems, even with the latest, fanciest drivers from whoever.

The second biggest problem I have with Linux is stability. Linux itself is a rock, but I have not used a single X app that hasn't crashed at least once. It's a dismal record. There's no accountability for bugs, so they're only fixed when someone feels like it. I've managed and worked on a few open source projects, and without corporate backing, guess what -- homework, real work, and personal preference come first. Unless you've got some really dedicated guys, shit doesn't get done.

I want Linux to succeed. I really do. I don't see how it's ever going to do it relying on X, and I don't see the desktop environments coming anywhere near more polished corporate-funded alternatives. Mac OS X is pretty, tight, simple, and as powerful as Linux, but I have to have a Mac to run it. Windows 2000 is vanilla, stable, boring, and runs on anything, but I don't LOVE using it. I would love for Linux to be a real alternative, but it simply isn't.

Ditch X and come up with a really solid desktop environment that doesn't require it, and I'll be back in a heartbeat.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[MrResistor]

What desktop/WM are you using? I used to think that X was slow and buggy as hell, too, until I ditched KDE for WindowMaker. It's blazing fast, elegant (IMO), and I haven't had a single lockup since I switched.

I agree that there are issues that the Linux graphical environment as a whole needs to overcome, but the all too common belief that X is to blame is simply wrong.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[glassware]

The part I like most about X is the sophomoric smirk:

Me: Where can I get client software to connect to your server?
Sysop: No, you need X Server software.
Me: I don't need server software. I just want to connect to your server.
Sysop: Yes, but your client provides a display surface to the server, which is a client to your server.
Me: Huh?
Sysop: You see, it makes perfect sense; your client machine is serving graphics to the server! So your computer is a server, and the server is a client! It's all backwards!
Me: Yes.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[jonabbey]

This is silly. Do you think that Windows and Macintosh don't have protection boundaries between the graphics rendering layer and the applications (client)? X has used shared memory and event coalescing forever. The only possibly defensible issue regarding X's C-S architecture is the context switch/scheduling delay, and that's on the order of a hundredth of a second delay. Even those delays can be ameliorated with one of the low-latency/interruptible syscall patches for Linux.

People calling for the rip-and-replace of X windows are simply not being realistic, either on a technical assessment level, or on a welcome to the real-world level.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Alioth]

Funnily enough, my experience has been pretty much the opposite (at least recently). A few years ago - yes, X was a bear to set up.

But the recent installs I've done?

RedHat 7.x seems to have BETTER graphics card support than Win2K, and the devices on all the machines I've installed recently have just *worked* with no fiddling at all - this goes from a Dell PII-266 to a new whitebox cheap component Athlon 1600+ box. We got some new machines recently - the ones I put RedHat on were in 1024x768 on the install. The Win2K installs required additional drivers. RedHat also supported the network card out of the box - Win2K needed 3rd party drivers.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Alioth]

Your message doesn't really suggest that X is the problem.

Buggy applications would still crash whether they were running on X or something else. Throwing out X because of buggy applications will not stop the buggy applications from crashing! Those buggy apps will still crash on Windows, Mac OSX or BeOS. X doesn't make them any less or more likely to crash. I've found X itself to be very stable.

I've not found the performance of X compared to the performance of Windows noticably different since the days of the 486 for normal desktop apps.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[chunkwhite86]

Then why are all the serious (i.e. UNIX based) CAD/CAM, animation and 3D design workstations UNIX (and X) based?? I cant hear you??

And why do I get higher frame rates in my FPS games under Linux than under Windows??

And since when does Windows 2000 run on anything??? Last time I checked, it only ran on P2 or P3 machines with oodles of memory?? How does that even remotely compare to the dozens of platforms Linux runs on, and dozens more that NetBSD runs on??

Please come back when you have a *real* argument.

In a world filled with clueless sheep buying Microsoft products just because that's what the guy before him uses, I figure I must be doing something right if my choice in OS and software disturbs your delicate sensibilities. Consider my Tux the penguin poster to be a big one-fingered salute, as a I fly past you on the information superhighway.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Headius]

I could ask a more simple question: If X is the way to go and doesn't have the problems I mentioned, then why doesn't everyone building a new OS use it? It's Open Source, it's freely available, it's ported to scads of platforms, including Cygwin. How come QNX, Mac OS X, BeOS and others haven't said "let's go with X windows"? Because it did not fit the task at hand - developing a responsive, crisp, reliable desktop environment. Implementing a windowing system from scratch must surely be more work than porting the tried-and-true X windows, right? What drives these players to go with their own homerolled solution?

X is old. It's a throwback from the Glass House era of computing that has simply been hacked over to squeeze a bit more performance out of it. Sure, there's shared memory, sure there's native drivers, sure there's a whole host of other modifications that are intended to improve performance. The bottom line, however, is that in order to continue supporting remote desktops, X has to carry along a whopping load of cruft. Cruft is bad for a desktop that's running client-only applications.

I don't NEED to display the window from one machine on another, but running X, I don't have the option of turning that feature off. These days, a desktop environment should be dedicated to local applications FIRST, and then provide support for remoting windows SECOND. Guess what, I don't connect to a centralized server to bring up my desktop anymore, and I have no plans to. Allow me to run a desktop that doesn't carry along that kind of extra weight, and I'll show you a real contender.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[IamTheRealMike]

No matter how fast they make the drivers, no matter how much they optimize it - a client-server based desktop environment is ALWAYS going to be slower than a non-c/s solution

First mistake. Measured statistics have shown that X is actually faster at some operatons (like line drawing etc) than the GDI on Windows. X is fast. Some drivers are not fast. If you have speed problems with X that are not purely psychology (i think it is slow, therefore it feels slow) then there's a bug somewhere that should be fixed with a driver/toolkit/application.

The second biggest problem I have with Linux is stability. Linux itself is a rock, but I have not used a single X app that hasn't crashed at least once. It's a dismal record

Uhh, well, umm, dunno what to say to that. I guess no Microsoft app ever crashes either? Linux is the OS and is pretty stable. The stability of an OS isn't related to the stability of the apps (snide jokes about 98/macos 9 aside), anybody can write a buggy app. So far most OS level software I've used on Linux has been solid. Some pure userlevel apps, ie chat apps etc sometimes crash but most are pretty good. If you're expecting every piece of software written for Linux to be uncrashable then you'll never be happy with it, so I guess you'll have to stick with Windows.

There's no accountability for bugs, so they're only fixed when someone feels like it.

And if a bug is annoying enough, somebody tends to feel like fixing it. This sounds more like a "my favourite bug/feature isn't fixed yet" rant.

I want Linux to succeed. I really do. I don't see how it's ever going to do it relying on X, and I don't see the desktop environments coming anywhere near more polished corporate-funded alternatives.

What is it with the mindless X bashing? Linux has already "succeeded" in many areas, and is busy succeeding on the desktop too. I don't understand what you mean by these comments about the desktop environments, to me GNOME2 feels pretty polished, albiet a tad light in features. X has nothing to do with polish OK, and FYI both KDE and GNOME have oodles of corporate funding. So your point is kind of invalid.

Ditch X and come up with a really solid desktop environment that doesn't require it, and I'll be back in a heartbeat.

Ditch X and replace it with what?? A non network transparent windowing system? That would be a major step backwards and I promise you, you wouldn't notice any speed difference (try installing directfb, something that you seemingly want, and see for yourself).

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[jonabbey]

You're still arguing that it is X's C-S design alone that is causing the problems you're talking about. The C-S design is an easy thing to single out.. "the other window systems don't support network graphics, and they are faster, so it must be the C-S design causing the problem" is not a valid logical argument. That's not to say that it mightn't be the problem, of course, but it's not to say it is, either.

Having to do context switches between the client and the server all of the time is a real issue, certainly. It is one that can be addressed through means other than simply throwing out 20 years of software developed on Unix, though.

Keith Packard wrote a good presentation on this, Efficiently Scheduling X Clients at USENIX 2000.

Something like the improvements to the X server's internal behavior mentioned in that presentation (or in the associated paper, see Keith's Publications Page for more), in conjunction with Linux kernels more optimized for low-latency multiprocess scheduling could help the performance issues a great deal without having to junk the whole system.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Headius]

Granted, buggy apps crash wherever they are. I do, however, think that X apps, being necessarily more complex than CLI apps, are prone to many more bugs. Writing a GUI app well is hard. Writing a toolkit to run that GUI app is hard. Writing all the other libraries and services to support a full-featured desktop, based on those GUI apps and toolkits is hard * hard. X, while providing a non-specific platform for windowing, has not provided any indication as to how those windows should look or behave. That means every app running in X relies on a MOUNTAIN of libraries. One critical bug in one of those library (which are developed by groups all over the world that all have their own way of doing things and their own plans) means the app has a critical bug. Multiply that by all the leaky abstractions inherent in layers upon layers of libraries, and you've got a big, fat mess.

This isn't to say X apps couldn't be great. With well-defined, well-documented, and well-standardized development practices, interfaces, and protocols, the leaks between layers would certainly be lessened. Right now, however, I run apps under X holding my breath. I've had critical applications crash far too often (usually losing work in the progress) to trust them anymore.

And you know what? vi doesn't crash. Why? Because it's not piled upon a hundred layers of libraries that all have their own problems. Writing GUI desktop applications is hard. Writing them under X is monumentally hard.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Lobsang]

Very well said.

I have the very same opinion about X: I think it's keeping Linux back. What we need are brilliant minds at work to produce a new GUI for Linux/Unix. X is full of annoyances (configuration, adding fonts, etc) and its advanced features (being a client/server model) are not of interest to 90% of the average joes out there.

I hope I survive long enough to see X's successor. :)

Oh, and BTW modders, I use linux 99.99% of the time (I just reboot in windows to do a chkdsk on the vfat partitions) :)

Regards

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[bfree]

OK, so when you have a 10THz processor in your case, with Tbit networking and a GPU capable of pumping out any film of today in realtime you are still going to complain that it's client-server based and therefore a couple of picoseconds less responsive then it might be? As for the stability of X apps, how many windows apps can you name that have never crashed on you? I can't think of any personally (though no doubt there are plenty I only ever used for 15 seconds). As for the desktops not coming anywhere near mopre polished corporate funded alternatives, what about Gnome with its backing from Sun? What about Gnome which received a Helen Keller award for lifting the standard for users who are in some way impaired?

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Elwood P Dowd]

(User #5562 Info | http://www.headius.com)

User #5562? Aren't you a little old to be trolling? Have you played with Linux since you got your account on /.? X windows *isn't* slow. It's got a number of issues, but speed doesn't even loom large among them. The reason other recent OSes haven't gone with X windows is either because they don't want open source, they want other *features*, or they don't want to deal with maintaining a fork that huge.

Hell. Mac OS X's windowing environment *does* have hooks for Client/Server operation. They went with something else because they wanted to be like display postscript. And it helps them charge $$ for their OS.

And it's slower than X anyway... what was your point?

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[u19925]

"No matter how fast they make the drivers, no matter how much they optimize it - a client-server based desktop environment is ALWAYS going to be slower than a non-c/s solution"

Slower by how much percentage? 0.1? It is like saying, you won't take bath in ocean because fish f**k in it. I not only use X, but use VNC client exclusively on my laptop to access all my unix/linux boxes at work and haven't felt it slow. I access the same sessions from home/work/travel etc. BTW, I do heavy development work on unix/linux. I use windows a lot, however not because of X on unix. In fact, I consider X to be number one point of using Unix. Look at VNC on PC and you would know (it typically eats 20-30% CPU on 1GHz PC vs less than 1% on 400 MHz Linux). My reason for using windows are:

Lack of good fonts. They are improving and now a days a well tuned linux has quality comparable to PC. Still Unix boxes don't have good fonts or the apps don't use them correctly.

Many stupid websites shut you out, if you don't use Netscape or IE. I hate Netscape as a browser (though it is my exclusive mail client and HTML editor). On windows, I use IE for those sites and Opera otherwise.

I have a laptop which came pre-installed with windows and no media. Due to lack of time and media for XP, didn't feel like playing with Linux. Even if I could, the only use of this laptop is to browse, access unix/linux machines and view photo/video taken with digital camera/camcorder. Linux has no advantage in this space. For other machines, I use Linux/Unix.

I guess, X has something which windows never had and most likely won't have for ages. It is stupidity of Unix/Linux marketing folks for not exploiting this advantage. Your second point: "There's no accountability for bugs, so they're only fixed when someone feels like it."

You are comparing commercial apps in windows with free apps on Linux. I use almost all commercial only apps on Unix/Linux, and can vouch that there are far less failures on unix/linux than on windows. Just last night, my XP started acting weird on network (it was booted in morning), so I tried to shut down. Well shutdown hung too! I had to hard boot it. While I reboot my XP about once a day (haven't seen uptime more than 1 week on reasonably used XP and more than 2 weeks on NT) while all other unix/linux boxes that I remotely access, are booted once a quarter or so (typically for adding some OS patches) and they are used much more heavily.

I guess, Linux/Unix folks would rather be without U than be without X (pun intended).

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Headius]

Measured statistics have shown that X is actually faster at some operatons (like line drawing etc) than the GDI on Windows.

Some operations. Some operations being faster does not a faster desktop make. Great, so under some circumstances, it can draw a line faster. The bottom line is that if one desktop has 5 layers of abstraction between the app and the hardware, and another has 4, the one with 4 layers has a much better chance of winning the race.

I guess no Microsoft app ever crashes either?

I never said that. See my other posting for why I feel X apps are especially prone to failure. Simply put, it's those lovely abstractions...they're never perfect, and if superb layer 5 depends on buggy layer 4, layers 6+ are hurt by it.

This sounds more like a "my favourite bug/feature isn't fixed yet" rant

No. I've been in the belly of the beast, and I'm guilty of doing the same thing. If a bug or problem is particular difficult to fix, and there's super-cool fancy-daddy super-wow graphics work that also needs to be done, I have seen very few people that choose the bug. Of course there's some people out there who live for that, but they're not a majority. Generally, open-source projects charge forward with new features and new enhancements while leaving many critical flaws for later. In this respect, they're the same as what Microsoft does - get the software out the door, make sure it's pretty, and try to get some good press. The truth is often far different.

X has nothing to do with polish OK, and FYI both KDE and GNOME have oodles of corporate funding.

Let's see some numbers on how much funding GNOME and KDE have versus corporate alternatives. Let's see how many man-hours are put into all the choices. As far as I know, there's never been any study into either statistic. I know you'll say that man-hours and money are not the key to good software, but relying on developers to work in their spare time, or pitting a group of n developers against a group of 50n developers in creating a complex system is painful. Throwing more developers at a problem does not usually help it, but providing more resources from the start can mean the problem doesn't show up at all. Note I say RESOURCES.

I've tried DirectFB, and yes, it's slow. X hitting the FB directly is also slow. Neither are what I want. The FB is for platform-independent access to video, as directly as possible. It's great that it's there, it's great that it's enabling so many systems, but it's not going to help performance, and I don't think that's its purpose.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[jonabbey]

Aha, so it is more than just C-S you're objecting to. ;-)

The thing is, writing GUI apps is hard everywhere, and Windows and Mac OS X have tons of libraries as well. You won't win on this one, I fear.

And gvim (vim-on-gtk) doesn't crash either, fwiw.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[BlameFate]

Spot on.

Cases in point - graphical installers for Mandrake 8 and Redhat 8, both autoconfigured X well enough to run the installer beautifully, at the right screen resolution and bit-depth. Come to configure X in the install, and all kinds of trouble. You owuld think someone would just include a button that says "Use current settings", it is beyond belief that this isn;t fixed yet.. The installer got it right automatically straight away, what is the problem?

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Headius]

I will certainly look into that presentation. I'm not trying to mindlessly bash X...I honestly wish it wasn't a problem. I don't want to be stuck on Windows any more than you, but going from a sports car to a regular car, in terms of responsiveness and speed, is not generally enjoyable. Even if the difference is small, it's there.

I also don't mean it to sound like I think C/S is the root of all X's problems--there's certainly plenty of others. I do, however, mean to say that there's too many layers between an X app and the hardware it is trying to access...even with all the fancy additions.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[IamTheRealMike]

As for why X apps are more prone to failure than vi, well yeah, they are much more complex than vi is. And besides, if you have a gnome app (take rhythmbox) that has 40+ shared lib dependancies, that's actually no different to Windows Media player. It links against the graphics layer (X/GDI), a widget toolkit (GTK+/comctl32), a media framework (directshow/gstreamer) and so on and so forth. You're right that more libs increases the chance of bugs, but that's just part of the nature of software development.

I remain to be convinced that writing apps for X is any harder or more error prone than for Windows. X and GDI are both graphics layers at the end of the day, and if anything the neutral stance of X forces better interface design (the extensions have to be portable between x servers). As to why other operating systems didn't use X: QNX is a realtime OS, doesn't need it, BeOS was written back before XFree was any good, and they didn't have the resources to make a decent X server, and MacOS X doesn't use it because it (at the time) didn't support enough eyecandy, also I suspect because it'd have made it easier to port Mac apps to Linux.

Generally, open-source projects charge forward with new features and new enhancements while leaving many critical flaws for later. In this respect, they're the same as what Microsoft does - get the software out the door, make sure it's pretty, and try to get some good press. The truth is often far different.

That's a big generalization. Perhaps a few of the smaller, less professional projects do that, but I know in mine we focus on fixing bugs first, then adding features. KDE/GNOME etc have formal policies on this stuff. Obviously if it's just joe-hackers-random-mp3-player then this might be true. And besides, like I said, if a bug is annoying enough somebody will fix it.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Arandir]

Ditch X and you'll lose as many people as you'll gain. DirectX is better than X11 for direct access to the hardware buffer. If you're a game player, that makes a difference. X11 is better than GDI/DirectX/w32 for systems on a network. For the corporate environment, that makes a difference. For everything else, there's no difference in performance.

Because of X11, I can run Adobe FrameMaker on my FreeBSD machine. The application is running on a Solaris box, but I can interact with it as if it were native, with no noticable latency. I'll refuse any alternate solution that cannot do the same.

p.s. I've also got Win2K on the same system. I find that XFree86 is actually faster on the same hardware. I don't know how much of that is due to XFree86 as opposed to FreeBSD, but I don't care, because I'm not giving up XFree86.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Headius]

I'd like to add that some of the problems of X are problems of Linux in general - too many configurations, too few of them documented well. There's 101 ways one could speed up an X server, but I've got better things to do with my time. For anyone who doesn't love endlessly tweaking their OS, or for anyone that thinks the OS should be supporting them rather than hindering them, Linux can be a nightmare.

I've been running Linux and other UN*X's since back when I loaded Slackware onto a stack of 40-odd floppies to install it (CD burning? Science fiction!), and I've backed it all the way. I still back it whenever possible, but unfortunately, the problems I had to apologize for years ago are still mostly there. Some configurations have improved, sometimes with the help of other applications, while many more have not. In X's case, most of the distros do a superb job of getting it up and going, often very close to optimally. In GNOME or KDE's case, they'll get up and running ok, but configuration frailty means that a slip-up or badly placed bug can cause the whole thing to come tumbling down.

I run Windows on my desktops now - not because I love it or because I hate Linux (both false), but because it just works. It's not pretty, it's not open, and it's not what I want to run, but it's the simplest option when I just want to get some other shit done. If I had Macs I'd run OS X, not Linux, for the same reasons. I've grown tired of hunting for configuration file SuperNifty.conf buried somewhere different on every platform. I don't care if I can enable anti-aliased buttons in SuperNifty! If AA buttons make me more productive, turn the damn things on. If I should have the option of turning it on or off, make it simple for me to do so.

In the open-source world, too many projects seem to think the community owes them a debt. Why make an application easier to use when it works fine already? Because users, not developers or designers, decide the course of software evolution. Survival of the fittest applies here: bad software falls by the wayside, good software propagates. If you can't make a piece of software usable by and useful to more people than competing software - you are going to lose.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[runderwo]

I hope you were joking. Not only are you wrong, it's also way simpler than that.

An X server provides the I/O interface to the program. It takes input from the keyboard or pointing device and outputs on a display.

An X client is a program that simply connects to an X server to use its I/O interface.

What's so hard to understand about it? That is, unless you're deliberately trying not to understand?

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[tuffy]

I hope you were joking. Not only are you wrong, it's also way simpler than that.

For Unix-heads, X11's client-server terminology is simple to understand (e.g. lots of different screens aren't connecting to a single xterm, but lots of xterms might connect to my screen - so my screen is naturally a sort of server). However, in Windows land, ordinary users are conditioned to think that their machine and everything on it is always the client and never the server; servers are magic things run in ivory towers that require expen$ive licenses to operate. Therefore, the notion that a screen might be providing services is a novel concept that takes awhile for them to wrap their brains around. Heck, even the trivial serving done by P2P programs is somewhat novel to the average Joe Windows user, so it's not surprising that X11's technology terminology might seem foreign to those unused to it.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Headius]

This is my favorite reply.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[fferreres]

It is hard, if you think of SERVERS as applications that provide a service to other clients. Web server, email server, file server.

So when they say they want to connect to your Server to use an X app, they mean they want to connect to the application that offer such service and that they are the clients that provide a Window to the server so that they can use it from whereever they are.

It makes more sense to call applications that provide remote services Servers than to call your client computer a server.

Or do you call your web app a server and slashdot you client application? Do you call your ssh client your server software and your remote (server) machine your client? Because basically, the terminal display accomplishes the same task than an X *server*.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Loundry]

What's so hard to understand about it? That is, unless you're deliberately trying not to understand?

The problem is semantic; specifically, the multiple and conflicting (in this instance) definitions of "server." Your response is an ad hominem and does not help.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[bockman]

Cases in point - graphical installers for Mandrake 8 and Redhat 8, both autoconfigured X well enough to run the installer beautifully, at the right screen resolution and bit-depth.

Are you sure? Last time I checked (Mandrake 7.x, I believe) the installer used the 'standard svga' mode, which is to say 640x480 at 256 colors. Which works on - almost - all the graphic cards.

But yes, it should be offered as option for a 'safe minimal configuration', so that the users are always set in in a graphical environment at the end of installation.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[FooBarWidget]

"DirectX is better than X11 for direct access to the hardware buffer."

That's comparing apples to oranges.
Compare DirectX with SDL+OpenGL.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[aussersterne]

Same old troll, getting modded up again.

X is no slower than the Windows GDI for many things and is faster in some things. 2D acceleration in X is excellent, better than Windows for most display hardware, and 3D frame rates are within 1-2% of Windows. I routinely watch full-screen DVD in X and I use X (running Windows in emulation, no less) to do tons of graphics work. X is simply not slow.

I wouldn't be surprised if what you're seeing is a lack of memory on your system, meaning that parts of the cache (on a KDE+X system, you want to cache everything) are being flushed and are thus having to be refetched before being displayed again.

If it feels slow to you (especially if it feels slower than OS X, whose display PDF system is dog slow), then you're misconfigured or inadequately configured.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[ukyoCE]

I think your problem was probably your window manager, not with X. I use X with Blackbox on a Pentium 233 and it *never* has any problems, whereas even on my 1ghz Athlon Windows XP will lag moving windows. In the case of Windows I think it's more due to their poor process scheduler than the graphics code.

But anyway, seriously, KDE and Gnome are crap. They're slow and buggy as hell. Don't confuse them with X. My friend used KDE and complained all the time that Linux is buggier and slower than windows.

What Linux really needs is just some decent configuration tools for the GOOD simple window managers like Blackbox. I love my Blackbox set up, but I had to a bunch of hand-editing of config files, which sucks.

Of course there's some truth to apps being buggy. Some apps, like XMMS, Xchat, Mozilla, E-Roaster, etc. have never crashed on me, ever. But I've had a hell of a time trying to find a decent graphical FTP client for Linux. all the ones I could find were horribly buggy because they're still under heavy development. And while I love gaim, it still crashes on me occasionally, maybe once a week.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[aallan]

I don't NEED to display the window from one machine on another, but running X, I don't have the option of turning that feature off.

You might not need to, but alot of other people do...

These days, a desktop environment should be dedicated to local applications FIRST, and then provide support for remoting windows SECOND.

Looking at the windows open right now on my desktop, about half of them are running on remote machines, this is fairly typical. When you need this sort of functionality, you really need it...

Al.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Elwood P Dowd]

Well, if it makes you feel any better, I'm not an OSS person. I run Mac OS X, and love it.

On the rare occasion that I play with Linux, there is a huge increase in GUI speed. And it's a lot uglier.

Are there problems with X Windows? Sure. Is it the client/server architecture? No. Is it the speed? No. Not if you think Mac OS X is better: Aqua is client/server *and* it's slower.

The core of his argument... doesn't exist. Pick something I've said and tell me it's wrong.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[iabervon]

I've personally never run Windows on anything especially new, but I've always found Windows to get slow responses a lot of the time. I've found Linux to be reasonably good, only getting sluggish when I'm doing something complicated (like compiling a lot of java files while running jboss and oracle). At work, I've got a 1GHz P3 with Linux 2.2 and XFree86 4.0.3; at home I've got a P2 266 (IIRC) with Linux 2.4 and (IIRC) XFree86 4.1, and the interactive performance is perfect (although, obviously, compiles and such take a lot longer).

Of course, I'm not using Gnome, KDE, Open/StarOffice, etc., since I don't really like the MS/Mac-inspired "desktop" interface. But I think that this indicates that the problem is the desktop software, not X (which updates everything promptly when the programs get around to figuring out what to display). The client-server issues apply about equally to X (when it's run locally, of course) and Windows; passing data to a system thread isn't all that different from passing it to a user-space application.

The stability issue is not (generally) X either; problems with X crashing have, in my experience, been mainly due to hardware problems (we got a bunch of machines with bad memory).

I don't see Linux desktop environments getting all that polished either, actually, but that's because I think that the desktop metaphor is fundamentally flawed. I see a polished Linux system coming from an entirely new design based on having the core software already exist, and wrapping it with an interface derived from useability studies. I see this as a Linux system in particular because Linux and X provide a large part of the necessary functionality without requiring a particular interface.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Jason Earl]

The glass-house is on its way back, and when the thin client pendulum swings the other way X is going to come right back into style. Thin clients really are the wave of the future in large organizations, the problem. They are far easier to maintain than PCs, and they are less expensive to boot. The problem with thin clients (since the PC days anyway) was that the software that people actually wanted to use was only available on a PC.

Linux, however, has finally gotten to the point where it provides an acceptable (but not spectacular) set of applications that are available on X terminals. For most office workers an X terminal running StarOffice, Mozilla, and Evolution would be more than good enough, and the savings, both in software licensing costs, and in maintenance would be far lower.

Secondly, the added weight of X is not nearly as big as you think. With optimized drivers correctly set up the difference in performance between X Windows and Windows is neglible, and as hardware continues to improve it will become even more neglible. Believe me, if artists designing movies can use Linux on their desktops then the rest of us will be fine.

In other words, you might believe that X Windows is holding Linux back, but when Linux does take over the desktop I bet you will find that quite the opposite is true. X Windows is the key to making Linux on the desktop vastly more affordable and easy to support than Windows.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Elwood P Dowd]

Windows 2000's graphics may be faster than KDE's. I wouldn't know. But Quartz isn't. At least not 'till QuartzGL. And would you say Windows 2000's gui is faster than BlackBox? I can't stand Linux's gui toolkits either, but that's unrelated to X.

You're right. I should have qualified: X Windows isn't slow due to it's Client/Server architecture. X windows isn't slower than Quartz.

As for calling him a troll, I could be wrong. Saying "X Windows needs to be improved drastically" is something I could agree with. Saying "X Windows should be abandoned" begs all kinds of obvious responses... but maybe troll was too much. But since I wasn't moderating, it didn't matter. I never mod down for any reason.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Loundry]

The original post was an ad hominem, in case you missed it.

There was no ad hominem in the parent post. And do you think that one person acting childishly gives you the right to respond in kind? If you want to sway people to your point of view, then you need to present your facts without all of the insults and the snide "in case you missed it" remarks.

I still don't understand what the confusion is.

People are confused by the problems arising from the multiple meanings of "server." I think it's ultimately a semantic problem.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[fferreres]

Of course I understand that server is a relative term. But most people that come from a Windows enviroment have trouble with it (including me when I was new to X Windows).

Most everything could be thought as server. Even a keyboard: a service for gathering keystrokes from human clients. Etc, etc.

But people do get confused about X being a server for the resons I stated. That's not my opinion but my experience. Every person new to X Windows must be explained that their X-Server is just their computer and that applications are just clients, in the X terminology.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[glassware]

Wow, I'm totally amazed that my comment caused such a gigantic tizzy. I thought I'd reply to your message, though, since your perspective seemed closest to mine.

It's obvious that there are many people who have different opinions about the way that the X server/client relationship is defined. I'm sure it's possible to make an argument about any one of a hundred possible "correct" server/client relationships. In my head, I imagine grad students at a bar celebrating a milestone in X/Windows development:

Grad Student A: "Hey, man, you know that IP based X client program we wrote? It's really a server, not a client, because it accepts graphics connections."
Grad Student B: "Whoah, you're right. I'll buy next round if you'll update the docs."

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Loundry]

You seem not to have read it very closely.

I went back and re-read it to be sure. I still disagree.

I thought there was no ad hominem in the parent post. So there was after all?

There is no ad hominem in the parent post. When I called you on yours, you deferred to the parent, as if you were claiming "one bad turn deserves another." I notice you don't deny that you had sunk to invective.

Who's trying to convince somebody? What's my point of view? Facts are facts, regardless of presentation.

I agree. You come off like an arrogant prick in your posts. You will piss off more people than you enlighten with this attitude. I think you would do a good job of educating people about the things you believe in if you stop being so snide and condescending.

The X protocol has a certain definition. There is no convincing needed unless people simply do not desire to listen to the facts; and if that is the case, I need not bother replying, since those type of people will believe whatever they want in any case.

I agree with this, too. It does not excuse your condescending "what's not to understand, you dumbass?" response to the original post.

The phrase "In case you missed it" refers to the case in which the person who replied had neglected to read the context of said post (including its parent) before replying. Since the replier demonstrated either 1) being incredibly obtuse, or 2) not having read the parent post, I chose to defer to the latter possibility in kindness.

Who cares what it referred to? It's still a haughty way of writing "stick that in your pipe and smoke it!" Your defense of it, once again, comes off as snide and condescending. Can we just stick to the facts?

Quite possible, but

Snip! When you inject the conjuction "but" you discount everything which comes before it. Do you agree with me or don't you?

If people are going to debate its technical merits, fine, but claiming that "X designers should obviously have done this and that instead" without even knowing the history and background behind such decisions is simply naive.

I agree! I think you and I agree on a lot of the technical issues. What I find disagreeable is your presentation.

Re:X has kept me away from Linux

[Lobsang]

Guess what...as far as configuration, there is the RandR from Compaq that is not part of XF86 taht allows for on the fly configuration. fonts are not a problem any longer, you just need a DE that supports AA and you need a good font library installed.


Sorry to tell you but fonts are still a problem. Have you compared the TT rendering done by X to the rendering in Windows? Even though I despise MS I have to agree they did a good job on this. Also, AA in X is a big complication: Some apps will use it, some others won't. It's not so much of a problem to most techies but to the end user it's just a nightmare.

Another one: Bad looking fonts: Have you run AbiWord recently? It's scary! (The product itself is very cool, but the fonts are really bad).

The point of having a GUI is to allow a no-brain person to use a computer. If the GUI requires the extensive knowledge to install/configure, people will just move to what they know (windoze).

Virus protection

[clem.dickey]

Every so often a memo comes out reminding us that we must have the latest Norton Anti-Virus. NAV is not supported on Linux, so I have to power on the Windows box to update my virus protection. Except for that it stays off.

If it ain't broke...

[72beetle]

...don't fix it. My win machines do what I need them to. When that's not the case anymore, maybe I'll do something about it, but until then, changing everything would just create more headaches than running with what I have.

-72

Re:If it ain't broke...

[esarjeant]

That's been my experience also; but I tend to follow this rule of thumb for all my boxes --- even (gasp) WinNT systems.

Currently I've got one Windows box at home, who's sole purpose is to play Empire Earth and Siege. After my XP box got struck by lightning (how ironic considering the other problems I was having with it...) I replaced it with a Walmart PC with Gentoo and haven't looked back.

I think W2K will be my last Windows box. At work all my development systems are Linux.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Denver_80203]

I agree. While the 9x and NT machines were a little bumpy, they got MS in the door. Now 2000/XP are very stable and easy to use. All the applications that my company uses are in MS OS. Linux and Mac machines simply don't have the applications that an Oil Drilling company needs. Certainly are are /some/, but not nearly enough to support the company being "half on one foot". Finally: I don't care if Bill is rich enough. It's not my concern. I have better things to do than hate a company because it's "big". I'm certain that when linux grows large enough and starts serving every possible customer, things will bump into each other and cause problems, too.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[sniggly]

And windows is stable as opposed to what, California around the San Andreas faultline?

What Keeps Me on Windows?

[Psx29]

The Asian Language Support. I can seamlessly switch between Japanese and Chinese input with windows. It is a lot more cumbersome in linux. Aside from that...there are certain programs that are just not available for linux systems and won't function under a windows emulator (or WINE for that matter) which are a neccesity(namely certain CD-R software, and file-sharing software).

Work

[alexjohns]

Most of the time, I'm surfing from work, where it's all Windows on the desktops. At home, I dual-boot Win98 and Mandrake. Most of the free time I have at home, I play Moonbase Commander in Windows, so if I surf before or after, it's most likely in Windows, but at least I'm using Mozilla to surf.

The wife has a crappy laptop, so she uses my machine a lot. It's better if it's booted into Windows for that purpose, so I leave it there most of the time. Actually thinking about springing for a copy of VMWare. Would make switching OS's much quicker.

Just bought a new house. So I don't have much in the way of funds or free time at the moment. Maybe that'll change.

drivers and software

[morgajel]

While I use linux for just about everything, neverwinter nights and now battlefield 1942 are keeping me on windows.
for my girlfriend, her hp printer/fax/all-in-one is a bitch to set up, and I just don't have the time/expertise to fiddle with it.

oh, and usb support for her palm pilot. I talked to the author of palm link, and he wanted me to upgrade to an unstable kernel if I wanted any chance of it even coming close.

I decided it wasn't worth it. For now, she uses linux, but reboots every week or so to backup her palm pilot.

Two multimedia areas

[joeflies]

I use Linux full time (red hat 7.3 on pc, debian for the sparc machine) for business use - StarOffice (x86) for applications and KDE desktop for everything else. Win4Lin or Wine will get me by if I need one or two windows apps.

But for home use, two areas still keep me using Windows. One, digital camera software seems to advance very quickly on Windows. While I know the functionality exists on gphoto and gimp, I find the autodownload, automount, filename tagging/sorting, automatic resizing depending on destination (for printer, web, or e-mail), and the ability to select specific paper profiles in Kodak Easyphoto fairly compelling for the everyday photo stuff. I like Gimp for heavy duty stuff but still find PhotoDeluexe to be more intuitive due to longtime Photoshop use. You can get part of the way with Win4Lin or Wine, but the paper profile stuff isn't so easy to do.

The second area - I still prefer Nero over all the Linux-based burning solutions, especially with its ability to handle so many disc formats. I hear Wine will now support Nero with DLLs, but I haven't got it to work myself.

Why my main is Windows

[ruszka]

Being a beginner to *nix (having only started running it for a couple years now), I mostly use Windows because of school. I am taking two webcourses at the moment, so I am constantly sending my instructors documents in Word format (correct me if I'm wrong, but I assume *nix can't save as Word formats). Also, I am in the programming curriculum and taking c# this semester so I am using VS .Net. As much as I enjoy slackware and learning about it, I am not comfortable nor knowledgable enough to go full-blown *nix only while I still depend on M$ apps.

Re:Why my main is Windows

[LordSah]

If you ever start doing development work on Linux/Unix, you'll wish you could go back to Windows. gdb kinda-sorta works, but you'll probably end up doing all your debugging with printf's anyway. The VS debugging capabilities are the best, period, amen.

If there is an open source debugger that works as well as VS, please let me know. However, the last time I did Linux programming (about a year ago), it was printfs.

Re:Why my main is Windows

[rainwalker]

If you are submitting documents electronically, I highly recommend using OpenOffice and submitting .pdf's. I use Linux pretty much exclusively here at home, but my school is rabid-MS-only, so I print all of my OpenOffice docs as PostScript (there is a little checkbox in the print menu), then pop open a terminal and type 'ps2pdf (document)'. OpenOffice doesn't seem to make working pdf's automagically at the moment, which is why I use the two step process, but I'm told the latest rev of OpenOffice (643 or whatever) has native pdf working. After all, pretty much everyone, everywhere, has a pdf reader...looks prettier too!

Re:Why my main is Windows

[Micah]

Not Open Source, but there's always Borland Kylix, which now supports C++. Its debugger has all of the features you'd expect.

For Open Source, there's Data Display Debugger (DDD), though it hasn't been updated in a while and it's a front end to gdb. I don't know why you say gdb doesn't work, but admittedly it's cryptic without GUI front ends.

Re:Why my main is Windows

[ruszka]

The problem is.. it *has* to be in Word format.. Due to one of the picky instructors I have, I am stuck depending on what she requires. It's become really pathetic how so many instructors are doing webcourses when they haven't a clue about computers. Hopefully after my talk with the VP of the college, this may change eventually.

Different tools for different tasks.

[Blimey85]

I use Linux for work and WinXP for games. I also use XP for doing some online shopping when I can't get Mozilla to behave but that problem has pretty much gone away for the most part, at least at the sites I frequent.

I also get an occasional MS Office file and while there are products available for Linux that will allow me to work with these files, it's far simpler for me to pull them up in Office on my laptop. I also need to run Quicken and Quickbooks and so having my laptop running XP makes it all very convenient. It's a shame that I need to either boot into XP or use a second computer to get through the average day but that has been the easiest way that I have found.

Also, I don't have MS like a lot of people do. I do actually like some of their products and while I agree that they have some pretty bad business practices, a lot of security holes, and a list of other things to bitch about, I still find some of their products to be quite useful. I have a MS keyboard and a MS mouse that I really like. I use Office XP when I need to do a spreadsheet or write a business letter. I play Motocross Madness and Age of Empries on occasion. I use some Adobe products as well as other applications and games that aren't available in Linux and since I don't have a Mac, I'm SOL on being able to run OS X.

The more I think about the situation, the less I think that Linux will ever wipe out Windows. I don't think it will ever happen and I don't think that it should. It's all about choice and I do think that we will eventually reach a point where we are free to choose an operating system based solely on that os's merits (with all of the major apps being available for Win, Mac, and Linux).

Until everything that I want to use is available for Linux, I'll continue to contribue to the obscene profits of MS when they have a new program or an upgrade that I wish to purchase. I use whatever is best for the given task. Games, it's Windows. Work (for me) it's Linux. Graphics it's (if only I could afford to get one) Mac.

my situ

[CormacJ]

In work I use a Windows 2000 box because thats what management want to use as a standard. The servers I administer are almost all linux.

At home I have a dual boot Windows ME/Redhat PC and a Dedicatred Redhat PC. I use windows there for some architect software and games. Development is mostly done under linux (with recompiles under windows to test)

It's all about the software.

[Stonehand]

My home system dual-boots 'tween Win2K and SuSE Linux. Both halves are rather stable, and sufficiently familiar as to be quite usable. However, they have different uses...

The SuSE side gets used for programming, CD writing (mkisofs + cdrecord), browsing, writing (Emacs + LaTeX, since if I'm writing it's probably for a technical paper), and certain games (notably _Dominions_ -- the windows version interacts badly with my video driver).

The Windows side gets used for photo manipulation (first some Minolta software to change color spaces, then PSP, which I find far more useful than the Gimp *shrug*), some browsing (for sites that work better in IE than in Konqueror), and certain games (such as CM:BB). I've also used Excel to create far more presentable graphs than what Gnuplot provides, and Powerpoint for presentations.

Why stay on Windoze?

[sakeneko]

Work -- almost all the companies I work for use it and mandate it. At home, I've been planning to install Linux onto my laptop for months, but keep not having the time. It is going to be a non-trivial task, unfortunately -- finding the drivers for a laptop isn't always easy.

It depends where I'm at

[JWW]

At work in the Office areas, its all Windows (per corporate mandate).

On the shop floor, its X-terminals running both HP-UX and Linux apps (per stable apps developed and refined over the past 8 years). Tight integration, works like a charm and solid. The search for new process control software tools is comming up with very little outside of windows stuff, but Unix/Linux compatibility is a big requirement for us. We're not going down the path to support nightmares for PC's on the shop floor like in other locations.

At home, Linux, except for games that aren't Tuxracer and GLTron, then I gotta run Win98.

Other than games? Not a hell of a lot.

[TellarHK]

I'm buying my second iBook today. I have two PC's, a 500Mhz iBook and a couple Sun classic-era workstations that I play with. Windows is for gaming, pretty much says it all. Sure, my Windows machine is more upgradeable than my laptops, but for the past month I've been using the iBook constantly on the job and have no problem whatsoever with it except that I really like what apple has done to revamp the line. So what did I do?

Today I got a loan from Apple, and will be getting a new $1489 iBook. 800Mhz, 640M of RAM, 30G, and a 32M Radeon in it. Am I stoked? Fuck yeah, I'm stoked. My iBook is going to my partner on 'indefinite postponed payment' once I get my new one. He'll make the second person I've brought over into the Mac realm. And just about two years ago, I was bashing them myself.

OSX is just incredible. No two ways about it, it kicks ass. Closed source GUI? Sure. I can live with that. Secretive API's? I can live with that too. It just works.

And as soon as I get back from the Salem, NH Apple Store tonight, I'll be reading good ol' Slashdot from it. Happy as hell.

Microsoft OS'es are lousy, but the games are okay. At this rate though, I'll be shelving Windows in favor of a PS3 or whatever comes next, and a desktop Mac.

Re:Other than games? Not a hell of a lot.

[woggo]

Whoa, check out Intuem. It's $80 (with a trial), and worth it. I use it as a MIDI sketchpad, but it's functional enough to use for arranging and editing sequences, too. (Logic is the way to go for real work, IMHO, but I've been too busy hacking on AudioUnits lately to make much music.)

Furthermore, the "logic big box" is only like $250 -- an astonishing deal when you consider what it includes. There is nothing like that on Windows anymore.

Games and Programming.

[Viewsonic]

I'm all for other OS's and I did support BeOS when it was available.. but.. Windows has such a wide platform of dev tools and directx, that programming something is just too easy. I can really make what I want VERY quickly with awesome results. The sheer amount of tools to help me with this is just incredible on Windows also.. there are virtually dozens of 3d modellers for windows that are free. it's crazy.

Why?

[gTsiros]

Because after having tried Redhad 5.1/7, Mandrake 7 8, Suse, Slackware 8.1 during the past 4-5 years, i found out that if i want to use my accessories and hardware, i have to use 98SE.

Because when i wanted to play divx5 content (i could play divx4) i had to download not only the plugin for XINE but also the new XINE version, the new alsa version and the new kernel.

Because when i got slackware 8.1 , thinking i finaly found the best distro (friends told me "it's tight" and i like that), i ran gpm, it froze, i ran startx it froze,only thing that worked was modprobe sb. I am not going to start reading manpages if issuing a simple command freezes an entire system. What am i supposed to do? reboot after every failed attempt at configuring my hardware? Yeah, that happens under windows too.

windows 98se are going strong on this pc (433celeron, 128M, 20G, geforce2mx, sbawe64g) for lots of years.

sorry folks, but this is what happened to me. This is my story. If you have not these issues i explained, i envy you. Wish i managed too. I really do.

Re:Why?

[Micah]

sheesh, sorry you had so many problems. :/

In reality, I have plenty of stuff working under Red Hat 8 -- HP 5200C USB scanner, SanDisc SDDR 31 USB CompactFlash reader, HP 8200something CDR... and I had to do very little tweaking, certainly no searching for drivers or reinstalling.

The key is to buy hardware that Linux supports. You'll need to buy a new PC someday, so keep that in mind when you do. Once you do that, you should have few problems.

Because Linux is not a Desktop OS

[disc-chord]

Look I love FreeBSD, don't get me wrong. My server runs FreeBSD, my router box runs FreeBSD... but my desktop machine is running Windows 2000.

For me Windows 2000 is just like Linux, except it runs desktop apps which is a nice bonus for a desktop OS. It's not the interface, believe me (I refused to go to Windows 95 for the longest time because of my preference towards CLI). It's just the simple fact that there are so many more exciting apps for Windows.

Whenever there is a neat new technology out it always comes out for Windows first, then *nix, then Mac. (Recent Examples: P2P, PAR, Bottler, etc.) As a fan of technology I want to run the technology as soon as I can download it... not wait for a port! Sure there are ports for nearly every P2P protocol out for NIX, and there are PAR clients, and yes there's even Buttler... but these versions are always months behind in development compared to their Windows counterparts.

Going hand in hand with technology is, of course, games. One can only play so much Tux Racer before going back to Windows for Mafia or the latest Half-Life/Quake Mod.

Re:Because Linux is not a Desktop OS

[unicron]

I couldn't agree more. An OS is merely a medium for applications to run. Linux just flat out doesn't have the software backing that Windows does. Keep in mind when I say software I mean well-funded, professional developed applications and games. A 15 year old fat-kid hiding away in his closet plinking out a Linux based Excel clone doesn't count as the "Linux equivalent of Excel". As for games, not even a contest, obviously. I still laugh my ass off when someone loads the Gnome games and uses them as an example of how Linux has come a long way with its games. I actually almost weep it's so sad. I would love to see Linux come into its own..but it's going to happen when truely professional software companies jump on the bandwagon, not guys on sourceforge.

Re:Because Linux is not a Desktop OS

[freakinPsycho]

I feel pretty much the same.

Three machines here. Two are FreeBSD servers, the other dual boots between WinXP and FreeBSD. I really like both OS's. People bitch a lot about Windows and Microsoft, but in many ways you owe some things to them.

Yes, there are things I don't like about Windows, but that's why I dual boot. There's also a couple things that are sticking points with me about FreeBSD (but I like it better than linux).

Bottom line, no OS is perfect. Each OS has it's place. Depending on what I want to do determines what OS I'm in.

Re:Because Linux is not a Desktop OS

[davew666]

Whenever there is a neat new technology out it always comes out for Windows first, then *nix, then Mac

This is not true, what about Firewire? This is only around now because Mac stuck with it, and it was then picked up by the PC manufacturers.

Re:Because Linux is not a Desktop OS

[Micah]

A 15 year old fat-kid hiding away in his closet plinking out a Linux based Excel clone doesn't count as the "Linux equivalent of Excel".

No, but OpenOffice.org Calc does.

I still laugh my ass off when someone loads the Gnome games and uses them as an example of how Linux has come a long way with its games.

If you're comparing the games bundled with Windows to the ones bundled with GNOME, then GNOME kicks Windows' arse! Whatever the OS, you have to install additional games. Plenty of decent games are working on Linux now.

I would love to see Linux come into its own..but it's going to happen when truely professional software companies jump on the bandwagon

That WILL happen... when enough people decide to use Linux! Yeah it's a bit of a chicken and egg problem, but you CAN help move it along by using Linux where you can, today. When more people do that, the companies will know there is a market for it.

Re:Because Linux is not a Desktop OS

[bwt]

I would love to see Linux come into its own..but it's going to happen when truely professional software companies jump on the bandwagon, not guys on sourceforge.

So IBM, Oracle, Dell, and Sun don't count?! Perhaps you didn't hear that OracleWorld has been retitled "OracleOnLinuxWorld" this year.

Name one company besides MS that isn't jumping on the bandwagon.

Re:Because Linux is not a Desktop OS

[theLOUDroom]

AFAIK you can play every version of quake on linux. I have a copy of quake 3 for linux installed right now. It works great.
I'm also running the current version of limewire.
There are some apps you can get for linux and there are some apps you can't get for windows, but please pick valid examples. Windows doesn't always have the best software for a particular task either. Your generalizations are much too broad.
I'm not saying linux is always the best choice, I'm just trying to correct some misconceptions that non-linux users may have.

school and work

[Maskirovka]

The computer labs at my school use windows workstations for the most part. They have macs too, but the are obsolete first gen G3s which no one knows how to maintain, and as a result, don't get used. At work, we use windows almost excluvivally for workstations, and netware on servers, because of all the legasy apps. Most of the web stuff is run off of linux though.

I could see either place switching to linux if the emulation and office compatability were better, but there are hundreds of scientific apps, and about a dozen custom prioprietary databases that are windows/dos only.

Because windows is better!

[Telastyn]

(to me) one of the great strengths of *nix machines is you're able to remotely administrate them very nicely and easily. cli tools exist for everything, and that is their great strength.

Windows machines' great strength lies in having tons of apps that are interactive only (games, ie, office). Plus (in my case) it's alot easier (imo) to actually use and configure the windowing system on windows.

So I use a win2k machine, and have a few putty's open to my *nix machines...

Maybe one day I'll comprimise and get an OS X box, but currenty the two machines are still cheaper than one mac.

Games and Work

[gheidorn]

Games on the PC are dominated by the Win32 platforms. If there's ever a point where games are released for *NIX at the same time as the Win32 version, I would switch. As long as my company maintains systems like Lotus Notes and a Visual Age repository, I'll be on Windows at home. :(

Because of Clippy

[ChopSocky]

I just can't get the useful help and cutsy animations from Linux. Clippy is my best friend. I love Clippy. If you used Clippy once, you'd grow to love him too. I can't live or breathe without Clippy...

Why Windows

[Shadow Wrought]

At work I use the company issued Compaq with Windows 2000. At home, well we are working on that. We are looking at buying a computer for the house in the next few months but it will most likely have Windows on it.

My fiancee wants to use it for Quicken, the kids for games. I want to use the games as well have having the option of working on documents from home. I am also, however, planning on getting the Amithlon as a secondary part of the system for my fun.

I have talked to friends about Linux and, quite frankly, I just don't have the computer knowledge base to try and use it as the primary OS. Hell I'm not even sure I can pull the Amithlon off ('tis been a long time since I played with my A1200). I have seen people with far more experience than myself struggle to get things to work with it. They are happy when they do, but I don't want to spend my weekends fighting with the confuser.

My $0.02.

I'm a Lightwave dude...

[Anonvmous Coward]

I'm an animator. I use Lightwave (PC or Mac, no Linux for at least a year or two), I use Photoshop, and I use After Effects. Right now, I'm stuck with Windows or even Mac.

Would I switch to Linux if magically everything worked? Not today. I recently tried Linux. My biggest complaint was that there was no way I could be productive on it without knowing some obscure command-line stuff. I had trouble getting the network going, I never got sound to work, and I found installing some (not all) software to be difficult. This was Redhat 7.2.

I enjoyed setting up a Redhat webserver. That went reasonably well, and it's behaving quite nicely. As a desktop machine, though, it was a horrible experience for me. I'm an artist. I'm right brained. I don't want to learn a bunch of commands when Windows' UI very elegantly manages the hardware. So yeah, I'm spoiled.

I plan on re-evaulating Linux in a year or so, but I think they need to evolve the UI more before they convert me. In the mean time, I am a satisfied Windows 2000 user. It's hard to switch when today I have working machines that don't give me problems. I've never lost an overnight or even an over-the-weekend render due to an instability in Windows or Lightwave.

I guess what I'm saying is: Not only does Linux need to be as good as Windows (particularly in the UI area...), it's also got to entice me some how. Film Gimp was a step in the right direction...

Re:I'm a Lightwave dude...

[uberstool]

You might want to try being a particle

Re:I'm a Lightwave dude...

[Anonvmous Coward]

"You might want to try being a particle"

I totally didn't get that. heh.

Re:I'm a Lightwave dude...

[Anonvmous Coward]

"I've heard this excuse too many times from artists and musicians. It's not true."

No no, it's very true. Right brained people tend to work visually. When I have a log to look through in Windows, I have a nice clean spreadsheet looking dealie I can scroll through. When I want to see a list of available commends, I right click on cells etc. A CLI interface, though powerful as it is, is an inhibiter to intuitiveness.

Long story short: People like me work better when they have visual cues to work from. We can work out the more detailed stuff if need be, but there's a reason why all the media related apps out there are increasingly moving to real time feedback.

P.S. I didn't really think you were flaming. I think you make excellent points.

Re:I'm a Lightwave dude...

[dodobh]

Wave particle duality from quantum physics. Light behaves like a wave and a particle at the same time.
Rather nice pun

Re:I'm a Lightwave dude...

[Anonvmous Coward]

"You should try Knoppix - it's based on Debian."

Noted, thank you. :)

Re:I'm a Lightwave dude...

[Anonvmous Coward]

Ah ya had me confused there. Lightwave has a pretty good particle system. :)

Re:I'm a Lightwave dude...

[theLOUDroom]

Did you install X?
No seriously did you?
What window manager did you pick?
I switched from windows to redhat 7.2 last winter. I find the KDE UI to be much better than the windows UI.
It loaded with tons of little "nice touches." Like being able to hit ALT-F2 and type gg:thing i want to google search for. An you don't have to learn that to use it. You can still just start Konqueror and type in a location just like IE.
Another good example is 4 virtual desktops by default. Yeah, it confuses someone whos never seen it before for a couple minutes, but then they either love it or just don't use it and it doesn't bother them.
You really don't need to use CLI for very much, unless you want to. There's a GUI app to handle just about everything. The only thing you need CLI for is the really hardcore system administration stuff.
If you disagree with me on this stuff I'd like to read your reply, because I seem to have had a totally different experience than you.

True

[ArchieBunker]

I won't switch until linux can do all these jobs flawlessly:

1. Run the latest games
2. Capture/encode video into divx or mpeg2 streams using commercial quality programs such as Cinema Craft
3. Play the latest media format (Sorenson, Windows Media, Realplayer(gag)
4. Run about a million win32 programs dating from 1992-present

Heres a good example of where windows wins and linux loses. I wanted a program for grabbing audio from my sound card and encoding to mp3 in realtime for archiving radio shows. In linux I had to fight with lame, cron, and some sketchy recording programs which produced files that skipped. In windows I downloaded a program, set the timer and picked my bitrate and had it working in minutes.

Re:True

[dbrutus]

By your criteria list you sound like a Mac OS X candidate. Wait for a bit and check them out about when the PPC 970 comes out.

Plug-ins and file-formats

[Lemmy Caution]

To be able to view and write to the widest possible number of formats, I have to run a Windows machine. This includes things like the Sorenson codec, etc. That, and, of course, games.

Combination

[youngsd]

I do law part time. All of the agreements I have to work on are in Word format, and I haven't (yet) had luck with any of the word processors that run on Linux. Some open some Word documents, but it's a hassle to reboot to Windows to open a document.

I also do programming part time. My current project is an intranet application to manage the review and redaction of electronic documents. The import utility has to run native Windows applications (like MS Office), but the server is on Linux. Even so, the application has to work well with Internet Explorer, so even when I'm working on the server, I've got to keep Windows up on my desktop system for testing.

Then, of course, there are the games. If Battlezone II and X-Wing Alliance were on Linux, I'd be in heaven.

-Steve

Yes it is the games

[avante]

The only thing at this point keeping me with a very very old copy of Windows 98 at home is the fact that the games are all there.

Unfortunately, this situation does not seem to be diminishing. What's worse, more games are coming out for XBox, and NOT on the PC platform, meaning to continue my lifestyle, I would need one of those... which is unthinkable to me.

I will completely abandon Windows when I have outgrown computer games. All my favorite development tools are on GNU/Linux or are cross platform. In fact, I even like Netbeans (free/open software) better than Borland JBuilder, which I happen to like a lot. For graphics, I like Gimp, although it takes getting used to. Mozilla has finally reached a critical point in development for me (and I want to develop for Mozilla as a platform). OpenOffice does more than I'll ever need, and doesn't even give me enough problems with Word documents anymore. The chat clients are better, text editing better, etc. Evolution is better than Outlook for me. I've had it with that other MS thing.

But the games...

I used to work at home, and when I did, I used GNU/Linux. Now I work in an office, and I still use GNU/Linux there. In fact, we are working very hard to ensure that all of our clients use GNU/Linux. There are two reasons. One, Free and Open software does not cost money, that's obvious. Our clients are poor NGO's, often working in even poorer countries. But there is another... with the continuing introduction of new technologies to track and control content, computers and their use, it is concievable that it will become more difficult for our clients to continue working with Windows in the areas where they are working. Often, they live in places with oppressive governments and need to maintain a certain degree of anonymity and we must be certain that there computer does not communicate what they do to a third party. Can't do it with closed source stuff, and more and more it's harder to do with Windows.

In short, our clients are only using microsoft for application compatibility, but that will change. In some instances, their lives may depend on it.

Re:Yes it is the games

[bartash]

I will completely abandon Windows when I have outgrown computer games

You will then never abandon Windows. The trouble is you never grow out of playing games. Like with music you now don't have to give up games when you turn 30... 40...

Consistency is keeping me on Windows

[FattMattP]

Everything looks pretty much the same on Windows. I have one user interface to learn. I don't like skins. That's why I don't use Winamp or Trillian. That's why I haven't upgraded to Windows Media Player 7. WMP 6.4 looks like a normal application. 7 doesn't. The same idea applies to my feelings on GUI apps on Linux. Gnome apps have one look, KDE apps another. Nothing looks the same. I get one filemanager for Gnome apps, another for KDE, and yet another for apps that use a different toolkit. It's frustrating.

Cut and paste doesn't work the same everywhere. I never want what's in my copy buffer to be overwritten because I've selected something. Somes apps overwrite it, others done. I've found out there's a standard for cut and paste in X windows, but each app has a different method.

Apps. I don't have Adobe Illustrator, Photoshop, and After Effects for Linux, all apps I use from time to time to get my job done. GIMP sucks and there's a reason it's named GIMP. I don't like doing everything with the right mouse button. GIMP can't convert to CMYK if I have to send something to a printer.

I already use OpenOffice and Mozilla on my Windows machine and they are fantastic. I just use Linux for server tasks at this point. The GUI has a way to go before it reaches my confort zone. Your mileage may vary.

Re:Consistency is keeping me on Windows

[FattMattP]

I didn't know you could do that. Granted, I haven't used GIMP in a long time, so I'll have to give this a try. Thanks for the tip.

Re:Let me get this straight

[hondo77]

Right now I'm using open source software that came with my Mac, troll.

Absolutely Nothing

[Alethes]

I haven't used Windows in over a year now. I'd rather work around interoperability issues (like converting Word docs to HTML with wvHTML) than use Windows. I should admit that I don't play games at all, though.

Why not?

[aardvarkjoe]

I use Linux because it meets my needs. But for the vast majority of people who just want to write their e-mail, play a few games, surf the web ... there's no incentive to switch.

The general public will switch to Open Source if or when the benefits outweigh the disadvantages. Right now, for most people, Linux doesn't fit the bill. And, contrary to what people think, the problem isn't in marketing (or advocacy), the problems are technical. What advantages does Linux have for Grandma that offsets the disadvantage of having to learn a new OS?

I made the switch...

[Kintanon]

A few months ago I went completely over to Red Hat, pretty much right after the release of RH 8.0 I went fully over. I still have a windows box because this one specific poker client I use and really like doesn't run under Wine (it was made really crappy) and since I have the box there I also use it to play streaming mp3s so I don't have to tie my main boxes sound card up on that. I'll also occasionally fire up Kazaa on that machine to download something. But I do all of thse through VNC since the windows box is sitting headless and half naked behind my desk. All of my day to day gaming, web browisng, e-mail, etc... etc.. is done on Linux both at home and at work.

Kintanon

61% use Windows

[AnhZone]

Actual server log data shows that 61% of Slashdot readers use Windows (among those who visited this Ask Slashdot link). .
22% of Slashdotters use *nix (90% of them Linux) and 6% Macintosh.

Anh Zone
Patriotism is the conviction that your country is superior to all others because you were born there. (GBS)

Java!

[dubbayu_d_40]

CPU's are fast enough and the JDK is good enough. If games were written in Java we wouldn't need windows. WE NEED JAVA GAMES!!!!! And quicken too...

Re:Java!

[bwt]

Try Wyvern -- it's a java based graphical MUD. It reminds me a lot of the old Ultimas, except it's multi-player.

Re:Java!

[dbrutus]

Mac OS X has quicken, decent game selection, and quickbooks is in beta.

Re:Java!

[dbrutus]

The utility of platform independent software rises as the dominance of desktop computing by any one company recedes. If the market were split 30% windows, 30% mac, 25% linux, and 15% other then it would make sense to rewrite quicken in java as there would be jvm available on all platforms. Any extra support costs would be offset by not being restricted to a minority of the market. That's simple economics, no need for advocacy at that point.

What's important for platform independent software is for dominance to recede, in *any* direction. If Mac goes up to 20% of the market, people will start shifting to portable code which lowers barriers for still more entrants. Right now, it's any port in a storm and get off Windows if you can.

From what you write, you can, you just don't care to because it would cost more money than you care to in order to fulfill your desires.

least amount of effort to get up and running

[myc]

I don't work in IT, so for me Windows is the easiest to get up and running to do real (for me) work (web access, word processing, some graphics). I'd use a mac but I can't afford one :P it also helps that my institution has a site license for win2k and office. there is too much fiddling to do to get linux to work as a desktop OS. our lab uses linux for a fileserver though.

Word & games

[tsa]

At work I have a dual boot machine with Windows2000 and Linux (SW 7.1). Although I have OpenOffice installed, this is for many documents still not good enough - formulas and pictures are handled differently from formulas and pictures in Word. The problem is that in many cases OpenOffice treats formulas and pictures 'better' than Word (it does what is expected of it, and handles captions a lot better than Word (which doesn't handle those at all actually)), but because everyone uses Word these days a document made in OpenOffice should look the same in Word as I made it in OpenOffice. Therefore at work I have to use Windows. At home it's mainly the games that keep me booting Windows now and then. For some websites I also have to use IE, unfortunately.

Applications

[boa13]

Well, there's not only unsupported hardware, there are also applications that only work under Windows. I'm working with Rational XDE, which is quite impressive in several areas (UML, customer support, price, memory consumption, among others), but only works under Windows.

Oh, and I just forgot to mention Microsoft Office, which is required where I work. Yes, it exists for the Mac, too, but I don't have a Mac.

As icing on the cake, I will add some of my digital camera's utilities, especially the photo stitcher and the remote camera capture tool.

Besides, working in Windows is not that bad once you've installed your usual survival kit: Vim, Unix Utilities, TortoiseCVS (check that one!), PuTTY, multiple desktops, etc.

Games/Printing...

[jhughes]

That's all...computer games (a full 50% of my harddrive is just games in my windows partition).
And printing cuz I have a non linux compatiable printer.

Everything else: web browsing, music, burning, text editing, programming, video watching...can be done in Linux.

Investment so far...

[twocoasttb]

The biggest reason I stick with Windows is the sizeable investment I've made over the years in purchasing and learning Windows software. For example, I own most of the Adobe product line. I don't know that I'd switch to Linux, but I'd switch to OS X in a heartbeat if I could get my Adobe licenses converted. Adobe used to let you do that for the price of an upgrade (still too expensive), but I don't think they let you do that anymore. That's the biggest problem I have with Apple's 'Switch' campaign. Switching isn't attractive when the switch would cost way more than just the price of a new computer and OS.

OK, here is some tough honesty...

[wumarkus420]

I have used Linux since kernel .99 and Windows since v2.x, I have also used OS X, OS/2, BeOS, and FreeBSD. I had a period in my life where I loved to multiboot every possible OS. But then I realized that multibooting was a hassle. Then I realized that I had to pick. And I picked Windows. Why? Still - after all the advances in Linux drivers, I found that hardware was my biggest problem. I have had so many different combinations of hardware that haven't worked - The MS Phone (not a surprise), the CyberGenie, the old STB TV Tuner, old webcams, scanners, modems, ethernet cards, TV out on my matrox, etc. Games were never a priority, but all my hardware working correctly was. And WITHOUT all the hacking. Other reasons: I like the XP interface. I like it BETTER than KDE, Gnome, and OS X. This is an unbiased preference. The look and feel to me works the way I want it to. I don't like virtual windows. I don't like windows being automatically focused on. I also believe that Windows gets easier to use with each release. This makes things easier for both the user and the person that has to administer the users. It is a lot easier for me to explain how to copy a file from one person's user folder to another on a windows machine using fruity, yet helpful terms like "Network Neighborhood." Network configuration is simple. Hardware installation is simple. Server configuration is simple. I also don't mind Office. I don't mind having my letters capitalized for me sometimes. I don't mind having a word like 'teh' automatically turned into 'the' - I even don't mind IE. I don't like tabbed-browsing. I don't like the ads in Opera. I even don't mind Outlook. I like being reminded that I have to turn in my timesheet. I like that it synchornizes with my cell phone and reminds me to attend meetings. So there are a few reasons for me. Every few months I download another distribution and put it on my second computer at home (2 comparably powerful PC's). Then I try to do the things I commonly do (which are different at home than at work, but not really). For some reason, I keep ignoring the Linux machine. CD Burning is better in Windows - I have a lot more options with CloneCD, CDRWIN, Easy CD, Nero, Fireburner, etc. I even like the effects in XP - I like the fading menus in Win2K. Sure, I can save on system resources by turning them off, but I think it makes my computer seem more pleasing to the eye.

So sorry if that was a huge rambling, but I was thinking out loud as to why I do like Windows.

And just to give you some background, I am a sys/network admin who administers both Unix and Windows machines for a group of developers and sales staff. I am not against Unix, it's just not what I want running on my everyday machine. Because it has features I don't need everyday. Network security? Unix. Internet services? Unix. Looking at pr0n? WINDOWS!

Third-Party Apps mostly.

[simetra]

For the last X years, hundreds, maybe thousands of 3rd-party software vendors have been making all their stuff for Windows. As such, we utilize these Windows apps for which there are no alternative in the Free world.

I still use Windows at home most of the time because it's easy for the wife to use, and easy to install and use various apps and hardware. I can, but choose not to, blow hours reading config files and man pages to get something running that would take maybe 5 minutes to set up in Windows. And no, it never crashes, because I only install software I want, and allow very, very few TSR's and unnecessary services to run in the background. Basically, it works.

Yes, I know I CAN do all this in Linux, but I don't have as much free time as some people. It's still very far away from being user-friendly enough for anyone to actually use as an all-purpose OS.

Warcraft III runs fine on my iBook

[green pizza]

I bought the boxed, retail version of Warcraft III. It included a Mac version which runs great on my iBook.

I didn't want to be a n00b

[Nobody's Hero]

I switched over recently. At least I switched my servers at work. (Can't really switch at home the gf would beat me with a stick!) It wasn't an easy task. Before now I had only haphazardly used Linux here and there and knew enough of the commands to get by. It's hard to learn new things especially new OS's getting my samba working and getting IP Tables to act the way I want was a hell of alot harder than simply turning on file sharing and installing some firewall software.

I think for the majority of the users it's a case of the roadblock of pride. It's easier to use what you are used to then it is to ask for help all the time.

Most of us are tech savvy enough to not ask for help with our computers at all. In fact for the most part we hate people asking us for help. I mean, how many users have you wanted to slap? It's hard to take that large step backward and put yourself into a situation where you know very little and in many cases have to ask for help.

I've quickly picked up the linux stuff now and feel I am competent with it. It's a good solid OS and it doesn't die like my NT box did..

It's not that I didn't want to switch it's that I didn't want to be a n00b!

Apathy

[Junky191]

To be honest, I hate all OSes. I can use any of the big ones (windows, mac 9, X, linux, BSD) with equal ease, but they all have crippling shortcomings that annoy the hell out of me. I think a lot of people are like me- they don't want to waste time being the monkey that keeps a machine running, they want to use the machine to get the work done. The OS should just be transparent.

Not What, Who

[clinko]

I'm using windows because I'm lazy and I have money (read: American).

I turn the computer on, it works. I can watch videos in any format I wish, MSNBC is practically the only place that does free news that I've found.

I know you can get X-pluging with Y-player for linux, but this works easily and NOW.

Also, contrary to popular belief, windowsXP is stable as hell. More stable than any linux box i've owned. I help run an IT dept. here with about 40+ win2k and XP boxes and NEVER seen the OS crash. I've seen netscape crash plenty of times.

I'm the reason i'm not switching back to linux.

Nothings Keeping Me Anymore!

[1stflight]

Nada! As soon as my new parts arrive (I'm waiting for after the holiday season), I'm building a straight RH 7.3 (skip 8.0) or Mandrake based system, with a subscription to Transgaming's software, OpenOffice and KDE 3.1. Windows, my wife can keep that box!

P.S. As for the reason this message is posted from Windows, I'm at work..as with most Slashdotters I'm sure have workplaces that still use Windows.

My PP Scanner.... :-(

[ejaw5]

Unfortunately, my Parallel Port AcerScan 620P doesn't work on SANE. So I have to keep a Windoze partition incase I need to scan some documents. Also, my Physics and Diff. Eq. classes require use of Excel and MathCad. OpenOffice is fine for word documents, but I have YET to find an alternative (open or propreitary) spreadsheet that has all the data analysis features that Excel has. MathCad 7 works under WINE, but the files i have to open are Mathcad2000, which wont' install on WINE.

..Anyone want to offer suggestions in these respects? Oh yea, the AcerScan is a nice scanner, so I'm not giving that up.

It depends where I'm at

[JWW]

At work in the Office areas, its all Windows (per corporate mandate).

On the shop floor, its X-terminals running both HP-UX and Linux apps (per stable apps developed and refined over the past 8 years). Tight integration, works like a charm and solid. The search for new process control software tools is comming up with very little outside of windows stuff, but Unix/Linux compatibility is a big requirement for us. We're not going down the path to support nightmares for PC's on the shop floor like in other locations.

At home, Linux, except for games that aren't Tuxracer and GLTron, then I'm forced to run Win98 :-(

Protools and Money....

[TibbonZero]

I would be using Linux for most of my activities, including gaming, if it were not for the fact that I run Protools for recording all of my music, and that my soundcard (Digi001) is only supported under Mac OS 9.2 and Windows XP at the moment.
Support for OS X (10.2) will be out in December, but there's no linux support in site, and we don't even think that the developers know what linux is. Perhaps some smart chaps will figure out how to take the 10.2 version to Linux, but until then...

So why don't I have a mac? For the most part I don't like OS 9.2. It's about as far from Linux to me as you can get. Windows is much more down and dirty as you would say, than Mac OS 9.2. Well, that's my opinion. I always had a PC (x86 processor) but now I want a mac, but with school costs and everything, I must sell my HP laptop to buy it, and even then I am still down on the cash....

Anyone want a PIII/850 laptop, it runs linux well...?

KaZaA

[DennisZeMenace]

I personally don't use Windows, neither at work or at home, though obviously i don't play games a lot (besides an occasional Quake III on Linux). There's only ONE Windows application that I use frequently, and that's KaZaA. So i have a VMWare virtual machine that i use just for this, with the KaZaA download directory being a Samba directory on the Linux host.

DZM

Corporate Standards and SO Pressure

[agrounds]

I have a Slack box on my desk at work for all my primary needs. It has all the tools I require to do my job and automate as much as possible. It is -in short- my life here. Sitting not three feet from it is my laptop running Win2K Server (server strictly for the network monitor). It's sole purpose in my day-to-day grind is to run Outlook 2000, the corporate standard, and grind out the Visio drawings for my PHB. We have no POP access to our exchange boxes, and no web outlook means no evolution+ximian connector. Thus the 2K stays on my laptop for email and Visio, and the real work gets done on slack.

Now home is a different story. The primary machine runs Win2K Pro, for games, but more importantly to serve as a buffer from my wife's wrath. You see, I loaded Gentoo on it once after a drive crashed. My wife came home, saw KDE, and my consoles piled up on it, and blew her top. I cherished the sexual side of our marraige enough to put Windows back on it, and relegated my Gentoo install back to the crufty machine. I may be a geek-at-heart, and I love linux as much as the next guy, but uptime/tweakability/power/toolset/zealotness is just no substitute for sex.

So.. in short, the reason I have windows on two out of four machines I use daily:
Work - Corporate Standard + PHB
Home - Sex

Most users don't care

[the_rev_matt]

I work with about 15 developers plus miscellaneous (sp?) tech writers, dba's, pm's, etc etc. There are probably 20 gov't employees I deal with on a regular basis outside this group. About 2 of them care what OS they use. They all use Windows (NT) because that is what is mandated by the LAN Support Group (A contract company, not government employees). I chose to install Linux on my workstation and no one seems to care. Of the other two who actually care what OS they're on, one is installing Linux on Monday, the other is already running Win XP.

I would argue that company policy is what keep a lot of people on Windows, and convenience (it's already there, it doesn't involve having to actually do anything) keep everyone else there. At least in the US, we are constantly pounded in the head with advertising encouraging us to be as passive as possible, so people always take the path that involves the least immediate effort on their part.

Give me convenience or give me death.

target audience

[selderrr]

as a developer, you simply make more money developing for windows. if I could sell software to linux users and make money of it, it would be byebye windows.

I'll probably get flamed...

[McQualude]

I wanted to switch. I tried. I read books, I installed, I participated on linux newsgroups, I tweaked, updated, etc, etc and I kept having to do it. The most frustrating part of using Linux is that you have to learn from geeks and geeks suck at teaching. It's like trying to learn guitar from a self taught musician. They can't teach what they know by instinct. My computer became about putzing with Linux instead of doing anything fun, so I gave up and installed XP. Now I can play games, all of my hardware works and I don't have an operating system for a hobby. Linux is for geeks and should stay for geeks.

Photoshop 7 on Mac OS X

[green pizza]

Works great on my iBook. It's overpriced, but it works better for me than Gimp or Corel PhotoPaint 10.

Applications

[geordie]

I think Linux is wonderful, It's a great OS. But... while there are tons of great applications on Linux, the applications I need ( or rather, the applications my clients expect me to have) are nowhere to be seen.

If a client drops a Quark, Illustrator, Photoshop, Indesign or publisher(urg) file lands in my mailbox I need to be able to :

a) Open the file
and
b) know that what I am seeing is what my client also sees.

I think Linux is perfect for an average user who just wants to surf the net and check their email, do a bit of word processing etc ( It's the OS I would recommend to my mom ). But in a design environment where the applications are pretty standardized it just isn't ready for primetime yet.

Get some of the big players on board (Adobe, Macromedia etc) and Switching would be incredibly easy for me to do.

Laziness

[madajb]

I'm too lazy to cahnge.
I run Debian on all my servers, but honestly, I have enough to do in my life without learning the ins and outs of KDE(or Gnome or whichever you use).
My Win98 desktop runs the way I like it. The buttons conform to my habits, and everything works the way I expect it to.
Which is not to say that your window manager of choice couldn't do the exact same thing, but I'm not motivated to switch.

-ajb

Re:Let me get this straight

[Planesdragon]

You want people to use Open Source, yet you use a Mac? Can you get any more proprietary than that?

Come again?

OS X has an OSS core; it's a BSD with a proprietary GUI on top of it.

Sure, it's locked to certain hardware--but I can't plug my toaster into my PC, either.

What I use

[Oliver Wendell Jones]

At Home: Games, games, games. With all due respect to the Linux game coders out there, my favorite games are all PC based. I have yet to find one MMORPG with a Linux client available. There are a limited selection of games available for Linux, and since I don't play Warcraft or most of the other games with Linux clients available, I use Windows to get to games.

At Work: Company policy. Our corporate IT group is very anal about what is and isn't allowed. According to policy, I can't even hook my personally owned PDA to a corporate PC. I do have a laptop running Linux at my side, though.

AutoCAD & MapInfo

[savaget]

I cannot do without Windows because all of my clients work with AutoCAD & MapInfo data/files. These programs are Windows only and I have no choice but to run Windows to earn a living. If I was a software or web developer, then my choices could include a *nix flavor, but if you use CAD, you prety well have to stick to a Microsoft platform.

Double the Pleasure

[ShakaUVM]

Like a lot of people here, I run two boxes, one Win2k, one Linux. You gotta play to their strengths.

Windows is great for:
Return to Castle Wolfenstein
Warcraft III
A UI that, sadly, is more mature than KDE|Gnome
Inertia (My windows box is still using the 2.5GB hard drive I bought in '96, and I don't really feel up to porting all the cruft that has accumulated on it to Linux.)

But on the other hand, I would never consider using my windows box to run:
MySQL daemon
File Serving
Remote interactive prompt (Have you *seen* windows terminal server???)
Web Serving
Or anything else that requires the least modicum of stability
Or anything that would slow down my aforementioned RtCW or Warcraft III if it was run in the background. ;)

There's nothing inherently wrong with using Windows over Linux. You just have to play to each of their strengths. Linux has stability, speed and power. Windows has lots of games.

Cheers,
Bill Kerney

Re:Double the Pleasure

[Shelled]

RTCW plays better in Linux. Look for the Loki installer.
The Windows UI is more mature, however if you don't like that paradigm, its one-size-fits-all design means you're screwed. Normally Fluxbox is my desktop, today I'm playing with Ion to find what suits me best. Can't do that with Windows.
Dual boot! Jeez, how much does a 40 gig cost where you live?

Re:Double the Pleasure

[RzUpAnmsCwrds]

- MySQL daemon

I have PHP and MySQL on my system. They run fine (most things install without modification). I also have the GIMP, GTK, AbiWord, and several other "Linux" products on my system.

- File Serving

Windows sharing leaves something to be desired, but I've developed my own system with Apache. You can download/upload with just a web browser or use a client program which integrates into the shell for true drag-and-drip use.

- Remote interactive prompt (Have you *seen* windows terminal server???)

Terminal Services is actually quite nippy over most connections (I have 128kb uplink on my cable modem and it's quite usable).

You can also use the command prompt (.net server actually improves the command prompt quite a bit)

- Web Serving

I run Apache on my system. It works fine and is quite stable (the 2.x series was developed with win32 in mind). IIS 5.x is swiss cheese, of course, but IIS6 (.net server) is quite a bit more secure.

- Or anything else that requires the least modicum of stability

Windows XP Professional; SP1; build 2600. Uptime: 23 days 14 hours 22 minutes. And that's just because a roommate tripped over the f****** power strip cord! Windows IS stable; datacenter server proves that. Sometimes apps die, sometimes the shell dies. But I have never had the OS die on me (except for the time when I attempted to install RAM while the computer was sleeping... ugh; or the time that I installed a driver that turned out to be a virus - that was fun).

I run an NForce system with an Athlon XP 1667 (2000+), GeForce4 Ti 4200 128M, 256M of Samsung PC2100, 2x Samsung 7200RPM 80G disks (RAID0), an old IBM 10G disk (Linux partition), TDK 32x burner (that has NEVER ONCE had a CDRW in it - just plenty of good old CDRs), Hitachi DVD (same used in PowerMacs. It's cool. I have insane uptime, and everything is stable and fast. This is what computing should be.

Now, don't get me wrong. I love Linux. It's a great operating system for some applications (I would never use Windows for a web server - even though it works fine, Linux is cheaper). Linux is not the end all OS, however, and perhaps it shouldn't try to be one. Windows is better on the desktop and it is better on the 32 proc massive DB server. Windows is probably functionally better than Linux in most ways. Linux wins when Windows is too inflexible, too closed, or too expensive. Windows server is $600+; Linux is free. That's what it comes down to: do you want "all that" or "all that and a bag of chips" for thirty five cents extra?

few reasons

[dubiousmike]

1. Photoshop - really isn't a full featured open source equal

2. Open Office doesn't work with a lot of MS docs - we tried

3. Employee changes - sure I can handle Linux on a desktop - but if I leave, I'd bet my replacement couldn't

4. Already a mixed bag for IT - we use PC's and Macs and about 4 flavors of each, stretching our IT resources thin already

5. Where's the third party support - if the IT guy is unavailable, most of us can tweak/fix/support our own boxes and the software that's on it. I'm not the IT guy who fixes broken boxes and I don't want to be if that guy is out.

6. Though it might be short sighted, out CEO believes that you get what you pay for - free OS equals no one resposible for OS when it f@cks up.

7. Servers great - desktops? haven't we already gone over this before?

Re:Let me get this straight

[WildBeast]

And the hardware?
And the no-Aqua like themes allowed lawsuits?
And all the closed source software that come with?
Is iMovie Open Source? QuickTime?

Visual Studio

[MAXOMENOS]

I'm actually going back to Windows XP / Linux dual-boot, from three years on a Linux-only box. The reason is simple: I want to pick up an MCSD and MCDBA, and it's easier for me to do that with XP and some form of Visual Studio than without. I will probably keep XP there so I can test my software on both Windows/.NET and Linux/Mono, and so that I can play with Palm development. My main motivation for all this is that I want to beef up my career.

Of course, for everything else, including games, email, publishing, music, UNIX development and web surfing, there's Linux.

(VMWare would be nice but there's that $300 price tag.)

Currently it's the best tool for the job.

[Demon-Xanth]

Granted that's slowly changing. I currently also run a Windows 95 based MP3 player, every time I look at putting Linux on it it boils down to "I have a slow internet connection". My semi-portable DVD player is the same. I'm extremely close to requiring only a single Windows machine. Do other OS'es have thier place? Sure, my dialup router is Linux based, and I wouldn't replace it with a Windows machine unless you paid me some fat stacks of cash. For the other two systems, to convert to linux I'd just need a CD w/ the files and someone to help me through configuration. For my main system, it'll be a while. I have alot of apps that I'm settled into, but very few that I'm locked into.

Reluctant to switch? Sometimes. But it works both ways.

What you learned on.

[Neck_of_the_Woods]

I think you will find that this is the reason for most things in the world with humans.

As a whole, we don't like change. Changing requires work and relearning. Some of us love this, and do it just to do it. The masses don't including people here at slashdot.

You will also find the most new users will use windows out of the box because everyone else they know is using it, and they can help you with it.

So, here it is:

What you learned on
Games
Ease of use
Help is easier to find
Every system at work is windows
More applications compatibilty in relation to the rest of you world without some tweaking.

All in all, the issue is that everything I need to do I can do on windows, why make it harder for myself just to use linux. When linux is as easy to use, you don't need to tweak it to be compatible with everything else, and I can play games on it, that is when it is a force. Until then it is just trying to catch up. Once it does I will give it a look for a desktop machine, until this time comes it will just run my DNS/Apache/Sendmail at work.

Linux is rock solid as a server for what I use it for. I don't have the time to tinker with linux all day to get something I want to work, at work on my desktop.

Server Logs

[clinko]

My server logs report roughly 83% of box's going to my site are windows machines that follow my sig off of slashdot.

%5 or so are Macs.

Although, slashdot does return about 90% of the 4% netscape users.

Just neat facts...

Work work work

[Fugly]

I'm forced to use Windows 2000 on my work laptop. At home I use MacOS X primarily. I don't know which I would consider my "main" machine but these days I've been spending a lot more time computing at work than home so I may have answered windows had I answered this poll.

Occasionally I fiddle around with Linux or FreeBSD at home. I like them both a lot but my mac really is the better tool for most of what I do.

Pro Audio

[son_of_asdf]

If there were adequate pro audio tools available for Linux that I could depend on for day to day production duties, I would take my Win 2000 lisences and chuck them in the garbage. Until Aurdour is really up and running (read as stable binaries that a musician, not a programmer, can install), no dice.

It makes me money

[rufusdufus]

I use Windows and encourage others to use windows because I am co-author of the system. I own stock in Microsoft and it makes me money.

Unlike the linux heads here, I spend a lot of time in the other camp listening to what they have to say.

I actually do have a Mandrake install on my second computer. I find no compelling reason to use that system for anything in particular however. My web server runs on an NT box running a hand coded server which uses IO completion ports which are not present on linux. My games dont run on linux. The mozilla browser is pretty good, but does not run certain activex controls like the Zone.

Three Answers

[chill]

1. Personally, I use Linux whenever I'm not troubleshooting a problem with someone's Windows install. To be fair, it is usually the USER'S fault as opposed to Windows, but not always -- downloading trojaned warez; opening unscanned .EXEs, etc.

2. My daughter just moved to the "laptop team" at her middle school, where they get almost all their work/homework on a laptop. They *require* Windows/Office/IE and have a couple other programs they install. At first, I had her on RedHat with Mozilla (Java/Flash/Real plugins), XPDF, and OpenOffice 1.0.1 on their wireless network. While 95% of everything DID work, she wasn't proficient enough with OpenOffice and the instructor didn't have time to figure the differences between MS Office/OO to help her all the time. If she was more proficient, she might have pulled it off. OO generated perfectly compatible Excel/PowerPoint documents.

3. At the office, they have more complex Excel and Word documents that don't translate 100% and get screwy on the formatting. Also, since we can't move all 5,000+ users at once we must have almost seamless interoperability with the data. There is a mix of Office 97/2000/XP and OpenOffice. MS Office 97/2000 formats [doc/xls/ppt] are the corporate standard. They are NOT going to translate the thousands of existing documents to OO XML formats, nice as it is. Also Visio and Project are requirements.

In the end, the computer is a tool. In a complex office environment Linux *MUST* be able to seamlessly deal with Word, Excel, PowerPoint, Visio and Project documents. Until that time, it isn't a clear choice for the best tool.

It *IS* getting there, though. OpenOffice is good enough in most cases -- the few complex/odd documents in Excel can be manually translated over and the rest left as is. Mr Project and Kivio/Dia are coming along but will NEED import/export abilities before Linux "turns the office corner".

-Charles

usability + games + applications + hw support

[jilles]

There's a lot of GUI environments on linux. Most are a work in progress and generally they don't work together very well.

Most of the applications I use on a daily basis have alternatives on linux. Sadly, most of the alternatives are of lesser quality in terms of usability, stability, features, etc. Actually there are a few apps I'd like to spend some time with. For example evolution seems like a decent mail client that has some interesting features.

Probably these are issues I could work around. I'm quite comfortable tweaking linux to suit my needs. Currently I'm fooling around with Debian in vmware.

What I can't work around is that most of the games I enjoy are windows only. In addition I have several pieces of hardware which are either not supported at all or with degraded performance/functionality/stability under linux. I didn't invest in an audigy + geforce ti 4200 just to listen to stereo sound and run a couple of outdated games. Not to mention my scanner, camera, wheel, usb mouse. Probably, with a lot of work, I can make most of these things work to some extent. However, the fact remains that they were designed for windows and not for linux.

My Reasons For Having Both

[limekiller4]

I have two machines -- one dual-boots Win2k and Debian, the other is dedicated Windows and I despise Microsoft.

This machine, the one that dual-boots, only goes into Windows to play games (and if it wasn't for America's Army, that would never happen). The other machine is permanently booted into Windows and I use that exclusively for my media files; streaming video (news), audio, mp3's, etc.

So I guess the reason for Linux is all my primary use. Surfing, email, developing PHP code. Everything else is booting into Windows because it is generally dirt easy to set up and handles media with no issues.

I'm a linux fan but lord only knows that I'm still a bit hazy on driver modules, how they work, how to troubleshoot, etc. Anything but the most basic problem in Linux generally has me spending a good chunk of time trying to fix it. The difference is that with Linux it is fixable, but with Windows the worst-case scenario is a re-install. And since there is nothing important there and on a seperate partition, that's not such a bad thing.

Re:My Reasons For Having Both

[autechre]

What, exactly, does your Windows machine do with media files that Mplayer can't?

I'm not trolling (I don't troll); I'm really trying to help you with your problem (since you despise Microsoft, I'm assuming you'd like to get rid of that extra Windows machine).

The _only_ thing that currently bothers me about using Debian as a desktop OS is not being able to play all Sorenson files. And, hey, they just fixed it, and I didn't really care all _that_ much about it in the first place. I mean...gee, I can't watch movie trailers. Oh, no! All the fansubs I want to watch are released in some other format anyway. RealOne w/ browser plugin works great with Mozilla (for those foodtv.com videos). No audio formats are unplayable. abcde is amazing at ripping CDs, and xcdroast is trivial to use for burning them.

All I ever had to do with Mplayer was the regular ol' ./configure, make, make install.

Re:My Reasons For Having Both

[autechre]

In my experience, onboard sound is generally not that hot anyway, especially under Linux (some onboard chipsets can apparently only do 48khz, requiring you to use something like XMMS, which can cope with this. While this is not a big problem, some people prefer command line clients for scripting/reliability [moosic, a program by my former roommate Daniel Pearson, comes to mind]).

Maybe I'm biased, since I have spent several years studying music, including recording, but I've always stayed away from onboard sound. If all you're looking for is audio output, you should be able to easily get a good PCI sound card for under $20 (I'm actually using such a card to stream the live signal for the radio station listed in my sig...and no, it's not down because of the cheap card; we just don't have people on the weekend :).

If it were between a $20 sound card and maintaining a whole other machine, I'd do the sound card for the heat and noise savings alone. You said that your other machine would be running anyway, but hey, it wouldn't have to run Windows.

(I know the pain of keeping a separate Windows machine just for ONE THING, as I used to have to do so in order to sync my PDA [vtech Helio]).

Re:Quite a lot, actually

[AKnightCowboy]

This complexity is probably the main reason I'm still on Windows. I don't want to have to make a CVS build of WineX to play my games and use my filesharing programs. I don't want to edit a config file to make such and such program run. Linux is fun, but for my purposes, it's really just inconvenient sometimes.

Plus it doesn't run all the latest and greatest spyware that I am trying to install. With WindowsXP I can easily install BDE, Xupiter, Comet Cursor, Cydoor, etc. and run them all concurrently with it's superior multitasking capabilities. Try running Xupiter under Linux and KDE and it will fail! Plus, I can't run Norton Antivirus under Linux! Damn backwards platforms.

No reason to switch...

[NanoGator]

I'm a Windows 2000 user. My computer is stable. It's easy to use maintain. It plays all my games. Well, long story short, I don't have any complaints about my computer. So why should I switch? Sounds like it'd painful for me to switch to Linux without a really compelling reason.

Frankly, the benefit I can see to me switching to Linux is that suddenly I'd be popular here on Slashdot. "hey look! I can use a real OS. After a steep learning curve, I can do what people are already doing in Windows! Woohoo! Down with MS!!"

I'm not stuck on windows

[mosch]

I have a windows box that runs a few apps, but for the most part it sits around being bored.

My daily driver is a Mac, my other machines are mostly FreeBSD (one runs Linux, one runs Solaris, one runs IPSO), and my games are delivered via PlayStation 2. All in all, it's a pretty good setup, and it has the bonus of having a surprisingly low Microsoft content.

Well...

[TheAwfulTruth]

Note: I am a software engineer and have done enough Windows and Linux cross platform GUI and non GUI coding to not be considered a Linux idiot.

Caution: Well thought-out and knowledgeable opinions ahead. If these disturb you , read no further.

I will not be switching from Windows to Linux as my main platform any time soon because:

1) Less hassle dealing with the OS. I don't care anything about the "OS" part when I'm using a machine. I use applications. Windows is far easier to install and use applications on than Linux. application and install break windows far less than on Linux IMHE.

2) The applications themselves. Though Linux has the basics covered. There is nothing even close to replacing Reason, T-Racks and Wavelab on the music front. Then there is the ubiquitous Photoshop. Though I couldn't afford the full version, my copy of Photoshop Elements for $69 is 90% of Photoshop for 1/10th the price. There is nothing that even comes close to the funtionality of Photoshop Elements for Linux. And of course Games. I work hard and I play hard (all on the computer of course).

3) Development. Believe it or not developing for Windows is infinitely nicer than developing on Linux (Okay, that's just my opinion). The tools are all equal (gcc, perl, python, vi, emacs) up to far more advanced (Visual Studio) and far more varied to choose from.

Basically, everything I do of any importance on Windows has no real counterpart on Linux. There are a lot of wannabe applications (GIMP etc) but they are usually pale shadows of real apps. The major windows (and Mac) apps are just too frequently not there for Linux.

Money concerns: Free is great, but when you can't get what you want for free, then pay is the way. The current state of free is not up to the current state for pay. I work for a living, I make money, I have no problem paying other peoeple for the work they do.

Even if everything else completely equal, the fact that I have 10 years of Windows and Windows Apps know-how in my head means that I would still benefit from staying.

It's been said many many times, but until Linux is considerably better than Windows on all these fronts, there is no incentive to switch. I (and most computer users I'd bet) are not political grand-standers, were tool users, plain and simple. Best tool for the job wins. For all my jobs, Windows wins.

Re:Well...

[AdrianG]

First, let me say that I do not want to discourage you from posting these opinions about developing on various platforms. But I must say, I am surprised to hear what seems to be an experienced developer who has used both platforms express a preferences for Windows. I hope you will read and reply to this message, and that perhaps I can learn something from your response.

You began with a brief note about your credentials, so I will follow suit. I have been getting paid to write code for about 23 years, now, and have used a variety of systems and languages. I've hand assembled code for a 6502 based single board system, and entered it via a hex key pad; I've written assembly code for MicroSoft Assembler under DOS; for the IBM 360/370 family and run it under MVT, CMS; for the Motorola 6800, 68000, 6805, and 6811 families, and for the Intel 8080, and 8048 families. I've written code in PL/I, Fortran, BASIC, IBM EXEC, EXEC2, REXX, various Unix shells, PERL, AWK, C, TCL/Expect, and Java, amoung other languages. I love programming and learning new systems, so what I am used to will never keep me from giving other languages and platforms a chance. I have to admit that while I have done some substantial programming under MS-DOS, I have never done any substantial coding under Windows.

While I understand why many normal users like MS-Windows and the user interface it presents, I am rarely asked to do the sort of mundane, ordinary user type work that Windows is designed to facilitate. I get mostly requests to do unusual things. I have often been required to use MicroSoft tools for a number of reasons, but I must say that I have not had a single experience with any of that appalling company's software that was not frustrating and unpleasant. I really hate having things hidden from me. GUI's are nice, I suppose, but I will never be happy with a GUI over a command line interface and flat text configuration files unless that GUI lets me do everything that I can do with the CLI and flat text config files. I find that such a GUI is extremely rare. I really hate hand holdy documentation, because it is almost always incomplete, and I really hate it when documentation says things that are not exactly correct, and I routinely face these problems with MS products. I don't have the words to describe how frustrating it has been for me to design my application to use MicroSoft's API as they are incorrectly documented, and then have to change my designed in the middle of a project to deal with how the API's really work.

Unix, on the other hand, seems like a dream operating system for a programmer. (I'm using "Unix" to refer to all Unix-like systems.) If you forget, for a moment, this naive tendency that some recent Open Source Programmers have to use HOWTO's and "info" files as a substitute for "man" pages (they are fine in addition to "man" pages), Unix documentation is online, generally exact, and fairly complete. Most things are designed to be out in the open and easily understood by the programmer. The tools that are provided with a Unix System are designed to be versatile, because the programmers that created Unix knew that they couldn't anticipate everything that their users (other programmers) will want to do with their system.

I realize that Windows has a number of GUI building tools that make it easy for people to create applications without having to know how to write a lot of code, but it seems like these tools do little to tell the programmer exactly what is going on at a low level with the resulting applications. Am I to trust MicroSoft to make sure the applications that results from my efforts with such a GUI will be secure? Also, how can a really serious programmer be happy with having all the details of what is going on hidden from him (or her)?

Finally, I have done quite a bit of teaching about programming, and I must say that I am concerned about the effect that MS-Windows seems to have on programmers that use it as their development platform. I really think programmers are better off learning from the very beginning that it is important to understand, in very fundamental terms, exactly what is going on in the applications they create. To me, the very notion that one can get by without understanding their application in pretty exact terms is antithetical to good programming. The boundaries between the application and the operating system must be reasonably simple and must be clearly and exactly specified in documentation that comes bundled with the operating system. Getting a new programmer used to the idea that the operating system is a mystery that he is simply not supposed to try to understand is terribly counter-productive. When a program or an operating system has a memory leak, the leak should be fixed; Training users to reboot the system to fix problems sets a terrible example for programmers. When I first learned to write code, and when I found that my program didn't do what I expected, I had to learn that my own mistakes were the most frequent source of problems. Programmers that first learn to program under MS-Windows don't have the benefit of an OS that is stable enough and conforms well enough to its documentation to teach them this essential lesson, and as a result, I find that programmers that come from a MicroSoft background are much more likely than programmers from a Unix background to start off blaming the operating system rather than looking in their own code for the source of their problems. Of course, programmers are individuals, and make their own decisions about what lessons to take from the platforms they use, but the example that the operating system sets is one of the things that influences the decisions that programmers make, in this regard.

So my question is this: What is it, exactly, that makes Windows a better platform for development?

Adrian

Re:Well...

[Arandir]

1) Less hassle dealing with the OS. I don't care anything about the "OS" part when I'm using a machine. I use applications. Windows is far easier to install and use applications on than Linux. application and install break windows far less than on Linux IMHE.

True and false.

True, most people don't want to deal with anything lower level than the desktop and the applications that run on it. They shouldn't have to. But unfortunately there is reality to deal with. Reality says that if you are the administrator of a system, then you must to administrator type things. The only two solutions to this as I can see are a miraculous set of default settings that work for everyone, or user knowledge of how computers and networks work.

What Linux, BSD, UNIX needs to do is to come up with different distributions for different users. Some tentative steps have been taken in this direction, but no distro has gone far enough yet. If you give the user the power to run a secure server, you've given them enough rope to hang themselves.

False, on decent Linux or BSD system, installation of software is more robust and easier than under Windows. Packages are easier to use than InstallShield type programs. Packages are a better paradigm than embedded installers.

The problem comes when distros/packagers screw up their packaging. Do people blaim Windows when some random install.exe file craps out and hoses their AOL installation? No! So why do people blaim Redhat/SuSE/Mandrake/etc when some random RPM hoses another package? A few popular distros need to get on the ball and start making more robust packages, because all the good distros and systems are tired of sharing the blame.

2) The applications themselves.

Amen. Regardless of what people say about usability, common looks and feels, and handholding installers, the lack of professional quality applications in every field is what's holding freenix back. Mozilla and OpenOffice went a long ways, but we still need a lot more.

3) Development. Believe it or not developing for Windows is infinitely nicer than developing on Linux (Okay, that's just my opinion). The tools are all equal (gcc, perl, python, vi, emacs) up to far more advanced (Visual Studio) and far more varied to choose from.

I have to disagree. This is a matter of style, not advancement or variety. Tell me I have to develop under Windows and the first thing I will do is install XEmacs. If I don't have to use MFC, I won't even touch Visual Studio. It all depends on what you're used to and how you prefer to work.

Re:Well...

[Reziac]

Your points are much similar to my own reasons:

First, I can fling together a Windows box out of whatever random hardware and whatever Windows version are handy, and it will always work as expected, pretty much from the gitgo. I might have to dredge up the odd driver or two for old hardware, but that's about the extent of the hassle factor.

Second, I can throw whatever apps at it that I need, of whatever version is handy from very old to the very latest, with little fear of breakage or version conflicts, and without having to spend hours RTFM'ing.

Third, I get *really* tired of the endless little annoyances or unfinished parts in so much open source software, and on linux there may be no better alternative. At least in the DOS/Win world, if I don't like how some shareware/freeware not-works, there is usually a fully-mature commercial alternative. Sometimes "free" costs too much in time or unavoidable nuisances.

Things that are not factors: Windows-based games (I don't play any); videos on my computer (I don't watch any); stability (when I'm done with it, Windows crashes seldom to never, so I habitually expect reliability from *any* OS :)

Now, I have messed with linux off and on, and the Darwin incarnation of BSD. But I sure haven't found that I can throw linux at any available machine and it just works, as Windows does. I've probably spent more time futzing around to get yonder Mandrake box halfway working than all three main Windows machines combined, yet there's still stuff that doesn't work right, or at all. I would really LIKE some linux desktop to work for me, since post-XP Windows promises to be somewhere I don't want to go. But I'm not holding my breath. :(

Lots of reasons

[truesaer]

First of all, Windows does everything I need. It does it or has software for it.

Games pretty much always work with windows

I need IE for my google toolbar

I already know how to use windows in depth. I work with computers all day, and really don't have any interest in figuring out how to do administrative stuff on a new one at night. I can use Linux/UNIX just fine, but my knowledge of config files, etc is not very good.

I'm a student and get Microsoft software essentially free.

These are in no particular order, and there are lots of other reasons. But its a start.

A differing reason (or two)...

[kiwimate]

Here goes with some honesty, so I fully expect hostility. Be gentle, okay?

Entrenchment
The vast majority of my work is on Windows. The software areas in which I specialize (for example, document management systems) don't do Linux, by and large. I have to know these systems, inside and out, and know the platforms they use, inside and out. For me, that's Windows. I have to know it, and know it well. Linux is strictly a spare time thing, and I really don't have that much spare time. Yeah, I know, if I were a true geek, I'd be staying up until all hours on my Linux system. What can I say? I don't play computer games, either, so it's certainly not that that's keeping me on Windows (unlike every other post I've read in this story so far).

Comfort
I know Windows, and I can get it to work. I fully expect the flaming to start about now, but here are some simple facts which represent nothing more than my experience. My Windows servers don't crash. My Windows workstations don't crash. Personally, I'm just as happy to chalk it up to the fact that I know what I'm doing when I set the things up (and, admittedly, W2K is pretty stable). Yes, I have to reboot for patches. But failures and unplanned outages -- forget it, I don't get them.

Linux, on the other hand, has given me some weird experiences, particularly on laptops, and, yes, occasionally I've had to do a hard restart because it was hung. I'm sure it's because I didn't download the latest drivers, or tweak the settings correctly, or rework my configuration script...but guess what, people -- I don't have to do that on Windows. Again, it's a comfort thing.

Disillusionment
Boy, I have a horrible feeling about what this might provoke, but here goes. When I first started to look at Linux, everywhere I looked on /. people were proudly proclaiming how fast it was and how tiny its footprint was. Please, point me in the right direction. I looked at SuSE, RedHat, Mandrake, and a couple of others, and everyone specified 64MB of RAM minimum -- that's not a small footprint, that's the same as an NT workstation! And, speedwise, my RedHat installation is the same as my W2K Pro installation on my dual-boot system. No tuning on the Linux system; but, then again, I've not tuned the W2K system, either.

Those, for me, are the main reasons. Windows is just too important for me at work to not know it intimately, and Linux doesn't offer enough compelling reasons to dedicate a lot of time becoming better attuned to it. Remember, I'm just being honest!

Games mainly

[SquierStrat]

The main reason I use windows is for games, other than that, it sits in linux. Except for my laptop (which I am writing this from.) The hard drive space on my laptop prevents me from having both linux and windows on it, and I use it for alot of class related work which requires...windows. If every game that came out was released on linux, my desktop systems would run linux exclusively. And sorry, WineX just doesn't cut it for me.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Planesdragon]

And windows is stable as opposed to what, California around the San Andreas faultline?

No, older versions of Windows. Oh, and non-professionaly admin'd installs of Linux.

I don't remember the last time a PC crash stopped me in the middle of using my computer--I suspect it was playing UT, which is hardly Windows's fault.

Nothing.

[Znork]

I dont use Windows at home, and I dont use it at work. It's just not worth the hassle.

As far as games go there are enough, and when I get bored of those it's more fun to work on developing my own games instead.

Windows usage

[bytesmythe]

I have a partition with Windows on my computer so I can (someday) finish playing "Vampire: The Redeption". Occasionally, I use it because the CD burner is easier to use under Windows, or if someone sends me an MS Office document, since OpenOffice is still too buggy for general use, and KWord doesn't convert well.

Other than that, my computer is always booted to Gentoo. Even my wife's computer runs Gentoo. Our internal server runs RedHat, but may end up with some BSD variant.

As soon as CD writing software gets more reliable under linux, and OpenOffice gets more stable, I probably won't have a need for the partition. Well, until I finish that damn gamn, anyway. ;)

To all of you who say 'Games'.

[thatguywhoiam]

I see a really commonly cited reason is games.

My personal view is that a PC for games is a totally shitty value for your money. I have a Mac, which has a half-dozen games (mostly gifts). I use the Mac for my work. I have a Playstation 2, which I use for games.

Now, considering that a PS2 will work 100% of the time (no patches/bugs/drivers/cruft), has a bigger screen, and pretty much the same number of games as the Windows platform (insofar as both platforms have way more excellent games than I'll ever buy).... and considering that the high-end video card you need to buy (for the PC you've already bought) costs nearly as much by itselfas a whole PS2/GC/XB.... why do you guys do it?

It's not a troll, I really want to know. Is it certain games? Keyboard-based games? The supa-bleeding-edge graphics and sound?

It's just a variant of the original poster's question, really, but I find my Mac/PS2 combination works really well. I don't want for many games.

Re:To all of you who say 'Games'.

[dswensen]

It certainly is certain games. If you have the chance, compare sometime Unreal Tournament on a high-end PC as compared to the PS2 version. The PC version is fast, attractive, a breeze to play, and very fun. UT on a PS2 controller is a complete nightmare. And the resolution stinks.

It's also hard to imagine games like Icewind Dale, Baldur's Gate, Civilization, most RTSes, etc. working on the console. I'm not saying they don't exist on the console, but that it's hard to imagine them working.

Consoles are great for fighting, racing, and social games. They are not so great for quiet strategy games or RPGs, in my humble opinion. That may work for some people, but I just don't want to be in front of a console for hours. My thumbs get calluses and my hands (which are too big for most controllers) start aching terribly after too long. Not the case with a PC.

It's a variety of factors, but for me it mostly comes down to the kind of games. And it cuts both ways, too: I own a PS2 and a Dreamcast and I love Soul Calibur and DOA2. But I'd never imagine playing either on a PC.

Re:To all of you who say 'Games'.

[GMFTatsujin]

Flexability is a good reason.

A PC is a machine that that not only game, but also word-process, compose music, burn CDs, sort data in databases, process video (with input from that self-same expensive video card, most likely), balance my checkbook, send email, browse the web... ... AND I can change the background picture on my desktop.

And a PC costs less than a Mac. That isn't stopping me from considering a switch though.

Also, games on a PC can run at higher resolution and generally seem to just look nicer. To me, anyway.

Re:To all of you who say 'Games'.

[MrResistor]

Graphics.

Bigger does not mean better, and quite simply, TV resolution and refresh rate blows. That's the big thing that keeps me from getting into console gaming.

I was beginning to question that opinion recently, but then a couple weeks ago I played Halo at a friends house. It's a really good game, design wise, but the res/refresh kept on the edge of playable for me.

I'm not really an eye-candy junky, mind you. I generally play at 1024x768 at 16 bits. That gives me the detail level I want, and puts me in the 100+fps range for most first person shooters, which is my prefered genre. And yes, I can tell the difference with refresh rates up to around 90fps. Basically, that's the point where the default machinegun in Quake3 actually becomes a useful weapon.

Re:To all of you who say 'Games'.

[HunterD]

Completly agreed. Consoles just don't hold a candle to the PC when it comes to games with a more intellectually challening level of gameplay. Colsoles have tried for decades to reproduce RPGs from PCs (or other general purpose computers), and have come up with what? Final Fantasy? What a joke. FF doesn't hold a candle to the story depth and complexity of gameplay of the true PC RPGs. Starting back 20+ years, you have Bard's Tale, Wizardry, Ultima (Ultima 4 is simply the best CRPG ever produced), Ultima Underworld, Might and Magic, Elder Scrolls, Magic Candle, Eye of the Beholder, Dungeon Master, and now NWN, all contributing new and interesting things to the state of CRPG art (there are of course many many more, but for me - these are the core of good CRPGs). Some of these have been poorly translated to various platforms, and without fail, they are always a pale reflection of the PC version.

Why is this? IMHO 2 reasons:
1) The more complex controls on a PC allow for a greater variety of ideas to flourish, and for more complex games to be born.

2) Consoles almost invariably dumb down games for mass market appeal (or to make them playable by kids). PC games have almost always been a smaller market - but one that tends to have more people who are willing to face greater complexity, and who demand more intelligence in their games then Zelda or Final Fantasy.

Re:To all of you who say 'Games'.

[edunbar93]

Heh. Angband doesn't need to be played under windows either. :)

Re:To all of you who say 'Games'.

[CoolVibe]

Maybe because the console joypads basically suck for playing FPS games. It's VERY hard to beat the keyboard and mouse in that respect.

Not that I run windows though... My copy of HalfLife works great in winex.

Re:To all of you who say 'Games'.

[wadetemp]

considering that a PS2 will work 100% of the time (no patches/bugs/drivers/cruft)

Oh, so you haven't played Vice City then? I and 3 of my friends have encountered 8 hard crashes (no chance to save/recover) on 4 different PS2s over about 80 hours of gameplay.

Still, I agree with you. I would rather play games on a dedicated-system than a PC, even if they are shipped with bugs these days.

Nothing.

[Zapdos]

I havent used windows at home in several years.

#1 reason people stay with Windows: WAREZ

While there may be a few, I do not know a single windows user, who does not steal software. (Use illeagal Copies, never registers winzip etc..)

Call me a troll, call me cranky, just don't call me late for dinner.

Microsoft Development Tools

[mr_gerbik]

Among other things, my primary OS is Windows because of the development tools. People who have not used Visual Studio (or people who have only touched the surface) have no idea how excellent Microsoft's development tools are.

TAKE NOTE: Before my current job, I was only using Linux, writing Lisp and C code in emacs... so don't write me off as some Windows goober who needs fancy widgets to get by.

Anyway, back to my point.. Visual Studio is some smart software. The layout is intuitive, the toolboxes are the kind of toolboxes you want to keep around and not hide. The dynamic help is wonderful. The tool tips that show various function argument completions are a huge timesaver. The debugger is powerful and easy, built in beautifully with the editor.

VS is just a wonderfully put together development suite that has won me over. There are no open or free tools that even come close.. and believe me, I have used them. Even the commercial development suites for linux/unix don't come close.

Anywho, that is my two cents.

I still run Linux at home.. I need the command line ;) But when it comes to my professional activities -- I will be sticking to Windows for some time to come.

-gerbik

Re:Microsoft Development Tools

[Forkenhoppen]

I wholeheartedly agree. Function argument completion alone is why I stick to Windows for all my development work. Give me a GNOME or KDE IDE that also:

• features an integrated debugger
• has help files, for the function whose name my cursor's currently over, that load with the touch of one key
• contains a project manager on the left that crafts my makefiles for me, and allows for drag and drop rearranging of my project's files
• shows me all my classes in my project, in a derivation tree, and what it inhereits and from whom
• works

..and hey, I'll come back. Until then, though, a Visual Studio bitch I'll remain.

Re:Not feeling a need to change

[zzyzx]

That's pretty much my reason for sticking with Windows too. I don't have a reason to switch.

Windows is easier

[Kevin Stevens]

My favorite software is on Windows. I have not yet seen anything beat AIM, Outlook, or IE. Open Office is pretty nice, but I still like MS office better. Every piece of hardware I have works in windows. Out of the box. I know windows. For me, the cost of windows and its affiliated software is the same price as open source software. Windows 2000 is stable. I have never had it just crash on me. Sometimes individual software packages do, and destabilize the system to the point where I feel more comfortable rebooting, but I have never been just typing away and have something crash on me. For what I do on my machine, I dont need a command line as full featured as bash. Linux, as a server, not running X is stable. A default install of Redhat 7.2 (the last distro I tried) is not as stable as windows, imho. Configuring things is a pain in linux. I dont have to refer to a man page in windows to recall how to sort by date. I dont have to run find / -name to find a file I misplaced. I am not incapable of doing these things, but in windows it is easy. Yes, linux is more powerful. You can configure more things. I am waiting for OSS to eclipse the quality and userfriendliness of windows software. When the day comes that I feel linux has truly surpassed windows and is more ENJOYABLE to use, I will use it. But as for right now, I am quite content with not having to memorize commands, and I believe that windows is now a stable platform, and yes I really believe that it is more stable than a distro running X and KDE.

Because Windows does everything poorly.

[TRACK-YOUR-POSITION]

I like both OS X and Linux better than Windows, but I probably run each of them about the same amount. I'll probably always have a Windows box because I'm sure if I ever got rid of it, there'd be lots of stuff I'd suddenly be unable to do. Like using a particular obscure piece of hardware, or playing a certain game (as a general rule it seems like anything involving 3D is best supported under Windows), or using a certain application. That would be a bit unlikely if I got rid of Linux, and almost certainly would never happen if I got rid of my Mac.

And I'm even more hesitent to set members of my family up with non-Windows computers--because I don't ever want to hear "I'd like to do that, but I can't because you stuck me with a Mac and I can't get the same programs everyone else can". It's a case of "No one gets uninvited from Thanksgiving for buying Microsoft", I suppose.

There are definite advantages to running the "default" computer that everyone else runs. Network effects are real, no matter how much we hate them.

One thing to note--so many people are here are pointing to games as the one reason they run Windows. I imagine once the entertainment-industry gets started with DRM, a whole lot of movies and music are going to be just as Windows-only as most games are. Seeing how Apple keeps trying to sell their computers as an entertainment hub, you'd think they'd be somewhat worried.

Why I'm still using Windows

[weird mehgny]

I have a hobby of composing music. There's no music composing software available for Linux (none that I know of, and certainly none that is powerful).

Nothing Keeps Me On Windows - I Switched

[Erore]

One day while installing the Option Pack for Windows NT 4.0 I was confronted with the fact that the pack required me to install Internet Explorer 4.0 on my server. I think it had to do with changes in the MS Help System. I didn't want IE 4.0 on my server. It would replace my default explorer.exe and make system demands on my server that just wasn't necessary. I never browse the web from my server. That is when I realized, Microsoft wanted IE everywhere.

That is also when I realized, I didn't want to be a part of this anymore and I started to explore my options. Throughout the next four years I went through many aborted starts and stops to find an adequate alternative OS to Windows. Most of this was dealing with various Linux distributions, but a brief stint with Mac OS was also unsatisfying.

Now, I have been Microsoft free on my personal and work computer for one year. Not all of that year has been rosy, but none of it has been worse than a typical year with Windows. Mandrake wasn't very fast and Debian wasn't getting updates to Sid quickly enough for me. Gentoo came along and I've been incredibly happy ever since. My desktop has never been so snappy, stability so high, or the appearance of the gui so slick. I can do all my job tasks from this machine or by remotely connecting to a server.

In my work environment, their are two things which keep a large portion of my users from switching to Linux. One is a techinical problem dealing with SSH and Framemaker on Solaris, but I believe that will be worked out soon. The second is the fact that we receive book submissions from authors in Word format. Not all the "powers that be" at our company support the idea of switching to Linux and therefore it is a requirement of users to be able to handle these Word documents as Word documents and not have them converted to another format (such as OpenOffice.org or Framemaker). Trust me, this conversion is a time consuming process that takes one person several hours to two days to be done correctly. The conversion has to be done at some point, the "political football" is about when it will be done.

Thankfully, half our users are Microsoft Office free and they may be able to make a switch once the SSH problem is worked out. Of course, they should be easy anyway because they are xterm users connecting to a Sun box. The question about them is whether to keep them as is, or have the xterms boot from a Linux server, or give them a PC running Linux. I'm in favor of the middle option since i favor thin clients.

To sum up, nothing stopped me from making the switch to Linux. I choose not use anything that requires Windows. That includes games, personal finance software, and Lord of the Rings trailers that are only in Quicktime.

At work, lack of authority over the technical makeup of the company and inablity to change a work process prevents a switch to Linux.

My name is Erore and I'm a Windows System Administrator for the company that makes the animal books you all love so much.

A real common answer:

[mao che minh]

I use every thing from Windows 95 to Mac OS 10.2 while at work. At home I use Red Hat 8.0 for my day-to-day web surfing and emailing, and alternate between Mandrake 8.2 and BSD (various) for coding/design/testing/etc.

At work I, as are most people I would imagine, am forced to use a desktop with a Microsoft operating system, and migrate between workstations of varying OSs in order to perform certain tasks. Right now I am typing this from Windows 98, behind me about 10 paces is a Mac dual G4 with Mac OS X 10.2 for testing and graphics. Right next to that is a Novell 6 server, which sits about a foot from a Windows 2000 server. It's just the way it is - I bet alot of people find themselves in this position.

But make no mistake, I am a Linux zealot. I only use all of this other mess because I have too. ;)

Why indeed?

[GMFTatsujin]

At work, I've got WindowsXP. Work has a nice fast gigabit connection, so that's where I do the majority of my browsing. That answers that until I switch jobs.

At home I've got a Windows 98 machine that I do my video editing and burning on. VirtualDub is the most powerful free video processor I've found, and it's a Windows app. That, and all my games are for Windows too. In short, I've got apps that I know how to use on Windows, hateful as that may be.

I've considered upgrading to Win2K (XP, like cops and vampires, will not enter my home unless explicitly invited), but I still stick Win98 for a simple reason: Both products break, but I'm more familiar with *how* Win98 breaks. That beast, I know how to fix in a heartbeat. Other Win versions, I have to learn new tricks. It's not worth the trouble.

My wife put Win2K on her home machine, and now the oldie-but-goodie games (like Dungeon Keeper) that she loves are acting strangely. Win2K only seems to like new things. Bah.

That's the same reason I've avoided putting Linux on my home boxes (though I do have one machine running Freesco for home internet and it ROCKS... anyway...). I know how to fix Win98.

I've experimented with Mandrake and RedHat, but the problem is that I've found them to be *too* flexible. There are so many ways to configure the system to do something (and each version seems to have it's own special method and ignores - or improperly takes into account - the others), that when something doesn't behave the way I expected it to, I don't know where to start looking. Do I use the GUI tool, or try to edit config files by hand? Which files would be affected if I did? What runlevel am I supposed to look at?

I know the depths of the Win98 maze backward and forward. It ain't perfect, but it gets me there. Linux, however, leaves me feeling completely in the dark. I'm too busy to put my computing habits on indefinite hiatus until figure it all out.

I'm considering buying an iBook in the near future, and perhaps I'll put VirtualPC on it and experiment with a Linux variant that way without endangering the extant OS. I just can't bear the idea of stripping everything down that I've spent so long building up and having to start from scratch again.

And yes, I've RTFM. Thanks so much.
GMFTatsujin

Nothing. I left Windows FIVE years ago!

[Jerry]

And resonable costs and high quality of Distros like Mandrake and software like KDE, KWinTV, Gimp, OpenOffice, etc. are the reasons why I am staying away.

One just has to purchase hardware prudently, to avoid hard-wired sharing or IRQs, WinPeripherals, etc...

Primarily Windows

[dirvish]

I run a dual boot of Red Hat 7.2 and Windows XP. I use Windows the majority of the time. Reasons for this include:
1)I haven't been able to get my printer to work with Red Hat
2)Games, particularily Counter Strike
3)I know Windows much better
4)I use Dreamweaver, Photoshop and some other software titles that aren't made for Linux
Someday I will check out WINE or VMWare and see if those will effectively run the Windows software titles that I rely on. I have also considered getting a Macintosh. The biggest reasons for not doing this is the lack of games, the lack of cracks & pirated software and price. I mostly only boot into Linux to play around with it and try to learn more, and when I am working on a programming project.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Cutting edge drivers...

[anthony_dipierro]

The most recent time I've moved from Linux to Win2k was because Linux didn't support my firewire drives (except in alpha stage drivers) or my ATI All-in-Wonder video tuner. Those are both probably solved by now, so the reason I haven't switched back is basically laziness (I'd have to format drives, convert my outlook folders, move stuff around, etc) and fear (that someone else is going to not be supported, as is almost always the case).

I have made the switch to mozilla for the most part, though citibank doesn't seem to like it so I usually use IE.

Re:Microsoft Money

[ShavenYak]

I had moved my stuff to GnuCash, but I got sick of it's weird handling of investments and it's lack of scheduled transactions (which are coming soon, I know, but not soon enough). So I've moved my stuff back to Quicken now - the wife's computer still has Windows.

On a lark, I decided to see if I could get Quicken to run in Wine. Surprisingly, it runs pretty well. The online features are a bit hit-or-miss, but otherwise it works perfectly. I'd be willing to bet MS Money wouldn't be as cooperative as Quicken was though.

Games, games, and damned games. And web surfing.

[StupidKatz]

Windows 98SE, capped at 512MB of ram for games. Since I already am stuck using Windows for games, I use Zmud (for text games), Opera (I know it's available for Linux), and Winamp. Everything else is either taken care of by my linux server (mail, ftp/sftp, ssh, dns) or in support of the Windows machine.

Oops, I use Nero, too. No, I don't share my ripped CDs.

Switched to Windows for development

[x mani x]

First, some background.

I started using Linux as a development environment (as a hobbyist in highschool, and as a CS student when I was working on my B.Sc) around 1996. I was 16 and really excited about having a UNIX OS on my PC. I'm still very excited about Linux. But as a development environment, I develop in Windows 2000/XP pretty much 95% of the time excepting when I have to test/debug code on a UNIX platform.

I have XEmacs installed in Windows as a native app. I use Cygwin when I need a UNIX shell. XFree86(cygwin), Exceed and/or any other commercial/free X server generally work just fine. And I use MSVC++ for debugging - this is the main reason why I use Windows. I have not seen any UNIX debugger that comes close to MS's debugger (no, not even gdb, ddd or workshop).

As a desktop user, Windows has provided me with 99% uptime (and that missing 1% is for software upgrades requiring reboot, not crashes). I simply can't use the stability argument anymore.

I'm confident that Linux will kick ass on the desktop in the future. But if the Linux desktop is to entice developer desktops as well, a "killer app" debugger is needed. Unfortunately this is a huge undertaking. On top of this, UNIX developers might scoff at fancy GUI debuggers, just like I scoff at WYSIWYG word processors since I use LaTeX. But clearly this is not productive.

So, unfortunately, I have to disagree that Linux (or UNIX in general) is the ideal development environment ... for me, for now.

Just my $0.02!!!

Re:Switched to Windows for development

[LordSah]

It's sooooo painful to debug on Unix. It makes me want to kill children. At work, I use Source Insight for my source browsing, and VS for debugging.

If you can spare the cash, I suggest you get Source Insight--it has a parser that looks up symbols while you work. You'll fly through source code like a mutha. There is a free trial version to download and try. If you do, you'll say "Holy Crap!"

Re:Switched to Windows for development

[istartedi]

As a desktop user, Windows has provided me with 99% uptime (and that missing 1% is for software upgrades requiring reboot, not crashes). I simply can't use the stability argument anymore.

The stability argument never made any sense. All the *NIX server people couldn't understand why all the Windows* desktop people liked an OS that couldn't stay up without a reboot every few hours. The answer was obvious: The average Windows* work user only needs to stay up eight hours anyway. They turn the machine off when they go home! For home users, it's more like 2 hours. In the early days, MSFT didn't fixate on uptime because all they needed was a few hours.

Of course this legacy carried over into the server software, which was bad. When MSFT saw it couldn't penetrate the server market as much as it wanted, then uptime really started to matter. Remember, MSFT started out catering to hobbiests! Uptime didn't matter. People were happy enough that they had a 4k basic and a Disk Operating System for their 2 MHz 8-bit systems. None of the "serious" software companies were doing that. Now MSFT has metamorphosed into a "serious" company so uptime is becoming more important, and they have made progress.

Re:Switched to Windows for development

[ukyoCE]

I'm sorry, but I can't believe you about the 99% uptime thing. I was very hopeful for Windows XP to be stable, but it just isn't. Of course it's leaps and bounds of Windows 98, but if I try keeping my Windows XP box up for more than a week, especially with multiple programs running, everything gets hosed all to hell.

In linux, the only time I ever have to reboot is to player counter-strike :) I've gone months in Linux without rebooting. Considering I can't go more than a few days even in Windows XP, I won't believe for a second that anyone has 99% uptime on a Windows desktop PC that actually gets used.

Windows is definitely coming along though. 2000/XP was a major step. Who knows...in a few iterations MS might have a stable OS! ^_^

Re:Switched to Windows for development

[x mani x]

I assure you that my uptime claim is not B.S. I've often had uptimes on the order of weeks (since I leave my workstation on 24/7 like most people), with reboots due to software installation.

And I stress Windows too. Along with the standard apps I use, I often test development code (pretty heavy stuff) and Windows doesn't break a sweat. I've never managed to take down the kernel requiring a reboot.

Note that at home, where I play various games (especially the buggy Battlefield 1942!), reboots are almost a daily event. So Windows is definately not there yet in terms of stability. But for your typical developer or desktop user it is about as stable as it gets.

You Still Have to be a Pioneer to use Linux

[GroundBounce]

At least a bit of one anyway. I use Linux almost exclusively at home (and luckily at work too). I only use Windows a few times a year, primarily for doing my tax return as there is still no Linux based package that even comes close to the functionality of TurboTax.

I have been using "alternative" operating systems for around eight or nine years now, starting with OS/2, and then moving to Linux 5 years ago when OS/2 seemed to be dying.

After all that time, I have to admit, it is much easier to complain about Microsoft than to actually use the alternatives on a day-to-day basis. I have managed to do it, but it takes a little bit of a pioneering spirit. It is much easier now, but five years ago, StarOffice (version 4 I believe) was a piece of crap, and programs like AbiWord, Gnumeric, KOffice, GIMP, Mozilla, Blender, KDE, GNOME (and many others too numerous to mention) were either non-existant or just in their infancy. There was a long period of time where I used LyX and LaTeX for word processing and all everyone else could say was: "Why?". The bottom line is that even today, it is still easier and more turnkey to use Windows.

There are also still many times when it takes more work to get some piece of hardware working in Linux than in Windows. You still can't go to the computer store to buy new hardware without a binder full of Linux hardware compatability lists.

I have tried to get some of my other family members to use Linux, and I have been having more success recently, but only after a lot of the more recent software has become available. My 13 year old son is now a Linux advocate but he still has to use Windows for 90% of his games, and most of his friends (even the technically oriented ones) still use windows.

The good news is that things are changing slowly. I can now do nearly everything I need to in Linux and I only feel like a "pioneer" 50% of the time. With flagship Linux companies like Red Hat now concentrating on the desktop, hopefully things will accelerate further.

Habit

[greenhide]

I actually use a Mac with Virtual PC running WIndows, and I frequently evangelize the Mac/Open Source and dismiss and deride Microsoft and Windows, so I'd say I'm a perfect person to be asked to justify my behavior.

Worse--although I do in fact have OS X on my machine, I don't use it. What is the real reason most people use WIndoze?

Habit. Habit and Familiarity.

Let's be honest. Unless you're work for an oil drilling company like the man mentioned above, odds are you can find a piece of software for the *nix platform (especially if you include OS X). As many people above have pointed out, plenty of alternatives to favorites exist, and many games have been ported over to *Nix platforms.

However, people use their computers as efficient tools. I don't bother even looking at the toolbar when I click on a button, or glance more than 2 seconds at a menu, or pause before entering a key combination. They have all become automatic.

However, were I to switch to another OS, I would have to learn its nuances, and that would take time that I'm not so interested in spending. Even though I'm eager to use a command-driven interface, I find it frustrating constantly having to "learn" how to do things which I easily do in Mac OS 9, and have been doing for over 10 years now.

The reason I haven't switched over to OS X? Believe it or not, there's only one reason: that stupid Open File dialog. I can't grok it, I can't figure it out, and worst of all I can't just type in the first few letters of the file I want in the folder and have it be selected, as has been the case since Mac OS 6.x (back when it was just called "System 6").

I think one of the problems, in fact, is that so many Slashdot users are power users -- dedicated gamers, programmers, coders, designers, developers-- who have become accustomed to using their computers as an extension of themselves. For most everyday users, the biggest difference between a Windows machine, a OS X machine, and a machine running a GUI Linux would be the color of the windows and icons. They don't try to juice their programs as much. After all, if the most complex action you perform as a user is hitting the back button on your browser, it can be any browser on any software platform. But if you're used to coding in a specific text editor, moving to another can be a painful experience.

Re:Habit

[Graff]

The reason I haven't switched over to OS X? Believe it or not, there's only one reason: that stupid Open File dialog. I can't grok it, I can't figure it out, and worst of all I can't just type in the first few letters of the file I want in the folder and have it be selected, as has been the case since Mac OS 6.x (back when it was just called "System 6")

Hmm, works fine for me. One thing you need to do is to change the focus from the "Go To:" input box first. Just hit the tab key and type a few letters. It will then select the first folder or file beginning with the letters you typed. You can then go into the folder by hitting the right arrow key. If you hit the left arrow key it will back up one level. The up and down arrows move you up and down in the current list.

Just because things might have changed a little doesn't mean that it's too much effort to switch to a new operating system. Sometimes you need to just plunge in and experience something new. Sure you will be slowed down for a little while, but MacOS X has many good features and actually has lost very little from older MacOS versions. I would say that overall the good far outweighs what has changed or has been removed. You will be up and running at full speed in no time

So jump right in and move forward with the many people who are now running MacOS X exclusively. I can honestly say that I have not run MacOS 9 or earlier in about a year, including Classic mode. I don't miss it at all!

Re:Habit

[greenhide]

Thanks for the advice...

I've tried this and it works for *some* applications. But it doesn't work for many of the applications that I use the most -- I can't get it to respond correctly for BBEdit, for example.

Very frustrating. *sigh*

Anyways, this isn't a Mac Help forum, so I'll shut my trap. :-)

Photoshop and ThumbsPlus and Quicken

[e40]

I'm a digital photographer, and using ThumbsPlus is a huge time saver for me. I have 10k+ images that I manage with it, including keyword annotations that help me classify and tag images.

Next is Photoshop, which I use to adjust imperfect images. I tried the gimp, so please don't even mention it. It's not in the same class. What do I use PS for, specifically? Adjusting color and brightness of images, mostly. Even ThumbsPlus, which has these functions, isn't as good as Photoshop.

I used to watch TV on my Windows PC, but since I got TiVo, I never do that anymore.

I believe Quicken could be replaced with GNU Cash, but since I'm stuck on Windows for other stuff I've never tried it. I don't use the bill pay features of Quicken, since my bank (E*Trade Bank) doesn't support them.

Consistency = Convenience

[Jerph]

The reason I stick with XP is that (a) it's consistently laid-out. The configuration and use of one application is nearly identical to the next. This is not so with Linux, where I have to scroll through giant man pages if they're there (and Google till dawn if not) to figure out how to use something. Or configure it. Or compile and install it. (b) Hardware. About a third of my hardware doesn't work at all in Linux (yet) and much of it I had to mess with it for hours before it would work. Sometimes, it would theoretically work, but I could never make it work in my case. (c) Software. This is a +/- thing. On the one hand there are tons of incredible, wonderful GPL software out there for Linux. I couldn't live without Emacs, for example. But quite often those things are available for Windows too (Emacs being a good example, along with Apache, OpenOffice, etc.) And, of course, there are the killer apps that are Windows only, like Word(the latest version has been incredibly stable for me, and otherwise amazing) and Photoshop. And don't even think about an easy to use video editor like Ulead's Video Studio on Linux. Or nice multi-track audio like Sonar. The list goes on. I guess what i'm trying to say is that, while I love Linux and will continue to dual boot for times when it's appropriate (school; i'm a CS major) Windows quite simply doesn't waste my time like Linux does. And note that Linux has many advantages I didn't cover, because that would be off topic. As soon as Linux is easy, or i become such an expert that it's easy for me, i'll surely switch for good.

Let's hear it for heterogeneous networks!

[ptomblin]

At home we've got 2 Linux boxes, a Mac G4, two Mac laptops (three when my daughter is home from college), and a Windows box. I use the Linux box for development, but prefer the TiBook for surfing. My wife uses the G4 for everything, and my younger daughter prefers the Windows box (mostly because with Mac OS X and Linux, she can't install all the crapware she downloads off the net). We *all* read our email and Usenet by sshing into the Linux server. The other night the three of us were sitting around using AOL Instant Messanger to talk to the daughter at college - using AIM, iChat and gaim.

The problem is that there are some really badly designed web sites out there, and clueless web managers who, when you tell them their site doesn't work for you, say "well, it works for Internet Explorer 5.5, so you'd better upgrade".
That sort of thing forces you to use Windows more often than you'd like to. We're just in the process of switching banks because our old one's web site was like that.

Using USB Alcatel modem?

[ejaw5]

I got Bellsouth DSL working fine on my Linux router. I specifically requested the external ethernet modem (connect to pc via NIC) and was a cinch to setup on the Linux box. On Windows (i had to verify that the DSL indeed worked) I had to reboot several times as the BEllsouth CD installed quite a bit of crapware.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[LordSah]

I've been running 2000/XP for years now, and I can probably count the number of blue screens I've seen in that time on one hand. I'd really like to know how the myth of ever-present blue screens keeps getting perpetuated. Is it just everybody out there is still running Win9X and doesn't know how to keep the programs loaded at boot at a minimum? (I ran a very stable 98 box prior, but I had to rule over it with an iron hand and regedit)

If you're still running Win9X and you hate how instable it is, go and get an upgrade. You can probably find Win2k CD's cheap online.

windows vb programmer speaks

[circletimessquare]

to some here, i am the lowest form of scum. i am a windows vb programmer. that makes me 1. evil and 2. stupid. evil because i support microsoft. stupid because, as we all know, vb is a horrible language, right? ;-P

you know what? you may be right, but you don't pay my paycheck. i have to eat and pay rent, you know? there's a market for vb programmers. i fill a market, shrinking or not, the market exists. i go to work and get a paycheck. end of story.

i really think i do cool stuff. i'm working with metrics my company is pushing as an industry standard. i crunch data into purty colors using (shake in horror now) microsoft office web component chart objects. it's easy and straightforward. i'm happy and content. doesn't mean i'm a monkey in a suit. i still deal with thorny programming problems. but, of course, i live a rodney dangerfield existence: "i get no respect." you go on with your bad selves and snicker at me. doesn't change a damn thing. smug attitudes are just mental masturbation that makes you feel better about yourself at the expense of winning any converts. and winning converts is the whole issue here.

my boss says "linux is an unproven platform. maybe in five years." before you all reply to his statement with derision and scorn, just remember that it does no good to chastise people like my boss, as you only further the image of the linux geek as an ivory tower, scornful, holier-than-thou type that wins no converts and drives average joe blow users away. instead, take his words at their face value. if you think his words have no truth, then work on dispelling the rumors and innuendo in the press that foster this attitude amongst your average corporate middle management types. don't like dealing with dilbertesque management types. fine! not a problem! don't! remember what the whole issue is here again in this story?

as far as home use, the scene is currently fragmented. "real" geeks use linux and do "real" computer science. the rest of us are just hobbyists and morons, apparently. until, if, and when linux becomes as accessible to average joe blow "how do you click a mouse?" types, windows will be around forever. if you want to accelerate the acceptance of linux and do away with microsoft, the next time a computer user says something mindblowingly stupid to you, you will not snicker and scoff and say RTFM, you will smile and reply helpfully.

and until the linux world makes a serious, concerted effort to make the linux gui and work environment and installation process as braindead as windows, yes, i said braindead, linux will not expand out of it's "i'm an ubergeek" niche. linux will seriosuly dent microsoft when someone can use linux completely, satisfactorially, on a daily basis, in all aspects of use and NEVER HAVE TO TOUCH A COMMAND LINE INTERFACE FOR A SECOND. or even know one exists!

remember, the world of morons does not cater to your computer science genius. YOU cater to and serve computer using morons. accept that or be happy with linux being relegated to the smaller, rarefied world of high-end computing.

Re:windows vb programmer speaks

[theefer]

Actually, I think RedHat has hidden the command line in its latest release (at least, as hidden as the DOS command in Win98). I guess you are supposed to be able to use the whole system without typing a single command. Ok, I haven't tried it, and since I'm used to using shells, I wouldn't even try.
But I'm sure you'll soon be able to use a non-console-based system, just like win98.

Now, as you said, Linux is for geeks. I agree with that, although I would add that it's *not exclusively* for geeks since you can use it for typing letters etc too.

Anyway, I *love* linux because you can really play with the system. Yes, this is the "geeky orientation" you were talking about. I don't mind linux becoming more mainstream with some more userfriendly distros, *as long as* you are still able to play with it (with some less friendly distros like Debian or Gentoo i.e.).

And the OpenSource/Free nature of GNU/Linux makes me think it will always be possible. And that's what's really great about it.

Re:windows vb programmer speaks

[fferreres]

Food is not a reason to use an OS. Food is a reason to use it at work only.

Windows? What's that?

[IGnatius T Foobar]

There's nothing keeping me on Windows. I switched to Linux way back in 1997 and never looked back. I don't need to list the apps that make Linux a useful operating system -- you've heard the list a thousand times.

The reason you can avoind Windows nowadays is because Microsoft lost the browser war. Yes, you heard me correctly: they lost. Microsoft didn't like the idea of applications shifting from Windows to the web. Remember when you needed special Windows apps for everything? You installed one to send messages to someone's pager, another one to do your banking, another one to track your FedEx shipments, etc. Microsoft wanted to keep it that way, but those pesky Netscape people kept pushing this idea of applications executing on a server while you viewed them in a browser. So they went into War Mode on the browser front. All they managed to accomplish was to destroy Netscape's ability to make money selling browsers. But guess what? Nearly all information-access apps moved to the Web anyway. And those apps are as easily accessed from a Linux or Mac desktop as they are from a Windows desktop. Microsoft failed to stop the migration of apps to the web. Say it with me, folks: Microsoft failed. Doesn't that sound good? It's true. Marc Andreesen's vision of web-enabled applications making the OS irrelevant has become a reality, and that's one of the things that has enabled folks like me to ditch Windows without ever missing it.

.NET

[Lord Omlette]

This is it! This is my one chance to vent about how much I hate Linux and why I love Microsoft! ...

And I have writer's block. Irony, thy name is ...

Damn I'm bad at this ^^;;

Re: .NET

[karlm]

That's the dumbest thing I've ever heard. Isn't the whole point of .NET that it's platform-independant and multi-language. If you're sticking to Win32 b/c of .NET, then .NET is one big lie.

There are at east two Open-source .NET implementations in the works One is caled Mono, and I forget the name of the other. Mono has something like 95% of the .NET classes implemented and tested. When the bug reports start comming in, who do you think is going to patch faster?

Okay, so now what's the real reason you're staying with Lose32?

Re: .NET

[Lord Omlette]

huh? what're you

OH! oops, for some reason I put .NET as the subject. My bad...

You're right of course, I guess Visual Studio.NET has nothing to do w/ why I stay w/ Windows. I'm sure it works fine in WINE...

From the other side...

[Fringe]

I'm not a Windows basher. I bash 'em all. Windows has issues, so does the Mac OS pre-X, and 10.0, 10.1, I'm not a fan of 10.2 either and Mac charged full price for the upgrade from 10.0. I like Linux in concept but got really annoyed by libc versioning issues and other annoyances that other OSes simply take care of. And while I'm a technologist and developer, I don't want to have to keep an encyclopedic knowledge of the low level bits of the OS just to configure a mail server, for example.

A lot of this is historical. I started with the Commodore PET, to the 64, CP/M, DOS, I made money programming for the HP 95/100/200LX, did "object-oriented assembly" for Geos, loved writing for OS/2, and play with a Palm these days. Every OS has issues. Which brings us back to the question... why do I primarily run Windows?

It's where the shallow learning curve to do "enough" is, where the rest of the family is, and where all the money is. I have to sell my work, prostitute myself for a dollar. There are a lot more opportunities to get that dollar on the Windows platform. Sure, Linux is the purer OS, the more reliable, but what I need is customers who will pay actual money... and they run Windows. So I do too.

Hey, I may be easy, but don't call me "cheap". Call me "economical".

Home

[Phroggy]

Win2k at work is pretty much a given. Some of the internal Web sites require IE, and may or may not work with IE for Mac. We have one tool that requires IE on Windows; I'm sure it wouldn't work on Mac. I don't know if wine would work or not. I can't imagine the company deploying vmware on Linux (which still runs Windows) as an alternative to just running Windows.

At home, the reasons why I've been tempted to set up a Windows box are 1) support for cheap-ass hardware like a webcam I bought on sale, 2) apps like MySQLFront, 3) games like Counterstrike. So far, 1) I bought a different camera, and I'm hoping driver support for Linux and OSX improves, 2) I can use Microsoft's Remote Desktop client to connect to my friend's Windows box through our VPN, and run MySQLFront there, connecting back through the VPN to my SQL server, and 3) I'm just playing Warcraft III and a couple other games.

They don't coexist well

[Flamesplash]

Granted I could have simply had a bad experience, but when I installed Redhat on my system that already had w98 and w2k redhat installed itself so that it pushed my w2k partition to a different partition number(?) so that when I went to boot w2k to boot loader was looking in the wrong place. You can try to blame this on how the MS partition mapper works, but I still think OS installers should be smart enough to not mess up my partitions for the most widely used OS out there. It's one thing if they ignore the other N linuxes that are used by .005% of the world, but the widest used OS is something different.

Additionally, after not using Redhat for about 7 months I tried to boot it up and it keep yelling at me about something to do with the windowing invironmens installed, (gnome?). Seems to me that my OS should still work if I haven't touched it in months.

The last part is that at the time there was no good way to book redhat from the windows bootloader OS list. I tried the strategies suggested but they simply never worked, I had to use a floppy anytime I wanted to use redhat.

I honestly would much rather use OSX than windows or *nix seperately.

Digital Camera DSLR

[lsmarso]

Digital camera image processing has moved to the 16-bit realm. That's what's keeping me on Windows, although not at all exclusively.

There is Linux support for RAW image processing into 16-bit TIFs (Bayer interpolation from CCD data) for both Canon and Nikon DSLRs, however tools for subsequent processing and printing are lacking.

I don't discount The Gimp, but its strictly 8-bit in all its glory. FilmGimp is beginning to bridge that gap. In fact, it's a credible tool for manipulating 16-bit TIFs. In addition, the ImageMagick package does provide a number of tools for 16-bit TIF processing as well.

Still, I can't get a cutting edge sharpening or noise reduction algorithm for 16-bit TIFs in Linux.

What's available in Windows? Well, more than Photoshop. All sorts of little specialty apps. As an example, here's a free, but not open source sharpening application that draws its algorithms from bleeding-edge medical diagnostics imaging software, with sophisticated edge sharpening and halo controls.

Not only does it output 16-bit images, but intermediate calculations are done in 32-bit for superlative accuracy!

Is ImageMagick evolving in this direction? I hope so.

And what's the future of printer support for 16-bit images?

It works, and I don't have to think about it.

[Shivetya]

Do I need to say more?

It works for everything I need it to do and I don't have to nor do I give a rats arse how it does it.

No Compelling reason to switch.

Three Cases.

[TheLocustNMI]

First off, let me say I dual-boot at home with Slackware and XP. XP is only used for games. Slackware w/ KDE works great for me.

1. Work
All Windows, All The Time. Until MS Outlook, Visual Studio.NET, and SQL Server Enterprise Manager are ported, I'm stuck.

2. Games
Yeah, I don't think this has to be explained. Run Battlefield 1942 under Wine? P'Shaw.

2. My Mother
Even as slick and produced as Mandrake and RedHat are for the new user, there are still various issues that the normal user just doesn't care or know about. The difference between KDE and GNOME? Yeah, try explaining that one -- and then try to explain why that is BETTER than Windows. Then reboot into Windows when you realize that you CAN'T. I applaud RedHat for their recent desktop-melding moves. Another issue is device support. Setting up a printer in Linux can still be a bit of a pain-in-the-ass, and the newest of the new devices are often not supported by Linux until much later (not the fault of Linux, mind you, but the manufacturers).

All of this said, I think that a Linux desktop is a good possibility for completely new / adventurous users. That's how Mac gained it's popularity in the early 80's. Plenty of complete newbies not accustomed to one particular GUI/OS paradigm.

So, as much as some of the Linux curmudgeons revile the movements of RedHat -- that is where the key to a large user base is.

Only one less reason

[BitHive]

My reasons for sticking with windows are pretty much the same as they were a few years ago, with the exception of the last one:

• Hardware compatability
• Game support
• Photoshop (Don't push that tired 'GIMP' crap on me)
• Decent web browsers (thanks to the recent maturation of Mozilla, and Opera's FreeBSD release, this concern is mostly addressed)

Three Things

[javacowboy]

I have a dual-boot WinXP-Slackware 8.1 system at home.

Three things presently keep me on Windows. Aside from those three things, I can do everything I want to do on Linux:

1) Games (ex Jedi Knight, GTAIII)
2) KaZaa Lite (which I can't yet get to work on Wine. no other file-swapping service is good enough)
3) Need MS Word for my job resume (OpenOffice is not QUITE good enough for the job, but it comes close).

There are also little things like QuickTime and RealPlayer, which I can live without. They are not deal breakers for me.

Basically, if I can get all three to run on Linux, then I swear I will dump my Windows partition. I've had it with M$, and I want to stop using any and all of their products.

If Wine gets good enough that I can run those three types of programs on Linux (or equivalents, such as OpenOffice 100% MS Office compatible), then I would be among the first to install and configure it.

I hate Microsoft. I wish I NEVER had to use their damn OS.

Re:Three Things

[RedWolves2]

RealPlayer - I have installed RealPlayer for Linux before that is out there. Google brings it back with this first item.

Sorry, can't help you on anything else.

Look here: alt.binaries.mac.*

[BoomerSooner]

Same shit, different platform.

I'm so lazy I just buy my software. I hate trying to find all the sit/rar files. Then after downloading the same app 3 or 4 times and it still doesn't work, you could generally buy it with your wasted time.

I learned on warez (in college) and bought for my business. This is why I switched to OS X and Linux (server side). My licenses were going to run in the 10's of thousands for MS products (that constantly need babying) and the Linux alternatives are free (with the exception of Oracle DB). I have 3 Macs and I'm getting a powerbook (thank god the high end went from 3700 to 2900) to use as my primary machine. I also have several x86/linux based servers and a UltraSPARC based box (running Oracle 8i no time for 9i yet). I'm going to convert my G4 tower to OS X Server when my Ti book arrives! Linux should pay attention to the UI tools available to Mac OS X Server. They are pretty robust (insert crude joke here)!

No XML support for Office file formats

[twoslice]

I would switch in a heartbeat if MS Office apps could save and open XML formatted documents. And I do mean standard XML format and not with Micro$oft extensions. All of my customers information is sent in MS Word format and I have tried every conversion utility known to man and the one that works consistently is MS WORD.

Apparently Office 11 is supposed to support XML but I'll believe it when I see it...

Nothing better

[cpt kangarooski]

By which I absolutely do not mean to say that Windows is the best possible OS, or even tolerably good. I hate Windows with the burning passion of a hundred suns. I find MS's business practices deplorable. I don't even care for the poor values in the Windows developer culture.

The problem is a lack of superior alternatives. I'm only using this thing by default, after all.

I used to use MacOS until pretty recently. It had a lot of heart. But it was also a very old design and was honestly at its peak in the early 90's. Apple should have pursued Taligent and replaced it by 1994 with something heads and shoulders better.

OS X is the devil. While it masquerades as a Mac, it embodies none of the values or design goals that were responsible for the Mac being as well-crafted as it was. Without this, OS X is turning out to be very poor indeed. It isn't significantly advancing the state of UI. In fact, in many areas it is regressing. Where there are Mac carryovers they are usually half-assed; they are the result of a cargo cult of imitators, just as happens with Windows and Unix. Largely they are dominated by NeXT, which was also never any good. (I speak from experience here -- looking slick isn't the same as actually being good, and NeXT is a master of form without substance)

Linux, and other Unices are popular here, but again, there's no dedication towards designing the entire OS and its attendant software around well-conceived and tested UI purposes. Without that, it's doomed to be bad. No one has ever delivered a good desktop Unix -- I don't think that it's really possible without so much work as to make it harder than it would've been to start from scratch with lessons learned and brand-new ideas to try.

I DESPERATELY want something new and better. But at this point in time, no one is interested in doing so. I'd switch to something else in a heartbeat if there were only something to switch to.

My small list

[inkfox]

These constitute 95% of my computer time:

• Visual Studio
• MS Office
• Explorer - too many pages require that and/or Windows plugins
• PowerDVD with 5.1 output
• MAME32

There's no equivalent for Visual Studio. The class browser, inline completion, UML export and integrated dialog tools make creating tools which regular humans can use and normal programmers can extend into a single day's work. The Visual Studio debugger has no equal. It's convoluted, but it does most anything you could ever want.

I know about the crossover plugin, Wine, etc. But I want to sit down and be productive or have fun when I browse the web. I don't want to tinker with little changes and incomplete hacks each time plugins change, and like it or not, it's a Windows web. I browse with Mozilla by default, but it's rare to go a week without having to hit IE half a dozen times.

I don't want to load a client's doc into Star Office and not be able to see some of its components, or to make changes and have it back, only to have them ask what the hell I did to the formatting.

There are a few ports of MAME for Linux, but I don't know of any with the nice, easy menu, comfortable feature set and overall performance.

I've looked at a few DVD player options. I haven't found anything like DVD, and my last venture at getting 5.1 sound under Linux was an utter failure.

I use my Linux and FreeBSD boxes for more and more things every day, but it's mostly server-side work and random data processing tasks. It's just not ready for my desktop.

Simple, really...

[intermodal]

I work at Microsoft and use linux at home. Microsoft won't let me use linux at work. Work is where I am most of the time when I check /.

I can't legally run Linux...

[Anonvmous Coward]

I inadvertently made an agreement with MS about that when I clicked 'OK' one too many times during the SP4 beta install.

Why I use windows.

[Dynedain]

On any given day I must use the following programs on the same workstation:

Photoshop
3D Studio
FormZ
Dreamweaver
Filemaker Pro

On many days I also must use:
Combustion
AutoCAD
Flash

While my primary job function is a digital artist, I am also expected to handle day-to-day in house IT on my spare time. This involves administrating 5 Win2k/XP boxes, 30 Mac boxes (NOT OSX!), 1 NT4 server, 5 old Macs running as servers, 2 tape backup systems, 2 color printers, 3 office laser printers, 2 large-scale HP plotters, a CD burning station, and 2 tape backup systems.

I am simeltaneously a digital artist, and the only in-house IT support staff. Besides not having the ability to run the applications I need (most notibly 3DStudio and AutoCAD) on other platforms, I don't have time to learn how to configure and administrate a network through command line and config files. I'd like my office to go to Linux servers, but since I'm the only one who has any inkling of how, and because I don't have the time to figure it out - it ain't gonna happen.

Limited time & incompatible hardware

[Xeger]

I find myself still using Windows on the desktop primarily because of hardware incompatabilities.

Yeah, yeah, I know, kernel 2.4 has support for every device and its brother. But listen:

Until recently, I had a very quirky system setup. I had 2 SCSI hard drives hanging off an old Adaptec ultrawide controller, and an ATA100 hard drive hooked up to one of my motherboard's built-in IDE channels. My motherboard's BIOS didn't support the IDE drive (too large) and there was no BIOS update available, so booting from IDE was out of the question.

LILO never has, and probably never will, boot off the SCSI drives. As far back as I can remember, from the day I first got SCSI drives, LILO would hang after printing "LI" with no further error messages.

I've tried installing four separate distros on probably a dozen occasions; I've installed onto fresh, unpartitioned hard drives and made sure I have a small boot partition well under the 1024-cylinder limit. I've put LILO on primary and secondary partitions, had a brief flirtation with GRUB--the only thing ever to work was a boot floppy, and I'll be damned if I'm going to leave a floppy in the drive just so I can boot.

Now, recently I bit the bullet and bought a new motherboard and brand-spanking-new ATA6 compatible IDE drive. I'm thrilled with its performance, which far surpasses my measly old ultrawide SCSI drives. Now I've got a modern BIOS and IDE-only drives, there's no reason that LILO shouldn't work.

But consider: my new motherboard has onboard 6-channel audio and an onboard Ethernet adapter, neither of which are supported in the latest Redhat release. I have an old Turtle Beach audio card which would be a suitable replacement for the onboard sound, but I strongly suspect I won't find any mixers with support for four-channel audio.

I'm not even going to think about support for my Radeon 9000-based video card. I'm sure there's an X server that'll support it, but it seems a shame to let its awesome 3D capabilities lie fallow. And even if I can get Mesa or another OpenGL workalike to support it, there are few 3D apps available for Linux. I'd need to keep a Windows install around for games, or look into WineX.

Now consider my schedule: I work a 40-55 hour work week and participate in a number of sports and recreational activities outside of work. I typically have less than four hours of discretionary time available in the evening; into these four hours I have to pack: dinner, TV, household chores, and whatever else needs to be done. Some evenings, it's all I can do just to scan Slashdot for late-breaking headlines!

With my schedule, why on earth would I want to spend two weeks of valuable evenings to install a new OS, simply so I could then fetch a Linux build of Mozilla and continue using it where I left off using Mozilla under Windows? It's sheer madness.

I hold Linux close to my heart; I use it in all of my servers and all of my clients' servers. I wouldn't be able to get through the workday without GNU utilities. But, at least for the time being, the overhead of switching to a Linux desktop is simply too great.

To be honest, proper sound support!

[thesolo]

Here at work, I have to use Windows; we are an MS shop. At least I can use Mozilla and Phoenix instead of IE though. Anyway, at home I run, or at least try to run, Linux. However, I flip back and forth between the two on a fairly regular basis. Why you might ask? Proper sound support!

My computer doubles as my stereo & alarm clock. In the morning, either XMMS or Winamp wakes me up, and the rest of the time, it's my stereo. I have a nice 5 speaker surround sound system with a subwoofer, connected to a Creative Labs Sound Blaster Live! 5.1 card. I use the digital out on the sound card to the digital DIN jack on the receiver. I also have the creative Live Drive, which has inputs for headphones, midi, etc., on the front.

The reason I swap back and forth is because this setup is not very well supported under Linux. It does have support under Linux (emu10k1 chipset/module), and Red Hat finally detects it properly as of 8.0 Here are the problems I've run into with this setup under Linux:

Red Hat 7.3: Took me hours to get this card actually working. Couldn't get more than 2 speaker output. Needed emu-tools (see below).
Red Hat 8.0: Detects the card properly, but does not turn on digital out on my card; it defaults to analog. You have to install emu-tools and run 'emu-config -d' after logon to get any sound. On the first run of RH8, I get 4 speaker output. If I reboot, only the satellite speakers work.
SuSE 8.0/8.1: SuSE detects this card perfectly out of the box, and has since 8.0. Their ALSA support is excellent, and they use Gamix, which means I can get support for the headphone jack on the Live Drive, etc. However, there is a problem with their support; their configuration does not use standard PCM controls, so adjusting the volume in programs like XMMS does NOTHING!! You have to physically adjust the volume on the receiver, or bring up Gamix and adjust it there. Did I mention that Gamix is done in Motif, and will randomly exit without warning? Ick.
Mandrake 9.0: Mandrake 9 does pick up my sound card, and turns on Digital Out by default, but only gives me 2 speakers again. Oddly enough, they give me the front L & R channels, exactly the opposite of RH 8.0.

I like good sound, and I want all my speakers to work. I don't play many games, so Windows isn't an issue there, and the Cisco VPN client is available on linux too, which is great. However, lack of proper 5.1 sound is enough to keep me on Windows. Also, gamix is impossible to install manually; the instructions are in Japanese only, and it fails about a dozen different dependencies that I was unable, even after several hours, to resolve.

I should be able to install a major distro, have it detect and initialize my card correctly, and I should NOT have to recompile my kernel for more than 2 speakers! My live drive should work without having to use a flaky motif program on SuSE. This is a big problem, and I'm not happy with it. At this point, I'm tempted to wait until ALSA lands in the kernel before buying another distro. I'm using RH 8.0 right now, but only having 2 speakers is really starting to get to me.

P.S. If anyone else has gone through this problem, please post your experiences or any assistance you can offer; I would really like to stick with Linux and have proper sound!

Inertia, and the Roland LAPC-1

[Rimbo]

My continued use of Windows comes down primarily to inertia:

1. I've been a very happy user of Cakewalk products. I recently upgraded to SONAR, and I've really enjoyed using it.

2. I own a Roland LAPC-1. I can't fit it in a Mac, and the Mac is the only system that has equal or better music-writing software.

3. Quicken. I swear by Quicken. I couldn't even balance my checkbook before it.

4. I've been a PC game player for many years.

But by and large, when I upgrade next, most of the above reasons will be gone:

1. As good as Cakewalk is, the Mac has a greater variety and quality of music-editing software than the PC. The products that are out there are also more mature. The Macintosh is the industry standard for music. Why am I settling for second-best?

2. I don't want to sacrifice the old LAPC-1's sound for anything, but as long as used MT-32's are available on eBay for $25, I no longer have to be stuck with it. Besides; even if I stay with a PC, motherboards with ISA slots are few and far between, and I no longer want to be limited to just mobos that have ISA slots.

3. They make Quicken for Mac, and there are similar programs (e.g. gnucash) for Linux.

4. I find that most of my game-playing time nowadays is done on consoles, and I rarely (if ever) play games on the PC other than simple Java apps.

A lot of these reasons have been around for a while, but only now am I at a point where something other than Windows can be considered an option -- in fact, a Macintosh is a much more attractive option for most of what I do now. My next computer will probably be a Macintosh, and my Windows box will get converted to a Linux machine.

God, I sound like one of those annoying "Switch" ads. :)

My 0.02

[sprayNwipe]

I run WinXP on my laptop.

If it could run games, and the hardware was cheaper, I'd nab an OSX-based notebook.

If it could run games, run decent graphics and 3D apps like Photoshop & 3DS Max, play all of my movies in a decent movie player without having sound fail because the codec wasn't supported, had a for-dummies set up of hibernation all ready to go, and had a consistent interface between apps, I'd choose Linux.

I recently tried RH8, and I probably would have stuck with everything that annoyed me about it if all the apps supported antialiasing, rather than just the shell and two or three other apps. I tried the GTK2 fix thing or whatever it's called, but it just nailed my system. It sounds like a small thing, but it's the small things that eventually drive you mad.

My wife's computer...

[mshiltonj]

I'm on linux, but my wife refuses to give up Windows until there's a Dreamweaver equivalent. Mozilla Composer don't cut it.

Re:Windows is easier

[Izeickl]

Ditto, I use FreeBSD for my servers apart from one Win2k Server, but on the whole Windows 2K on the desktop for me cant be beat. Its rock solid, the sheer amount of available software that isnt what seems like continually in Beta phase. And the development tools, VB is great for quick little gui programs and using components from other programs, it may be awful to alot of people and bloated whatever, but its so simple and fast to do, and the .NET tools are even better in mixing code types and producing GUIs. I do sensible things like avoid Outlook for security reasons etc so I dont trust Microsoft entirely, but I wont be switching for a long while.

Paint Shop Pro

[King of the World]

No, I'm not kidding. I can't stand the interface of Photoshop, so therefore I can't stand the interface of The Gimp. All those windows are just awkward. I don't have an separate windows for my webbrowsing and my navigation bar and my toolbar - why are graphics programs so different? At least PSP gets that right. They align the toolbars along the sides of the window like every other application. It's simpler and easier to use. Even Macromedia Dreamweaver that did copy Adobe in it's a-million-and-one floating windows now aligns it to the side within the single window. Can the GIMP do this?

My two bits

[CanadaDave]

First off, I dual-boot Debian 3.0 (actually Sarge/Testing) Linux with Windows XP Pro. About one-third of the posts I make are from a public computer at school (running Windows 2k), one-third are from home on my Windows XP Pro partition, and one-third from home on my Linux partition. So although I use Linux about half the time (sometimes more sometimes less) the stats on the Slashdot server may not show. I think a lot of people like me, may do some Slashdotting from a public computer, or from a work computer (or wherever they can!) where Linux may not be an option.

Reasons I need Windows:

1) Mathematica for school purposes, and at my previous job, for work purposes. Matlab and Maple are both available for Linux, and Octave is available for free on Linux and Windows. But nothing compares to Mathematica for some things (NonlinearRegress anyone?)

2) Running IntelliJ IDEA JAVA compiler. It is JAVA, so it should run on Linux. In fact it used to for me, but now that I have Debian testing on my system the libc6 binaries are too "new" for the IntelliJ IDEA program, and so it crashes on start. So this is a dependancy problem which just doesn't exist in Windows.

3) Burning CDs. Linux can do audio CDs okay. I haven't quite mastered how to back up my data though and have the CD turn out properly AND work in both Windows and Linux. Something to do with the Rockridge/Joliet/ISO standard, blah, blah... The filenames get screwed up and stuff.... So I store all my data on a FAT32 drive and access it from both Linux and Windows. Then I back up that drive on CD using Roxio CD Burning Software.

4) I wasn't going to put Microsoft Office on this list, because I primarily use OpenOffice. BUT, there is one exception. I need Excel sometimes to quickly do a fit to some data and I need to do a trendline, etc.. Sure Octave for Linux can do this, but it is a pain. With Excel I just grab some delimited data, highlight the data, graph it, right-click, add trendline, options->show equation, done!

5) Playing Diablo II Expansion Pack over Battle.net. I haven't looked into how I could do this with Wine. But every time I've tried Wine in the past, it hasn't worked.

6) I'm still using Microsoft Money 2000 to track all my investments. GNU Cash sucks for investments, and all the other investment software projects for Linux are not complete, and some haven't been maintanted in some time, I consider them unusable. I think KMyMoney2 may become my program of choice, but I'll wait until it is a bit more mature, and hopefully they'll add some more investment funcctionality. I tried running my MS Money 2000 over Wine but it didn't work.

Quicken is essential.

[s_e_h]

At home, Quicken is essential. I consider it the most critical application I run. While verything else is entertainment, education, or just a hobby, Quicken is lifeblood. I'd be happy to run it on some other operating system (Macintosh may be a possibility), but for now I need Windows as long as I need Quicken.

I don't mind using Windows, as long as I can have most of the Cygwin suite installed. Ideally, I would like Quicken on Linux.

What Keeps me in Windows

[RatBastard]

Here's my quick list in no particular order:

• I play a lot of games. Windows has the highest number of game titles.
• I Already have all of the tools I need running under Windows and I do not feel like spending the time learning to use analogs of those tools in another OS.
• I know my way around Windows well enough to do the administration I need to do. I don't feel like throwing all that knowledge away.
• I can't afford a system that can run Mac OSX at a reasonable speed.
• I do not like *nix. I like it for its technical aspects and its power, but administering it gives me headaches.
• I do not like KDE or Gnome.

All that being said I am no fan of Microsoft's business practices. I do not use most MS products other than the OSes. I use the computer and OS to run the applications I want to run. I am not an OS hobbiest who uses the computer in order to use a particular OS.

Because laziness pays off right now

[dswensen]

Games, and the fact that I bought Photoshop for the PC years ago, and I'll be damned if I'm going to A) buy it again for another platform at its ridiculous price (or try convincing my employer to do so), or B) learn the GIMP or another program, because my day to day work life is busy enough without having to learn how to do everything all over again.

The same goes for a number of applications I use every day, and have little motivation to try to find the equivalent for on a different OS. Because that's hard work, and as Douglas Coupland says, "Hard work may pay off someday, but laziness pays off right now."

So, yeah, laziness and intertia. I've been using my Windows tools for so long, and use them so much, that to switch over to another OS because it's "better" is not something I feel I have the time for.

Just for that, I'm booting back into Linux

[Wee]

So, unfortunately, I have to disagree that Linux (or UNIX in general) is the ideal development environment

I'm at home sick today, and I was planning on playing some Battlefield 1942 (mostly because it's gameplay goes so well with Dayquil), but just for that comment, I'm going to boot back into Linux, remote-display my IDE over ssh and get some work done...

:-)

-B

Re:Just for that, I'm booting back into Linux

[LordSah]

Or you could do what I do: use XP's remote desktop to remote-display my IDE, and still use the vastly superior Visual Studio for debugging.

I don't mean to be combative. I'm just saying that this isn't an advantage that Linux can claim anymore.

Re:Just for that, I'm booting back into Linux

[Wee]

I don't mean to be combative. I'm just saying that this isn't an advantage that Linux can claim anymore.

I'm just glad we have the choice, you know? Right tool for the job, I say.

-B

Re:Just for that, I'm booting back into Linux

[Wee]

You'll grow old at a young age trying to explain to people what liberty is good for. Use what you need, and let others do to the same. If they don't like it then they are welcome to develop an alernative for you.

I've really got no beef with MS as a whole. Sure, they've done some wacked things, but every company I've worked has done something less-than-scrupulous. MS just does it on a bigger scale is all. :-) They aren't my bag, but I don't mind if they are yours. Why would I?

Keep on truckin' man...

-B

Re:What keeps me on windows

[moosesocks]

Of course... it's been there for millions of years without changing, and probably never will

Re:Installation ease, apps, multimedia, support

[JWW]

Its real interesting to hear people talk about software installation.

I remember in the early 90's there were the same kind of issues with Windows. Everyone had diffenent installers, there wer configuration problems with different software, etc. Then along comes Installsheild and all of the sudden every installer was installsheid and every installtion did basically the same thing.

Linux really needs the equivalent of an installsheild sort of application to come out. Maybe now one that can automatically resolve dependencies, or organize libraries. I think that something like this could be not that far off into the future. I sure hope so anyway.

Right tool - Ease of config

[HamNRye]

I use a Dell 2k box at work, and at home have a variety of Unix and Windows. But /. server logs would show me as a windows user. Here's why:

My Entertainment Computer:
Athlon 1GHZ
1GB RAM
TV Card
Dual Monitor (29" CRT 17" LCD)
WinXP Pro

Why:
Linux supports my TV card, but it is a major pain to set up. Poor DVR capabilities compared to WinDVR or SnapStream. Dual Monitor support is better in some circumstances with Linux, but mostly the featrues I like (DVDMax, etc...) are provided by the Matrox Video Drivers.

Gaming - This is my gaming rig, although I don't game much. But I NEED Madden NFL and Morrowwind.

Porn - I just hate getting Quicktime or WMA porn on Linux. Also, I like the Slideshow Feature for images in XP pro.

DVD, CD, etc... Ripping - It is a pain to set these up under linux. (Is it possible to rip DVD2DivX in Linux??) Plus viewing - Good full screen, etc...

I use Linux on one box, but Linux Distros have imitated too much of Windows. I use windowmaker with a BeOS theme, and occasionally Gnome, and occasionally KDE, sometimes just Enlightenment. Ewww. KDE mimics the Windows GUI to the point where the even have an out-of-control "K" menu (Think start menu) and Kandalf, the talking....

Gnome just always felt clunky. Works with all windowmanagers, works well with none.

To be honest, I am seriously considering switching my Linux box to Windows. As stable, as easy to use, less compatibility issues, a large library of warez^H^H^H^H^H software, etc... Linux (mostly due to it's handling by the Distro folks) has become a productivity sink for me. I find that I spend too much time trying to remember which program does what, and where it is. The munged up mess that /usr/bin has become. Minor config BS followed by Library issues.

Windows at least seems to have become more stable, more consistant, and free from DLL HELL. Now, instead of figuring out an XF86Config, I figure out how to stop the 18 ways that XP phones home, where the hidden/hidden files are, and watching for new vulnerabilities.

Linux is not the problem. It is the distro creators who are looking to put out 17 CD's of freeware. (Or 1 CD that has "FreeCiv" but not termcap) The vendors need to do better at creating a "Linux experience". Set up a distro from scratch and imagine how a new user might interact with it for a day. Chances are they'd be frustrated as sh*t.

Moderators: Call it Flamebait, but don't call it funny.

~Hammy

Visual Basic

[orangepeel]

I feel so ... dirty ... for having admitted that in public.

I started working with Visual Basic back in 1997. I was working part-time while going to school part-time. The job was awful, and so was the pay. In order to improve conditions, I needed a language that would allow me to get small applications up and running in a hurry. Visual Basic allowed me to do that, and thus allowed me to tame some of the insanity that had been present at work by automating tasks that should've been dealt with a decade earlier.

Of course, you can guess where that led ... to more and more complex applications. On occasion I would bump into VB's glass ceiling. I'd also been reading a lot over those years too, so I'd been noticing all the things that I'd been missing out on by having started working with VB instead of a different language.

I really, really wish that I'd started with Borland Delphi. But back in 1997, MS was offering VB at a ridiculous discount for academic users, and I was dirt poor. Yeah, I hear you mockingly saying, "the first one if always free (or at least cheap)."

Things have changed somewhat now. About a year and a half ago, I decided to switch exclusively to Linux and *BSD (RedHat and OpenBSD specifically) at home. I love them both and don't intend to use Windows anymore than I have to from now on.

The problem is, there's that programming issue.

I don't have the same job anymore, so the pressure's off, but there's still software that I want to write.

It's ironic this article was posted, because I've just come from the "The Peon's Guide To Secure System Development" article on Slashdot's main page. Before I can completely drop Windows, I need to find a language that offers the following:

1) If I'm going to switch from the Windows world, it's got to be worth it to the best extent: it's got to work on both *BSD and Linux systems.
2) Compiled, not interpretted.
3) Provides some way of creating a solid GUI.
4) Offers some type of event-driven functionality, or a method to provide an equivalent.
5) And it's got to be SAFE for a pseudo/wannabe programmer such as myself.

Point number 5 is critical. I'm a good enough programmer to know that I'd be as dangerous as hell if I were to produce entire applications using C++. Because of that, so far I've limited myself to producing a few simple C++ DLLs that are used by my VB apps.

At this point I have to say I've been incredibly impressed with Ruby. With the FXRuby library, it provides a slick connection to the FOX toolkit, so GUIs are a snap. And all three of those components work flawlessly on both Linux and *BSD. Furthermore, while it's not something I need, work on the "FreeRIDE" Integrated Development Environment is beginning to look really impressive. However, Ruby is an interpreted language. I'm going to continue using it whenever I can, but I still need a language I can compile once in a while.

I haven't found an option that can do all that, so for now, I can't afford a complete switch from Microsoft. Visual Basic makes it too easy to work on their platform. Unless someone knows of an alternative under Linux/BSD....

Re:Visual Basic

[cmpalmer]

I write mostly Visual Basic, too (although I started in C/C++). I like it and I'm not embarassed by it.

I use Windows machines because that is what I have to use at work. We write applications that interface with a lot of Windows-only sofware using lots of Windows-only components. There are quite a few people at work who would like to use Linux/*nix, but, thanks the old chicken or egg problem, our customers just don't want it.

I use Windows machines at home because my wife and kids use Windows at work/school (my wife is a teacher, so that's almost the same thing).

If I was single and writing custom server applications or specialized sofware, I would use Linux/*unix. I started out in the Unix world and like/miss a lot about it.

If I was not working as a programmer and didn't have to worry about money, I would use a Macintosh. I'd love to have one, I think they are really cool and easy to use, but I just can't justify having one unless I get enough disposable income to get one as a 3rd computer.

Re:Visual Basic

[tempfile]

There's no need to be embarassed by programming VB. VB is in fact an excellent tool for tying together COMponents, and just perfect for database frontends.

Re:Windows? What's that?

[iksowrak]

That's awesome that you can run Linux full time. I'm really happy for you and one day I'd like to be able to do the same.

However, I disagree with you on a couple points. 1) Microsoft may be loosing the browser war but I'd hardly say they've lost it. Until I can visit every site and have it work perfectly with a browser other than IE, MS hasn't lost the war. My credit card company won't let me access their online payment site without IE, a handful of sites have functionality that's only available through ActiveX compoments etc. MS got to the top by some questionable (to say the least) methods and they're slipping (long live Mozilla & gang!) but they're still top of the heap.

Secondly, you say that "The reason you can avoind Windows nowadays is...." Please tell me how to get the games I like (not just any games, but the ones I want to play), Quicken (gnucash isn't there yet), photoshop (gimp is cool but it's not Photoshop), all the latest hardware drivers, application development suites, etc. (I could go on) to work in my browser.

NOTHING

[poiu]

Hmmmm ... lets see, I can use Office on OS X. I can SSH wherever I need to. I can have a light kick ass laptop with full userland tools. I can script to my hearts content, and even better its an awsome Java development platform.

So, I'd have to say nothing.

Sure, I've used Windows in the past year, but after I switched my main laptop to a PowerBook I've never looked back.

The only thing I miss is a two button mouse ... *grin* +1 troll

ok

[nomadic]

1) Is it just the 'vocal minority' that favors alternate OSes over Linux and

Yes.

Do people like using Windows? Are games the driving factor? Or is it just 'the right tool for the job?

Games are a fair-sized reason; there just aren't enough new commercial games released for Linux.

Secondly I like XP's desktop better; graphically it's more responsive, and just looks better. Browsing the web is a lot easier, too. The browsers work better and audio and video is unproblematic.

And the main reason I used to use Linux, the stability, isn't so much a problem with Windows anymore. XP/2k, despite the claims made on slashdot, is quite stable.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[sniggly]

I got winxp a year ago (for my adobe apps) and I am happy to say its much more stable than win98.

Still, windows explorer and msie freeze on a regular basis. Also Mozilla does bork out at moments. I've had a few instances where I had to reboot the machine.

As to a linux desktop - when my kde 3.1 beta freezes i can ssh in from another box and kill the process that freezes my machine. But if i run icewm on it instead chances of a lockup are much less. Thats a choice that can be made :)

The oldest webserver that I admin is a linux box running on a (then new) 400 mhz celeron. The only downtime it had was for kernel updates and one move to a new colo. It never destabilized by itself. Thats about 4 years of stability.

No girlfriend.

[Quixadhal]

I still use windows because I don't have a girlfriend. If I had one, I couldn't afford to throw all my disposable income at the latest games every week, and I'd be using linux to ensure that I could customize everything just the way she wanted it, while still have my desktop look the way I want for the 5 minutes a day I got to use it.

But, lacking a girlfriend, I have all these cool games that sadly don't work (or don't work properly) under linux.. and thus I have to stay with bouncy old windows...

Troll? Use the best tool for the task!

[Fastolfe]

This article is fairly loaded with bias, but I'll try to make the point anyway: Use the best tool for the task.

Anyone that tells you a single operating system is the best tool for every task is an idiot. So the question becomes, which operating system is the better tool for most of your tasks?

That's entirely a question for the user: are you going to be doing a lot of Unixishy development? Is there some particular software you need to use to do your daily job? Can you afford a second computer?

I personally think it's silly to limit yourself to one OS if you can afford a second computer. Hell, I have several, most of them headless systems running Linux with a beefy Windows system that's my sole head. I use Exceed to run X apps from my Linux servers.

Drivers and Cygwin

[Eneff]

keep my windows world sane...

The first thing is Linux drivers. If I'm on a server where things don't change every few months and video is unimportant, then Linux is great. However, video drivers for linux are inadequate. Furthermore, the amount of RTFMing required to get everything set up is fine for a hobbiest, but there are times when I just want to get things done.

2. I might be tempted just to have a second computer to do most everything in Linux, but that which is important to me from Linux is in Cygwin. Linux has no advantage on desktop apps because the most important ones (vi, grep, cvs) work on winderz.

Okay, so they don't all use Cygwin, but they've been ported. If I need to use an X app, I have xfree86.

Once that was developed, there was just no reason for me to fiddle around with linux on my desktop.

Cheap DAQ cards..

[Knobby]

I use MAC OS X on my primary machine, however...

My lab is filled with inexpensive PCs because it's much easier to find data acquisition hardware with Windows drivers. National Instruments supports Linux, AIX, Solaris, Windows, Mac OS, OS X (I have a LV7 beta disk for OS X on my desk right now), and Linux. Unfortunately, they don't have drivers for anything other than their GPIB cards on any of the platforms except Windows.. It's frustrating and I'd switch to something else, if I could get the hardware issues sorted out..

Sticky Apps

[bwt]

I'm 100% Linux at home, but at work I've got one linux box and one windows box. I spend 80% of my time on the windows box, the rest on the linux box. The biggest thing that is stopping me from adopting windows at work is the fact that we've put a lot of our business data in windows only apps. It's not that equivalents programs don't exist, in most cases they do. In many cases the cutover cost would be prohibitive.

For example, we use an off the shelf app called "HEAT" to track tickets from the call center into our development shop. There are plenty of open source equivalents (like say bugzilla), but our data is in HEAT. HEAT has a web-app called iHEAT, but I'd have to convince management to use it. There is no hope of changing away from HEAT. We use MKS Source Integrity for source control. If we upgraded to the Enterprise edition, we could use this on linux, but the standard edition still appears to be Windows only. There is no hope of us changing this tool either. I'm guessing Evolution now is interoperable with MSExchange, so that's probably not a show-stopper any more. I think MSExchange has a web access layer we could use too. It is, of course, critical for drop-in 100% interoperability here from Linux.

We're an Oracle shop and we do our development in TOAD and the Oracle tools. The latter have linux support in the newer versions (so when we convert it'll be OK), but the TOAD equivalents (TORA was farthest along last time I looked), are still catching up. I can do some work in a plain text editor (JEdit rocks).

Re:Let me get this straight

[hondo77]

And the hardware?

I'm sorry, I didn't realize you are using open source hardware...

And the no-Aqua like themes allowed lawsuits?

And this has what to do with anything?

And all the closed source software that come with?

I like using the best tool for the job (i.e. I'm not a fanatic).

Is iMovie Open Source? QuickTime?

No. Are the games that the many ./-ers who just have to play on their Windoze boxes open sourced?

Why My Windows Machines Still Linger

[anewsome]

I think everybody agrees the only reason someone who prefers Linux, would keep a windows box around is because of the applications. Don't get me wrong,.. I am a Linux user at heart. Linux has been my primary desktop machine since early 1995 and it has not been easy watching all my Windows friends have access to all these cool applications.

Currently the applications I am missing are:
1.) Full featured DVD Authoring. - Admitedly I do this on MAC OS X right now, but this is because there is no software, commercial or otherwise that can do this on linux right now. And yes I do have my eye on dvd-create and I have made a few DVD with dvdauthor. I would hardly call the end result full featured.

2.) MS Money - Does not run under Codeweavers CrossOver Office product, which I did buy. I know there was a recent report of Quicken being able to run under CrossOver Office on Linux but Quicken != MS Money. I have over 6 years of MS Money data. Before you say that I can export/import that into Quicken, learn something about what you are talking about. The export functionality does not support all the features of the product.

3.) Decent CD burner Application - I burn ALOT of CD's. I've tried them all on Linux and none of them work as smoothly as say Nero or Prassi on Windows. I use Prassi myself. Yes I've tried kcreate, xcdroast and so on. Why heck, I can never get cdrecord to record any faster than 4x, no matter what the speed capability of my drive or blanks. And my name is in the man page!

4.) A sensible GUI file manager. I've looked at Nautilus and probably a few others. On my Redhat 8.0 desktop right this minute I can not do a simple search of files by right clicking on a directory.

This one will be kind of tricky for the zealots to comprehend so listen to what I do, A LOT. I have about 20,000 MP3 files and I buy at least 2 or 3 CD's a week, all get converted to MP3. When loading up my portable mp3 player, I like to open a WinXP explorer window so I can see the root of my mp3 directory, right click on it and pick search. I pick a date of the last 2 months or so and *.mp3 and it gives my a new window with my recent mp3s. I interactively pick enough (while the size of my pick updates in real time) mp3s to file my Compact Flash card, then I drag them to the Compact Flash. Seems simple doesn't it. Try doing this under Linux without writing your own application. Yes, I know how to use the shell, Nautilus, find and all other relevant tools. None of them make the process I just described very easy. This is simple as pie under Windows.

4.) Still flaky applications (although this is better than no applications) - Specifically, the only decent PIM app is Evolution, I just loaded the released a few days ago 1.2 version and it is still riddled with bugs and hangs 4 or 5 times a day on my system. Matter of fact I have a icon on my toolbar which does a kill -9 on all the evolution processes and restarts it, that's how often it happens. This really stinks if you're like me and your productivity depends on being able to access your email, tasks, calendar, etc.

I guess this list isn't all that bad, considering just a year ago it included a whole bunch more things that I needed my Windows for. When I switched to this Linux thing in 1995 I said I'd give it 10 years to come out with the applications I needed. Well,.. I've got three years to go. We'll see what happens.

--Aaron

What's keeping me on Windows?

[Chester K]

Warning! If you're a zealot, you might want to just pass over this comment, because you'll surely be offended by some of it.

What's keeping me on Windows?

• First and foremost, there no compelling reason for me to switch off of Windows. Linux offers nothing that I can't get on Windows.
  
  
• I don't give a damn about Microsoft's business practices, or how they treat their competitors.
  
• Similarly, I don't give a damn about patent issues or licensing. I just want to be able to open that DOC file without some crappy import filter screwing it up. Emailing the sender back and ask them for the file in another format just because my platform of choice doesn't conform to de facto standards isn't my idea of a good time.
  
• Linux GUIs are ass compared to Windows. Sorry, someone has to say it. Even with the popular themes, and even with all the improved fonts installed, and even with all the antialiased text patches installed, it still looks chunky and uneven. Sit someone in front of a screenshot of text under KDE with all the fancy options enabled, and a screenshot of Times New Roman, both under XP's ClearType, under Windows standard antialiasing, and under Windows non-antialiasing, and they'll point to the KDE text as looking the worst. And that's not even getting into the usability issues with KDE and Gnome. And the clipboard! Oh god don't even get me started on the clipboard. I know there's a standard somewhere for how applications should store data on the clipboard in X for compatibility, but nobody uses it; and that makes the clipboard pretty much useless. Considering the clipboard is one of the most used features of a GUI, that's a big handicap.
  
  
• With only a small handful of exceptions, games run on Windows and not Linux.
  
  
• Windows has Photoshop. The Gimp sucks. Anyone who works seriously with graphics would agree on this point. The interface is absolutely abysmal.
  
  
• I like Internet Explorer. I like the interface, I like the way the UI is responsive, I like the fact that pages just work in it. I could give a flying fuck less about W3C standards support.
  
• I like not having to edit text configuration files for basic OS functionality. I'm sure people get their jollies on editing /etc/resolv.conf, but I'd rather be doing things with my computer.
  
• I don't really like the GPL. If the software were truly Free, there wouldn't be any restrictions on redistributing it. I enjoy tinkering with code and I'd hate to release some fun little trinket of a program then find out that I'm required to provide source code access to it in perpituity because I link against a GPL'd library. Linux advocates seem more interested in enforcing their licenses than Microsoft is!
  
• The various versions of Windows are generally compatible with each other. This is not often the case with various Linux distributions. You not only have to worry about your kernel version, but the versions of all your various libraries, your utility programs, and where your distribution vendor put various paths. It's "DLL Hell" to the extreme.
  
• I bothered to figure out how to get rid of that stupid inward bevel that surrounds KDE's taskbar. It's unnecessary, and it makes the taskbar look cluttered.
  
• I can plug my digital camera in my Windows XP box and it's not only supported right off the bat, but it has both a wizard to extract the pictures, and it also is integrated right into Explorer to let me view the pictures on the camera like it was any other drive on my system.
  
• I can't stand most of the vocal Linux advocates. They're like children. I don't put any trust in the technical abilities of someone who insists on spelling Microsoft with a $ instead of an S, or someone who still thinks the picture of Bill Gates as Borg is funny, or someone who claims that Windows95 was unstable because Microsoft made it that way on purpose. I almost hate to recommend Linux for any project because I don't want to be lumped in with that very vocal group.

That's pretty much the biggest issues that keep me on Windows.

My thoughts

[lewp]

A lot of what I say may sound like blasphemy to the average Linux zealot Slashdot user. This is fine. Just remember, you asked :P. My desktop PCs run either Linux or FreeBSD, so this is more of an educated guess than why I use Windows.

People stay on Windows because:

It came with their computer
Most people aren't savvy enough to install their own operating system. Yes, OS installations are horribly easy now compared to just a couple years ago. This doesn't matter. These are the people with the blinking 12:00's on their VCRs (yeah, they still own VCRs you snobs). Though I'm certainly an elitist bastard, this doesn't mean that all of these people are stupid. They just have better things to do. They don't want to contemplate their choice of OS, they don't even care. They just want their computer to work, do what they need it to do, and get out of the way so they can play with their kids, go outside, or enjoy a hobby. You know, things we (as system administrators and technology gurus, if just to the rest of our family) have been promising them for years they will be able to do with the extra time the computer will save them.

It's too different
Most people don't have problems with the way Windows behaves from an end-user standpoint. Even if they did, moving to one of the Free Software (beer, speech, whatever) alternatives isn't going to get them any usability improvements.

No, they're just going to have to re-learn how to do the exact same things with different programs that, at best, are one-off clones. Most likely they work completely differently. They don't care that the Free program can do the exact same thing, perhaps even better than the Windows program. They don't know how to use this feature, therefore to them it doesn't exist. The sorry state of Free Software documentation in most cases doesn't help matters.

It's not supported
If Mozilla is so great why doesn't my bank let me use it to access their site? The answer to this question is not because the bank is stupid. The bank works fine. They saw it working just a few minutes ago in IE on Windows. You can't convince the user that you are right and the world is wrong. Even if you can, it doesn't help your cause any. They need the bank, they don't need Free Software.

These brief examples aren't the only reasons people use Windows. Hell, I even heard once from this crazy hobo that some people like Windows. That may not be true, but there's more than just a monopoly that's keeping it on the vast majority of users' computers.

How can you help?
Simple. Give users a real reason to switch. Money alone isn't the reason for a home user to switch, people buy their Windows license with their computer. Saving a few bucks on that license against the price of a $1000+ machine isn't worth their while if it keeps them from doing even one thing they really want to do. Freedom? Psh. Look at what's flowing through Congress lately.

If you want to help, make something that's Free Software and is truly cool. Make the Windows users lust after our neat new toys, rather than vice versa. Make something that lets users get more done, or that is more entertaining, or that is easier to work with. Under-the-hood enhancements don't count. End users don't care about Netfilter or Soft Updates. These things are definitely cool in their own way, and certinaly necessary, but don't expect them to get Free Software on the desktop any faster.

The alternative? Make it so easy for users to switch that the monetary or freedom benefits can win out over their practical concerns that they won't be able to do as much. This is the road that is taken more, but it's also more difficult. You're handing the key to your success to Microsoft and saying "here, just don't do what we're doing and you win." The ability to integrate with Windows is cool and currently necessary, but basing everything around this almost ensures you'll always be one step behind.

Off the record (:P), I've gotta say that I don't care too much. I like my Linux and FreeBSD desktops. I'm used to Vim. I'm used to Fluxbox or WindowMaker. I'm happy in an xterm. I can get everything I want to get done currently done in a Free OS. The Crossover plugin keeps me from missing out on a lot of cool stuff on the web. If only it worked on FreeBSD...

3 words- "No Warcraft Three" (n/t)

[Master_Ruthless]

nt = No Taurens

Two words

[StuartFreeman]

DirectX

E.U.L.A.

[jmoriarty]

I keep using Windows because of the EULA. Specifically:

5.23a - In the event that Leasee begins using another OS, Microsoft reserves the right to come into Leasee's home and immediately harvest all of Leasee's organs with a rusty spoon.

Re:E.U.L.A.

[CTho9305]

Careful!!!

5.23b - Section 5.23a is not to be disclosed to others who have not accepted this licence. In the event of disclosure, Microsoft reserves the right to enter licensee's home and harvest all of licensee's organs with a fork.

Re:Not feeling a need to change

[luzrek]

Wal-Mart sells Linux boxes (and Lindows boxes) starting at $199.99. That is less than the cost of Windows XP Home. Given, for 200$ you don't get too much computer, but it would be more than enough for wordprocessing/webbrowsing/AIM/e-mail.

Solidworks

[Hollins]

If not for Solidworks, I would be able to use Linux exclusively.

this is it's strange

[ciryon]

this discussion turned out: "Use Windows, or use Linux". For most people Linux just isn't ready as a desktop OS, even if the apps are there.

But there's NO EXCUSE not to use a Mac. And, no, they're not as expensive as everyone thinks. You can get a really fast iBook or eMac for $999. The apps, are there, stability, UNIX, ease of use and power.

It doesn't matter if you can get a Super-Athlon 2.6 Ghz at half the price of a PowerMac if the OS sucks.

My explanation why Windows is so popular, that noone has mentioned so far, is that people pirate software. A lot. It's extremely easy to find all kinds of windows apps/games without paying for them. Why do you think the filesharing apps are so popular? You can get the latest game within an hour and don't pay a dime for it.

Ciryon

Re:this is it's strange

[jonnythan]

It doesn't matter if you can get a Super-Athlon 2.6 Ghz at half the price of a PowerMac if the OS sucks.

Not many people will say that Windows sucks. Windows XP and 2000 are quite functional, stable, and just damned easy. A P4 2.4 GHz with half a gig of RAM and a 17" monitor from Dell costs LESS than that eMac with a 700 MHz processor and 128 MB of RAM. And let me tell you, Windows XP, even will all the eye candy turned on, feels far, far faster on the 2.4 GHz P4 than OS X does on a 700 MHz G4.

Re:this is it's strange

[Nailer]

But there's NO EXCUSE not to use a Mac

Er, yes there is. Right now you can probably play more games udner Linux than MacOS.

Re:this is it's strange

[jpt.d]

You can get many of my favorites under only MacOS(X):

Cromag Rally
EV Nova (its coming to windows soon...)

Re:this is it's strange

[jonnythan]

Check out Dell Small Business. Just last week I bought 4 P4 2.4 GHz desktops with 512 MB of RAM, CD burners, and 17" monitors for $698 each.

Easy question.

[zsmooth]

RMS.

Quicken and Tax Cut

[nevets]

I use Linux full time at work and at home. I bought Win4Lin when it first came out to stop my need to reboot whenever I needed Quicken or TaxCut. Those two are the only reason I use Windows and unfortunately I doubt that they will ever be ported natively to linux. Other than those two, all my other business is done in linux.

My 6yr old daughter's machine runs Windows full time since the only thing she uses it for is the JumpStart educational games. I'm sure they run fine on wine, but I do legally have a copy of windows, and I don't need to waste time with Wine just to make a point.

I HATE Windows. I use it every day!

[oogamrm]

Here's why I "still" use Windows, even though I love Linux and Solaris and have used Unix since 1979. Office and Outlook: Wine and Evolution don't offer the 100% interoperability I need for work. Palm applications: The PC "halves" of Palm applications exist and work. Easy, client based SPAM filtering. No need to be a Procmail or sendmail expert. Ad filtering. Super easy with AdSubtract and several other PC tools. You have to set up Squid or Privoxy on Linux. Trillian. Seems simpler than Gaim. USB support. The truth is, more stuff works on PCs, especially things like disks that require USB2. With everyone I work with using Windows, it would be encumbent on me to be 100% compatible with them. I just don't have the cycles to figure out how to do that. There are too many complex Word, Excel, PPT, Visio files I need to be able to quickly edit or view. There are VPN clients that only work on Windows, and the IT staff has no time to figure out a solution for Linux. Laptops. Maybe using VMware, but that's it. Printer support. It's gotten better, but try using a Brother MFC on Linux. Can you say, "No driver"? I love Linux, but I can't spend time everyday dealing with incompatabilities between Linux and Windows applications. If I had a superfast PC with a hunk of RAM, I might consider Linux as the Primary OS with W2K as a VMware guest.

Man, this is huge

[Apreche]

I can see this topic is going to go crazy, it already has, but I gotta say my piece, even if nobody is going to read it in the giant pile of crud.

I run Win2k and Mandrake (the newest one).

Primarily though I use win2k, and here is why. It is stable, it is easy, it works perfectly with all my hardware, it has features like windows file sharing, all the advanced features of my hardware are fully supported (I have a logitech cordless keyboard with a bunch of extra buttons on it that don't work in other OS's, Winamp makes mp3s sound good and I listen to lots of mp3s, the sound driver in windows makes things sound better, windows has working non-beta software for IM, video playing, VNC, etc..

There are more reasons, but they are small reasons, though numerous. Note I use no other MS software other than Win2k, VS.NET, and IE. I have mozilla in windows, but I only use it when I'm browsing pop-up ad laden sites since it is slow and a memory whore (though not as much as it used to be). IE is fast, that's the only reason I use it really. As for VS.NET, it makes making windows software easy, quick, and powerful (with C#) and it was free from my school. I would never pay for a compiler.

I DO run Mandrake in a dual boot. I use it to develop software. I am a CS major in college. The CS machines run Solaris. In a *nix environment with X-forwarding, shells, and compilers for java, C, C++, etc. it is much easier to write code. Especially with all the nice text editors in linux. When I'm writing code though mp3s sound like ass since linux has no idea how to make my sound card work right (it does work though), and it can't play games for crap, I need my Half-Life mods man. And its basically HARD to use linux. Even harder to change something. When the day comes where linux does everything windows does without me having to open a shell or edit a text based config file I may go all the way.

As far as I'm concerned neither OS is technically superior. Linux is superior in it's free as in speechness, but from a purely technical standpoint win2k and mandrake are equally stable and fast, from my experience any way. Sometimes X messes up in linux, and sometimes windows gets funky. Those are due more to my crappy computer than the os's actually. But the only time I ever have to reboot really is to switch os's. Anyone who tells you that win2k crashes left and right is a lying sack of crap. They didn't set it up properly. They are probably one of those linux guys who only knows how to do things the hardware and can't figure out how to change settings through a GUI designed for someone with a 5th grade mentality.

To sum it up, win2k is stable and fast, it does everything I want without extra effort, and there is software to suit all my needs. Linux does almost all of that, but to do everything windows does is either too much effort from me, or not currently possible. Linux is a good environment to code in windows is a good environment for everything but.

PS: Mac OSX looks really cool. I really like their portable stuff, especially the ipod. As for beOS it appears to be technically superior to all the other OS's I've seen, but again it doesn't have enough software nor does it do everythign windows does or support all my hardware fully.

The operating system I want doesn't exist yet. Read my journal for more on that.

Re: Did he say TSR's

[anewsome]

I wonder how many of these teenage slashdot script kiddies got that one. Man I feel old.

Why I switched from Windows to Linux

[Elkman]

My primary desktop machine at work is Windows 2000, and it looks like that's going to be the corporate standard for our software for some time to come. There's not much I can do about it.

Here's the more interesting story, though: My primary desktop at home was Windows for the longest time. I also had a Web server running Linux in the basement. Due to either unreliable hardware or an unreliable OS, my Windows box kept crashing with memory-type exceptions. (It was giving me either invalid page faults in applications, or crashing the entire system with fatal error 0E. That seems to point to the hardware more than the OS.) Each time I'd reboot and run ScanDisk.

Unfortunately, the day came when, after rebooting, ScanDisk crashed and told me it was out of memory. I later found out that ScanDisk under Windows 98 can run out of memory on partitions more than 16 GB. I was unable to boot my system into Windows after that -- almost the entire filesystem was toast.

I figured this was as good a time as any to buy a new, more reliable machine to run Linux and replace the old web server machine. I installed Red Hat 7.3 on it and got all the web server components (Apache, MySQL, PHP, and so on) installed just fine. In fact, just about everything I installed was very easy to install. I started running Linux as my primary desktop at the time, since I didn't want to try reinstalling Windows only to have the machine crash. As it turns out, I was able to do most of my daily tasks (E-mail, web surfing, and web development) on the Linux box. In particular, Ximian Evolution has enough E-mail features to keep me happy, and I was able to import my old E-mail from Eudora once I could finally recover files from the Windows box.

The only downside is that the fonts don't look as nice in Gnome as they do on Windows. (I understand that's much improved now under Red Hat 8.0, which came out just a week after I installed 7.3.) And, of course, there are programs I can use only on Windows, such as my GPS software and my digital camera software.

Oh, and about those files on Windows: Once I finally booted from another partition and ran the Windows version of ScanDisk, I was able to recover my files. The problem was, all of my directories had lost their names and all of the long filenames were lost, so I was stuck with directories such as "C:\Dir0001a" and "C:\Dir0001a\Dscf01~3.jpg". Nice filesystem, Microsoft.

Re:PERFECT QUESTION!

[ellem]

I mean a CS major, someone marginally more knowledgable with computers

While I applaud your degree and all that if we (as humans) have learned nothing -- we have learned that piece of paper is not who you are. (See also The Wizard of OZ)

Your being a CS Major and your inability to install Linux have as much in common as my English Degree and my inability to write romance novels that I can sell by the pound. These things are unrelated. Knowing how to program is a very poor indicator of knowing how to administer a system (installation included.) That's why there are Sys Admins, and Programmers.

Is Linux harder to use? Yeah, probably. So if you want Unix chic and you want useablity go buy a G4 and run OS X. You'll feel cool 'cos you're 1337 and you'll feel smart 'cos you can run it. Everyone wins.

What keeps me on Windows?

[fudgefactor7]

(1) The need to get things done, Windows allows me to do my job, whereas at current Linux will not.

(2) I have to. (See point #1 above).

(3) All the Linux desktops look like ass.

(4) All the cool games work on Windows better (and don't give me that crap that you get equal FPS in Linux as in Windows, that's been disproven time and again.)

(5) Because, frankly, Windows isn't that bad. Only the loud, uninformed, zealot uses terms like "get a real OS" or "Windoze", or "M$"...

why i use windows?

[jasno]

1. Most of the time I check /., its from work on my win2k box. Win2k is required since our tools as well as most others' only run on windows.

2. At home I use windows because lately I just want to surf the web and in windows I can do it with a lot less hassle.

3. Games? Maybe... I still play half-life sometimes, and even though I CAN run it under linux it just seems like a lot of trouble.

Basically, I bought a linksys router, which removed the necessity for maintaining a linux box. Oh, and I got a life. That took most of the time I had previously devoted to playing with linux.

Don't get me wrong, I still love the penguin. I'd love to get to work on an embedded linux project, but that hasn't been in the cards lately.

My reasons

[matsh]

At work:
--------
* We use StarTeam as source repository at work, and we don't have the web version.
* Last time I tested, there was no good replacement for the Palm Desktop (like Outlook, for the Palm Pilot). Maybe Evolution now is good enough?
* There is nothing like XmlSpy on Linux
* If I screw up, I'm on my own. No other Linux people at my company that could help me out.

At home:
--------
* All the games for my kids
* My wife is more at home with Word than Open Office
* I have just a few friends that can help if I screw up.

DVD authoring...

[Zemran]

I have a windows drive (that I am using atm) for DVD authoring. There are no Linux options for this. I switch back to Linux for everything else. I would not waste money on M$Office when OO does everything I need there and all my web and mail needs are met with Evolution and Mozilla. I have plenty of Games on Linux and more are coming out all the time.

I use removeable bays so I can set up a fresh machine when I need to, rather than dual boot.

Only at work

[Geekboy(Wizard)]

And at work, I have to use windows, since we have a draconian "IT" department, and we have propriatary applications that I have to run.

At home, I run BSD exclusivly. Free and Open are my trees of choice.

email client

[jonadab]

I've switched now, but the thing that kept me on Windows for over a year when I otherwise would have switched was email. All the graphical email clients for Linux are totally inadequate. I ended up going with Gnus, which is _still_ missing one or two of the features I was accustomed to using in Pegasus Mail. (Granted, Gnus also has numerous features that pmail lacks, but I wasn't accustomed to using those.

I tried using Pegasus Mail under WINE, but the performance was lousy and many of the widgets weren't rendered correctly. I tried other email apps, but they all were missing features that I couldn't live without. (I get a lot of email. A lot of email. I have to have advanced filtering (regexes, yes, but also advanced in terms of what it can do to the message; one of the features I miss in Gnus is that my filters can't cause a message to appear in the message list highligted in certain colours I miss that feature on a daily basis) and folder management facilities just in order to function.

I don't understand how people can function with things like Mozilla mail and Evolution. For me, they just don't cut the mustard.

I'm getting by with Gnus for the moment, but there are issues. It's not multithreaded. It doesn't gracefully handle an unreliable or missing connection, which matters to those of us on dialup. There's the aforementioned lack of ability for the filters to set a color for the message's entry in the summary buffer. (This last I could fix in lisp, if I got off my butt and got more familiar with the Gnus internals, but the other two are probably beyond me.)

So, on the ballance, I'm still looking for an excellent mail client for Linux. I have everything else that I need (well, at least everything that I had under Windows; there are things I'd like that are not available on either platforms, but we'll save the outright dreams for another discussion), but this one category of application, I had a good one under Windows, and there's nothing to rival it that will run natively in Linux. I'm making do, but I still want my Pegasus Mail back.

Here's a list

[Alomex]

1) setenv DISPLAY mordor:0.0
2) backspace key doing any number of things (including delete and help key) rather than what is supposed to do (hint: it's says backspace)
3) main editors not always mouse aware (vi, emacs)
4) lack, until recently, of a decent graphical mail application
5) lack of a decent word processor. Forget about word: could somebody clone Wordpad and include it in all standard Unix distros?
6) ugly font design. KDE and GNOME are light years ahead of motif but the fonts they use still suck.
7) default values for almost all unix commands are obscure cases rather than the norm. For example, typing xterm from the command shell should background itself without need for '&' with an explicit command option *not* to do this
8) lack of support of extended character set. e.g. vim seven-bits by default all characters.
9) lack of third party applications

Nothing anymore!

[mt_nixnut]

There was a day when I ran a 100% M$ shop (NT) and I led the charge for everyone to convert from Lotus to Office. 5 or 6 years later I have converted the same office to about 90% Linux (mostly X-terminals) and I have personally used Linux for years as my desktop. long before it was "ready".

I understand the sentiments of many and why they must use M$ even if, in a perfect world, they would not. But there is no real reason to stay there at this point unless you run a multimedia shop or you need some custom VBA app (like our accounting office ;(.

Things are good now and getting better every day. People ask why I would put up with bugs and rough edges. Well I put up with them for years w/ M$ and paid high prices for the "honor". Now that M$ has finally built an OS that falls into the exceptable range it seems everyone gets amnesia and forgets all about the last 10 years or so. When the biggest richest corp in the business either could not or would not make improvements that mattered. Today Word seems better suited as a virus delivery platform than a "productivity" app.

On that note, the number of document born viri since conversion to Linux 0.( or any other kind for that matter)

Prior to conversion, there was no way of counting.

And still people remain faithful and after they pay M$ they pay Norton or who knows who else just to keep all that nonsense at bay and then smile and say "it's great, what's wrong?" pulease....

Well, to each his own i guess.

Maybe a repeat but here it is :

[aepervius]

* Historical Reason : Most people only want to learn one OS at most, except maybe a minority of interrested Geeks. So people learn windows at works then just use the same at home.
* Easyness of use. Even if linux get better , let us be real. Installation and usage of windows is far easier for people which know nothing of PC. Furthermore again due to historical reason everybody can tweak a bit of windows or know someone which can.
* Games ! Applications ! Plus this is the same applications than at works, emaning you don't need to learn two software to do the same things. Need I say more ?
* All that which anger OOS suporter (API non disclosure, Monopoly, blatant skewing of market power to force the hands of people, new licence scheme) is completly LOST on non-geek people. This is a sort of "negative" argument.
* and due to the above points, the mega super argument it comes already installed on the PC of first time user, and thus unless geek they will stay on that forever.

The same poll...

[Keighvin]

According to the same source, 2% also use CowboyNeal. I don't think it's a very accurate place to get your information. ;)

Reading through the responses, aside from gaming and "work makes me" the predominant reason is massive application support, and the potential complexity (meaning array of complex-application specific) thereof.

Microsoft set out several years ago with VisualBasic to create a language simple enough any idiot could work in it - and they do! The APIs almost amounts to: DoWhatIMeanTo(WithThis). The whole mess encourages sloppy coding and letting the OS handle all the messiness which largely accounts for the size of recent releases.

Even the slightly more advanced languages for the platform in the RAD dept. (Delphi, VC++, .Net) rely on the VB based (D)COM interface, and so inherit the same kind of crutch. MS is trying to be everything to every developer with their embraced/extended libraries so though is removed from the process and they Own All Your Base instead.

I once read in an MS development manual about how the underlying API and hidden libraries were intended to, "shield the developer from the complexities involved". I don't want to ever rely on a piece of software written by someone who buys into that. If a developer can't handle the complex nature of development they shouldn't be developing.

So, by tapping intellectual apathy MS grabbed a hefty amount of brain-share early - it continues to coddle them along now with helping hands that ensure MS continues as the dominant OS of choice for new software.

I've worked in and out of MS environments - I'm much happier out of, no question.

Re:The same poll...

[Keighvin]

The interface of COM is structured around VB's style - I'll admit to oversimplification.

Now, to be a REALLY hard core programmer you'd have to switch the inodes of the hard-drive platter by hand, with a magnet. But then, that would be another crutch so you'd need to use the natural magnetivity of your own nervous system. And skip the hard drive. Add the numbers in your head and imagine the graphics output.

Yes, a great deal of it is useful - but it's also been oversimplified to use a massive behemoth which drags a system down as much as it makes it functional. Even if you just want a small slice you still have to buy the whole @#$& pizza.

DirectX, a useful network library, unified sound access, all these things came long after MS was working on its domination. It's a grandfather'd position that's hurt many learning developers - you know what the complexity of writing graphics code in DOS is, and you've evolved your knowledge with the tools and can use that understanding of the underlying system to optimize your routines making use of the new libraries. You don't have to deal with the complexity now that you've conquered it.

Someone just starting out doesn't know best practice for memory and speed optimization, elegant algorithm design, etc. They're free to write crappy code because it's easy to do so.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Dave_bsr]

NVIDIA's Gl drivers will break linux randomly. But then again, they're drivers, kernel modules. *shrug*. And bad hardware will make linux crash too. I've done it.

But then again...That's all the problems i've ever had. ever. two. XP just plain doesn't like my system and blows chunks ALL THE TIME, 2K wouldn't install, and 9x craps out about once a day. *shrug*.

Office 97 Pro

[ka9dgx]

I hate Microsoft, and I'm the entire IT staff for our company, but I'm locked into Windows, and Office 97 Professional. We use the heck out of it, we've paid our blood money, so there's no point in switching at this point. We're not going to upgrade, but we bought our software before the advent of subscriptions, so we get to keep it. ;-)

If someone can show me how to replace all of our applications, especially our crufty Access97 database, then maybe we can talk. The forms and reports are the key, I know about mySQL and PostgreSQL for the actual database.

--Mike--

Nothing is compelling enough to make me switch

[CodeWheeney]

The primary reason why I use Windows as my OS of choice is that I make my living writing software that runs on Windows. All of my machines run NT/2000 or XP. My Domain controller and print server runs on an NT 4.0 box (because it's a 486/50 with 32 MB of RAM), my main desktop runs 2000 Pro, and my File Server/Terminal Server box runs 2000 Server. My laptop runs XP Pro. All of these boxes are rock stable (I saw a few blue screens on my old 486 during NT 3.51 days, but that's it). I am productive on these machines when I develop software, work from home (I'm a developer at work, too), when I surf the web, write my resume, work on my finances and do my taxes.

The second reason why I use Windows as my OS of choice is that there are no compelling reasons for me to switch to Linux or Mac. The Mac laptops are very cool, and I'd love to have one to play with, but I need to run .NET to do my job, and emulation isn't fast enough.

Now, I'm not the kind of person to hate a company because of it's success, but I'm not a Microsoft fanboy, either. They've done some illegal things and should be punished for it (more severly than they currently are).

Lastly, I have to say there are some things to do that make running a Windows Box as secure as possible. 1. Never, ever, ever, run Outlook. It's a steaming turd. 2. Avoid, like the plague, Internet Explorer. These two apps are the primary reasons for most of the recent major virii outbreaks. I use Mozilla as my browser, and couldn't be happier. Keeping my Windows boxes up to speed as far as security goes is pretty straight forward. hfnetchk and Windows Update keep you informed on security patches and installation is pretty easy. Read Bugtraq and subscribe to MS Security Bulletins to keep yourself informed.

Harumph!

It Does What I Want

[cheinonen]

Really, most of the constant criticisms leveled at Windows are either irrelevant (I don't care about SQL Server security on my laptop) or outdated (crashing).

I've been running Windows 2000 or XP since I could get my hands on a Win2k beta in 1999. In that time, and among all my friends running it (we're all power users, CS students, DBA's, etc...), we've had a total of two crashes in that time. One was from a hard drive failure, one was from a beta program. Otherwise, the operating system has been rock solid that whole time. It recognizes our hardware, copies pictures from our digital cameras when I plug it in, plays all the games, and doesn't complain. Anyone that still complains about crashes on 2000 or XP has some other software causing it, or flaky hardware, since the OS never even crashed when I was installing it on thousands of computers at Boeing.

If I need to run Apache, MySQL, a NAT/Firewall, or something along that line, I'll setup a FreeBSD server on an old computer and use it. Those programs don't matter on my laptop, on my desktop at work, on anything other than a server box I'm running with no monitor. However, I've also done all of those in Windows and it's worked fine. Configuration was easy, they ran while I could setup the FreeBSD box, and they were easy to remove.

What FreeBSD/Linux are missing is a killer application that will make me switch. Windows2k/XP are solid enough for 99% of users out there (a crash a year is OK, power goes out more often than that), we know the interface and understand how it works, it supports the widest variety of hardware, and every program I need to use can run on it. The xNIX zealots might point out great alternative software I can run on their platforms, but the bottom line is no one has yet to point out a program they can use that I can't run on Windows. If you want to know why people aren't switching over, that's why. Until there is a program that I can't live without, I'm not going to be switching over for anything but my server, there's no reason to lose the advantages that Windows offers.

Laziness

[crimoid]

Fist and foremost: laziness

Really, who cares. I do most of my work via a ssh shell to various other machines. Why do I care whats on my desktop.

I don't have any reason NOT to run Windows. It does everything that I want it to do, why should I switch. There isn't a killer app to motivate me. Linux w/ X isn't any faster (I've tried); there is higher quality end-user apps on Windows, and more of them.

I like linux. I convert every server that I can. I save thousands of dollars in licensing fees for my employer every year with it, but Linux doesn't cut it for a modern, easy desktop OS.

The only other OS that has almost converted me away from Windows was beOS. It was clean, easy and fast. I liked the interface and the spankling of *nix. Alas it is mostly dead and the # of apps pales in comparison to Windows.

So here I sit... Windows XP, Office XP, IE 6 and all. Other than SecureCRT and Winamp there isn't a non-Microsoft app on my box. Sigh.

Reasons:

[scumdamn]

At work:
Required.

At home (laptop):
Wireless networking, needed for work development, stupid windows games (www.gamehouse.com)

At home (desktop):
Counter-strike. 'Nuff said?

Why Windows?

[Hank Reardon]

Actually, at work I use FreeBSD because that's the OS a majority of our servers run; it keeps my development environment nice and in-sync.

I use WINE for my Office apps at work when I need to share between people, otherwise I use straight text or a Wiki.

At home, there's a different story. I have 5 areas that I simply can't do without:

Web Development

I use Macromedia software to develop about 90% of my web stuff because it makes life easier. Yeah, the HTML is usually shit, but it's much easier to clean up than to make it look pretty in my head before using a text editor.

Graphics

Photoshop. I've never been able to get it to run under WINE. Yeah, I know: "Learn the GIMP! GIMP rocks". Whatever. I like Photoshop, Photoshop does everything I want it to, I know the interface, I know the quirks and I'm sticking with it. Want to have me move over to the Gimp? Duplicate everything in Photoshop exactly so I don't have to have 6 months in lost productivity while I learn the quirks of a new piece of software.

Music

I write music. Give me Fruityloops and Acid on Linux and I'll dump Windows for the music in a heartbeat. Until then, I'm stuck.

Games

I spend most of my time on the Windows box either playing games or writing music. If I need a HOWTO to get my game running, it's preventing me from having my downtime. I spend 65+ hours per week dealing with technical problems, driver issues on various *NIX systems, downtime, CISCO switches and assorted other bullshit. After all of that brain-drain, I want to put the CD in and play the game. Period. If it's more difficult than that to get my eye-candy running, I'm not interested.

Blogging

I use Userland's Radio to blog. Again, I can't seem to get it to run under WINE, so I'm stuck on Windows with it.

You'll never hear me argue that Windows is technically superior, crashes less often or is even visually more appealing than OSX, command-line Linux, FreeBSD, Plan9, VMS, CP/M or whatever OS you feel like esopusing the virtues of; it just does what I need for those five things. The software I like (at least in the music area, and possibly the games area) is available exclusively on Windows.

Until all of the above offer me the same functionality with the same ease of use, I'm going to use Windows for my personal stuff because it doesn't get in the way.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

LAST POST

[joe_bruin]

nobody else post after this.
if you must, go reply to something up top. /LAST POST

Interesting question.

[mwillems]

I have some interest in this as I am trying to move my company to Linux. All our servers already are, but laptops and desktops are all Windows (98/XP).

The reasons are the same you will ahve heard many times.

1. Apps. We are trying StarOffice, but converting the world's excel, word and PPT files is a royal pain - never QUITE works. Office it is, much to my chagrin.

2. Integration. Cutting and pasting works different in all Linux aps. Fonts are sub-optimal. Everything works "almost" out of the box. You cannot right-click on a file and select "Send To...". And so on. Desktop Linuxius still for people who know what they are doing.

3. The pain of changing. Even if (1) and (2) above were not an issue, the work of switching from one OS to another takes real effort, and we like all other companies are struggling to make the sales - the last thing we can afford is an exercise that will distract us from this.

Damn, I wish it were different, becuase I am very motivated to push this through...

Michael

If it ain't broke...

[NineNine]

...don't fix it. And as far as I'm concerned, W2K isn't broken. I haven't had a *single* hiccup with W2K. I had a few with IIS on a server, but those were my fault (shitty programming... see my journal). Why would I want to devote many, many very valuable hours trying to fix a non-problem. My time is invaluable. Spending a few hundred bucks for W2K then forgetting about it is priceless.

What I use / Why you care

[bmajik]

At work, i have 2 XP boxes and a W2k Advanced server machine all powered up in my office. There's a linux box and an openbsd box i used for a few investigative projects, but they're powered down right now.

I've got a "General machine" running XP that i do my web surfing, mail deleting, and the majority of my work on (it usually has 2 or 3 isqlw windows open at all times, not to mention all those instant messenger windows)

My other xp machine is a much faster dedicated machine for work in vs.net, as well as working with 3 separate source trees for forks of a testing harness that i manage. I have outlook completely unconfigured on this machine, as outlook only makes things slow :) I dont run any IM software on the machine, infact, the only office component i use on that box is excel.

At home, my main machine is a dual proc sparcstation 10. (my SGI indigo^2 ate its disk and i have no install media). I have an openBSD IDE fileserver, and another openBSD dedicated firewall (p166mmx, no less). I've also got a 486-133 distributed across the floor. Finally, there's a p233mmx running win2k server. My wife has a powerbook g3. I have an IBM Z50 CE laptop.

If i read slashdot from work, its IE6. From home, its either IE6 (via TS connection to the windows box from my wireless Z50) or links on the sparc 10. no version of any netscape product is fast enough on any machine i own.

at home my main apps are mutt, irc, and rdesktop, sprinkled with links, and gnuplot and xfig occasionally.

The biggest thing the windows machine gets used for is for our photoprinter, and running the BMW ETK software (You can buy the mobile traditions CDROM which is a snapshot of the BMW parts database for older cars. includes technical drawings/diagrams.. helps me keep my 1988 M5 running)

Basically, i dont care what os I use - whatever fits the needs the easiest. Fuck trying to get a photoprinter working on anything besides windows.. i mean.. why bother ? And i know that some people can get netbsd running on the ibm Z50, but again, why bother ? CE has some annoying quirks (like no soft reset, and forgetting what my Aironet 352 card looks like about every 5th power-wake).

Basically, any OS i've mentioned here - OS X, W2k, XP, OpenBSD, and solaris -- they're all passable and don't get in my way enough to cause frustration for the tasks they're doing. On solaris i use CDE because fuck compiling gnome or something else, CDE works great for me and doesn't slow me down.

So at work, its 99% windows, at home, its 70/30 unix/windows. I've got too much of an investment in unix hardware, unix knowledge, and unix comfort, to just throw it away.

One thing that makes Microsoft products a good choice at work is um, that i've been a microsoft employee for about two and a half years. They're sort of the incumbant environment at work. Although there are people here that use exchange connector and Evolution against the corporate exchange servers (mostly to try it out, assess the "competition", etc). And one of the VB developers writes his code in raw emacs for NT, without c-mode.el (he wrote his own c-mode a long time ago and prefers it).

So, i dont really care what platform i use. What im doing is more important than the toolchain, because most toolchains and platforms these days are passable. I missed all MS operating systems after win 3.1 and went straight to w2k, but our lab team has to support everything 95osr2 and above, so i get to see how shitty W9x is from time to time :)

realistically, W2k and XP are good enough that i dont miss anything about unix, except the unix-specific things. For that, i install MS Services for UNIX on my machines. the big things i use are "tail -f" and one-off sed/awk/grep/head/tail/cut constructs that are just stupidly frustrating to do in Cygwin or with the dos ports of the GNU tools. SFU does all that stuff perfectly, and gives me a real single-rooted fs and a real tsch hosted on my box. I can paste data from sed into excel or notepad. It's really the best of both worlds.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[GreyWolf3000]

Furthermore, to me, KDE is just an imitation of Windows desktop, only a lot slower.

Complete and utter shit, my friend. KDE is far more themeable than you obviously realize. Distros theme KDE to look and feel like Windows so that 'cl00less n00bs' feel more at home. What do they get in return? MS cheerleaders saying KDE looks too much like Windows (hence, it's trying to be Windows; hence, it is inferior--somewhere along the line 'Linux' gets confused for KDE).

By the way, there are way more Aqua/OSX themes for KDE than for XP, and there are a number of completely unique themes. Keep in mind that themes are more than just Winamp 'skins'--they can overhaul the look of the entire widget set. With respect to KDE being slower, that again is the distro's "fault" for building without prelinking and being forced to build for depracated architectures (i.e. 586 and below).

You, my friend, are completely full of shit on your second point. As far as Windows being stable (first point), it seems both Linux and Windows have mixed reviews. I haven't used Windows in like 4 years so I don't know much about it.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Mr.Intel]

I'd really like to know how the myth of ever-present blue screens keeps getting perpetuated.

How about some systemic issues that onyl seem to crop up with windows machines? Try this nVidia loop error here. Ever try to change from an AGP video card to a PCI one or visa versa in 2k/XP? I've has BSODs on 2k/XP on several different platforms (HP/Compaq/Dell/IBM/Gateway) for literraly hundereds of different reasons. Our VP/IS won't let the company go XP for this very reason. They have tested it and it didn't pass. 2k with SP3 is the minimum allowed windows operating system.

I agree that 2k is miles ahead of 9x in stability, but I don't think you can easily dissmiss the BSOD.

Re:It's all about Quicken

[BiOFH]

However, my company recently "shifted focus" and everyone will have PC's within a year.

And everyone will be frustrated and pissed off within a year and 2 days. hehe :)

Windows XP and 2000 "different beasts"?

[lvdrproject]

Ok, i didn't even have an account on Slashdot before i saw the above two posts, but i completely disagree with both of them, and had to make my opinion known. Now, i am in NO WAY a fan of Microsoft, and personally i love the Mac OS and Mandrake, but there just needs to be something said here.

"Saying "2000/XP" is like saying "MacOS X/BSD". The two are completely different beasts."

No, they're not. Windows XP is just Windows 2000 + skins + better drivers + new Start menu + a few aesthetic details. In fact, i'm sure you've noticed, Windows 2000 is Windows NT "5.0", and Windows XP is Windows NT "5.1". That is to say, a semi-moderate update, but not a completely new product.

"Windows 2000 is indeed stable, and all-around is the best OS M$ has ever put out. XP, on the other hand, is a nightmare at all levels. The UI changes are ridiculous and counterintuitive, the stability is a joke, and the mothership-calling/DRM/licensing/totalitarianism is insulting, painfully annoying, undesirable, and runs directly counter to the philosophy that made Microsoft, DOS, and Windows a success, which is putting more power and control in the hands of the end user."

The UI changes that actually go any deeper than simple colour and logo changes are very few, and most of these can be modified to work/look exactly like Windows 2000. The stability is a joke? Bull. Windows XP is just as stable as 2000. I've NEVER, repeat, NEVER, had Windows XP (that is to say, the actual operating system) crash on me, and i've been using Windows XP since the pre-2600 build stages. In fact, i might relate a little anecdote here: a few weeks ago, i was attempting to get an old (500 MHz) computer up and running, and as my XP CD was mysteriously corrupted, i installed Windows 2000. Mere MINUTES (and i do not exaggerate) after my initial boot, i got a blue screen, and it died. In Windows XP, the operating system rarely crashes; instead, the programs crash, and the operating system continues on its merry little way. As for "mothership-calling", almost all of those features can be disabled, and if you still think that "M$" is HAX0RING UR IMPROTANT FILEZ then you can invest in a decent firewall. If you know how to work XP, you can make it work or look any way you want it to.

As for the second post:

"In all seriousness, I have found XP to be terrible both in general speed (crispness, responsiveness to clicks, etc.) and stability (especially in an environment where the machine is pushed hard)."

Ok, i don't know what you're running on your computers (i have a Dell Dimension 4300 1.8GHz/512-MB RAM computer, which sounds like the same model, or a similar model, as yours), but XP is nothing but speedy for me. And i'm one of those people who loads his computer with every possible RAM-sucking gadget he can find, including transparent mouse cursors, transparent windows and menus, every single visual effect XP comes with, etc., etc.. XP is super fast for me. My programs don't load up slow at all. On the other hand (and i did notice that you didn't defend any other operating system, but let's use an example here), Mandrake 9 with KDE 3 runs noticeably slower, and this is the standard bare-bones install, with no fancy tricks or gadgets. On both my 500-MHz K6-2 and my 1.8-GHz P4, i have Mandrake and XP Pro dual-booted, and XP is MUCH, MUCH, MUCH faster.

Now, why do i use Windows? Because i'm 15 and don't have the money to buy a Mac; because i was BORN in a house that ran MS-DOS/Windows; because i'm used to it; because it looks prettier; because it's more user-friendly (not so much as opposed to the Mac, but definitely so as opposed to Linux); because all of the great applications that i can't live without (Winamp, Photoshop, Flash MX, Nero, Exact Audio Copy) aren't found on Linux; the list goes on.

I LIKE Linux, i LIKE the Mac; i don't use my computer for playing games (except frozen-bubble :D), i don't use my computer ENTIRELY for chatting with my school friends (like most 15-year-olds i know), i have a little bit of programming/scripting/"getting into the system" experience, and i'd like to think that i know what i'm doing.

So, as an objective observer, i would like to just make my disagreement known.

:Lav

Re:I use RedHat 8.0 on my laptop...

[Fraize]

This is my number one complaint about Linux - VPN support. I can't believe the Linux developers think that what's out there is actually acceptable. It's unbelievable how stupidly complex vpnclient's config is compared to the windows (XP and 2000) equivalent.

That, and Samba pisses me off. How difficult is it to be able to right-click on a folder, select Share, type in a few details, AND YOU'RE DONE?! Sheesh, last time I tried to fuck with SWAT, my eyes crossed and I lapsed into a coma.

I think that there's a fundamental difference in the way Windows developers write software and the way Linux developers write software. A typical Windows developer writes code with a simpleton in mind for an end user. A typical Linux developer writes code with HIMSELF in mind as an end user. One will get you software that'll be very easy to use but not terribly customisable. The other will get you an absolutely customisable solution, but is only useful if you completely understand every option.

That's what keeps me in Windows. I'm a simpleton, and I have work to do.

Re: Windows? What's that?

[Black Parrot]

> There's nothing keeping me on Windows. I switched to Linux way back in 1997 and never looked back.

<aol>meetoo!</aol> And right about the same time, too.

And it just keeps getting better every year. I can see how someone who actually needed Photoshop or MS Word or some other specific commercial application, or who was addicted to games, wouldn't be able to live on Linux. But for the rest of us, Windows doesn't offer anything we need or particularly need or even want.

I'm still on Red Hat 7.2 / GNOME 1.4, and I don't feel any rush to upgrade. It has gotten to the point that upgrades are luxuries that I do at some convenient time, rather than something that needs to be done to pick up new features as soon as they become available. Back in RH 4.x days I always upgraded immediately, but for the last 2-3 years I've been skipping more and more upgrades.

At any rate, let me emphasize the "never looked back" part.

Not Much

[foistboinder]

Some greeting card software my wife uses, and some games my daughter plays. Otherwise, we can do everything with Linux

ONE WORD

[CSG_SurferDude]

GAMES

And one game in particular:

• MECHWARRIOR

Need I say more?

Why I use windoze

[vonsneerderhooten]

I use windows because i know how to fix it. Put me in front of a linux box with a bad NIC driver and say fix it, i'd format it. Package installation is another issue i have. i had a devil of a time installing the JRE, could never get it working properly with the program i wanted to use. I am also a very visual person, and in windows, everything has an icon.

Our breakdown

[yoink!]

Well here's the makeup and primary purposes for each system on our tiny little network.

x.x.x.01 - This system, lovingly named FireRush, is a PII-266, 64MB ECC SDRAM (SIMMS remember those?), 1 GB Quantum Fireball Hard Drive, 1 ISA 3 Com 10baseT Card, 1 PCI 3com 3c905b 10/100baset T Card. This system runs linux, kernel. 2.4.3. It serves as: router, NAT box, masquerade server, webserver (apache 2.0.43), roger_wilco server, a local (no external access) FTP server and an SSH server for remote network access. I also use it for various orther jobs which linux tends to handle especially well. It seems to manage our 3mb/s DSL connection quite well, and never uses any of the swap partition. (No monitor, keyboard or mouse attached.)

x.x.x.02 - Internally refered to as NDGhetto, a 1.4GHz T-Bird, 256MB of Ram, 13GB WD Expert, 3com 3c905c Net card. This system runs linux, I can't remeber what kernel and is used as a Half-Life (CS and DoD) server. We actually ran a Natural Selection server on it for a while but it was so popular that it cost us way too much in bandwidth. No monitor, keyboard or mouse attached.)

x.x.x.03 - Remora Prime is one of two sound design workstations. This machine, yes, it runs Windows XP. It's an AthlonMP system with 512MB of RAM and not much more. The system is mated to a relatively high-end sound card, 10 channels of 24/96 audio on high-end converters, ADAT connections, SPDIF, low latency midi (1ms) et all. Our main application is Sequoia, which is only available for Windows. The reason we chose Windows XP is that it can support 32 audio channels, whereas 2000 can only handle 10. I disklike protools, and Sequoia is very powerful, hence the windows choice.

x.x.x.04 - TheDude. This system is the gaming machine and my brother's workstation. It's an AthlonXP with I can't remember what configuration because he upgrades so often. He uses Windows 2K and has recently started dual booting with Mandrake to get to know linux. It has a GeForce3 (Hercules 3DProphet something or other). He plays a lot of Natural Selection and DoD.

x.x.x.05 - Headrush. This system is a PIII 500, 384MB of RAM, 4GB UWScsi disk, and runs Windows98. This system is taken to all of my band's Gigs. It has a 4 in 4 out, high-end soundcard (also 24/96), and is used as a softsynth/sampler at all of our shows. It has crashed only 1 durring it's time in use (over two years.) We also use it as a backup if we need 2 extra A/D converters because we can sync this card to the more powerful soundcard and track to the main workstations hard drives. It runs Reason2, B4 and Pro53 during most of it's cycles.

So you can see that linux has a very important part in our network. We use it every day, even if only transparently. Unfortunately until the Dimudi project comes to fruition, and until ProTools revamps it's interface, Windows will remain our primary platform for audio work.

That's it.

Re:Stability

[Synn]

"Have you used Gnome or KDE recently?"

Yes I have.

When was the last time you ran KDE? It's come a long ways in the last year or so.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[NineNine]

First off, parroting "illegal monopoly" makes you sound like a hell of a gov't supporter. I suppose that if, I dunno, vegetables were outlawed, then you'd say you wouldn't eat "illegal vegetables"? Hell, and as far as I'm concerned (thinking for myself now... not parroting), MS isn't a monopoly. There are alternatives, but most people just aren't interested. Forcing people to pick alternatives (ie: the gov't destroying a company) is getting pretty close to a dictatorial gov't. Let the people chose. By and large, the people have chose MS, whether you like it or not.

As far as "Wrong" practices, they've never done anything other than compete in the marketplace. Period. They've produced better products (Recently), they've lowered prices, and they've done a hell of a good job with marketing. If you think that any of this is "wrong", then perhaps you should go live in a cave, because every company on the planet does these things.

Re:I Tryed to Switch

[Dave_bsr]

Message client - gaim + msn plugin
File manager - Rox, Konqeror, and i've heard good things about gentoo
Task manager...um...ps? top? the Command Line is your friend.
Quick launch bar - ummm.. ?
Icon editor - gimp? I don't know i'm not a graphics man
Graphics editor - gimp? Others? Mandrake has lots
text editor - gview, if you like vi. Nedit's good.

Linux can do any task you need. It just doesn't have a one-to-one correspondance in tools.

Applications, Hardware, Point and Click

[mesocyclone]

I have been a software developer for 35 years, and have used a lot of systems. I was using Unix at home before I had Windows (1983), and I still like many things about Unix (and find it incomprehensible that Microsoft architects keep missing the simple concept of pipes, command line scripting, and links).

That being said, I use Windows2000 for almost everything I do. I have literally hundreds of applications that I use for work, for my hobbies, and to keep track of things (such as stock market tracker, weather alert, etc). Few run on Linux. ALL of these run on windows, are easy to get and easy to install. Even most open source software worth having has a windows port or build kit. Applications software is the main driver for the Windows monopoly, and this follows a historical precedent starting with the IBM-360 in the early '60s.

Windows is compatible with all PC hardware I want to buy (except a few things that I need Windows98 or WindowsXP for). It is usually a no-brainer to install new hardware. Hardware compatibility is another driver of the Windows Monopoly

I like the user interface of windows. Microsoft has a lot more money to spend in user interface engineering and experimentation. Almost anything I want to do is accessible with point-and-click. I probably RTFM for windows or windows software about once per year! Try that with Linux!

When I want Unix functionality, I can get it easily (and do) with Cygwin. I normally have 7 Cygwin windows open on my three-LCD desktop, and I use VI for my text editor (I still cannot figure out how anyone can do software editing faster with a mouse-oriented editor). I run postgresql on Windows2K and develop in Java, C and cross-assembly (for embedded machines). I user a commercial X-windows package on the rare occasions when I need to access my Linux system.

Yes, I have Linux. I use it as a file backup machine. Occasionally it is the right place to do development. The area where it shines is in low level development. In Windows development, if you don't spend all your time memorizing stuff or RTFM'ing, you either operate at a high level (and have little idea what the underlying leaky abstractions are doing), or you do trivial things. As a systems programmer, I find that frustrating.

I don't like Microsoft's monopolistic behavior. I really fear that they will gain monopolies in more applications areas and in services. However, I don't mind that much that they have a monopoly in desktops, because with the current state of software and hardware engineering, it is inevitable that some standard will be chosen by the market, and become a monopoly.

If I ran the world, Microsoft would be split up. The monopoly areas (Windows, MS Office) would become two separate companies. The rest would go into a third, which would be required to compete on a level field with the rest of the world. I resent monopoly rents being used to subsidize attacks on other markets.

Re:Applications, Hardware, Point and Click

[jonesvery]

I normally have 7 Cygwin windows open on my three-LCD desktop, and I use VI for my text editor...

Damn. Your comment is interesting, but I just got stuck when I read "three-LCD desktop." Man, I want to be you...

At any rate, I absolutely agree with the installation issue (though apt-get and synaptic have made me ever so happy as an only marginally informed user of linux on the desktop). For the most part, installing new software under linux is still an imposing chore for anyone who is used to "double-click the installer icon and you're done."

I'm not so sure about the interface, though. If we're talking about something like Redhat ca. 7.3 or 8.0, the differences in interface for day-to-day use of linux and windows 2000 (haven't really worked with XP) are relatively minor.

I tend to consider my wife a pretty good test case: she's intelligent and comfortable with computers, but has absolutely no interest in them other than as tools to get something done. At this point she'll sit down at my linux desktop as happily as she'll sit down at the windows machine, and (without ever having gotten any guidance from me) browse the Web, create a doc or spreadsheet, what-have-you. She's confident that she can figure out what she needs to do.

She'd still prefer to sit down in front of the powerbook, of course, but that's another issue entirely... :)

I understand

[stonewolf]

But, the thing is that UNIX/Linux can no more afford to junk the X APIs than Microsoft can afford to junk the Window GUI APIs. All the software depends on them.

OTOH, over the last 15 years there have been several implementations of X that make the X server either part of OS or a special shared library that is directly callable. Both of the approaches give you a blazingly fast desktop, while preserving the X APIs. All this without having to give up the X protocol and the ability to run remote applications.

What I'm taking about is NOT the same as putting a GUI in the OS as Windows has done. The window manager, the desktop look and feel, the font server, these are stay out in user space. It *IS* the same as having a file system that lets you access your hardrive as files and directories rather than as tracks and sectors. It *IS* the same as using a file system to let many applications share the diskdrives. Only in this case you have a graphics system that lets you use and share the graphics hardware in a nice way. It is also similar to "tux" in the kernel. It was put in the kernel to proved a blazingly fast HTTP server, not because anyone thinks that every kernel needs an HTTP server built into it!

Make the X server a loadable module or add the hooks needed to create a multi-threaded, thread safe shared library, and get on with it. Kill this stupid problem now.

Stonewolf

Re:I understand

[stonewolf]

Why? What is wrong with the X license?

The Gimp Sucks.

[Lord Bitman]

Yes, many people swear by it, but I am definatly not one of them. I have Photoshop, which I dislike, but The Gimp is an exercise in awesome horrible. "The Gimp Sucks" is not the only thing which keeps me on windows, rather it is an example which shows the User Interface problems with many linux programs: They are great programs which have the ability to do powerful things, but for the most part they have a horrible user interface which slows down productivity considerably. The interfaces I have seen (I have said this before) remind me a lot of when I used to draw pictures in, well probably before pre-school age.. I gave everyone arms and legs and a head and a belly button, but I could never remember if a mustache went above or below the nose. Linux UIs remind me a lot of the resulting pictures. Doing their best to /immitate/ what a good user interface should be, but unsure if the mustache goes above or below the nose. The Gimp is an example of the result, eeyes, x-chat, they're things which do well, but make it hard to do it, or certain things hard to do. So what keeps me in windows is the user-interface. Some things which I consider to be important just dont seem to be priorities in OSS projects.
I tend to stay in debian, but when I want to edit an image or something, I always go back to windows.

Re:The Gimp Sucks.

[Lord Bitman]

I dont use graphics professionally, I used the word "productivity" in order to have my point understood by people who are not like me, but my point seems to have slipped by /because/ of the word.
I do not enjoy using OSS GUIs because they tend to be annoying, tedius, peices of shit. Non-Free software likes to be able to sell, so they try to make their programs non-tedius, and try to make it easy for a user to access the feature that they want. The feature /I/ want is to not have to search through menus to get at a frequently used tool, to not have to go searching for misplaced windows since the programmer has decided that lots of windows you would never want to use by themselves should not be placed in some kind of other window or somehow be grouped by the /program/ [not window manager] so they are all raised when you raise one, not that it matters, since the option you need to get at isnt actually on any of those windows, but can only be accessed by a right-click context menu of all things [WTF?!] on a certain area of a certain window.
So "Productivity" is a stupid argument, yes, but maybe the argument "This is a peice of shit" isnt. The "the GUI Sucks" argument can't possibly be a bad one, because I'm talking about Desktop use, not Server use. When you're talking about desktop use, the GUI-suckage issue has to come into play.

GUI sucks

[mr_burns]

It's just that simple. It's a royal pain in the ass to configure correctly, and when it finally is running, the fonts are butt ugly.

Working in an x-windows based window manager is an ergonomic fustercluck. It's hard keeping your mind on your tasks when you're constantly reminded of clunkiness. Keeping mental state of all the quirks is mental time I could dedicate to my work.

Frankly, x-windows and the window managers that sit on top if it are the human interface equivalent of heavy lifting with your back. A poor imitation of crufty dinosaur GUI's.

I use macs as my workstation boxen and Unix for headless applications. *nix is definitely my operating system of choice, and all my systems run some flavor of it. I use OpenBSD for infrastructure nodes and Linux for development and deployment servers.

My OS X box is my workstation. The interface isn't perfect but it's comfortable and easy. I'm very productive in it, and I never tire of it. If it's in my way, I use bash. It's also nice to have Photoshop on a *nix for the price of a PC.

The rest of my machines don't even have x-windows installed. No GUI at all. Stripped down and optimized for the task at hand.

I think the best way to get Linux past the desktop barrier is to fix the GUI so it doesn't suck so bad. Rewrite it, wave a dead chicken over it, whatever it takes. Otherwise, it never will be a serious contender for something people have to stare at all day and develop a working relationship with.

Nothing.....

[Quazion]

Normaly if i sit on them they break.

Now if it where Open Windows ;-)

Just when i wrote that last line i had an idea,
if we got OpenBSD and FreeBSD why not OpenWindows and FreeWindows, yeah we got wine and people trying make an OS around it, but are there any win32 compatible Operating systems out there ?

The obvious answer that everyone is overlooking

[Have Blue]

To some people, the choice of computer or operating system is not a political or moral question. It is instead a question of (somewhat) personal preference and (mostly) using the right tool for the job. I'm not going to fall into the usual trap of making absurd analogies involving Microsoft and historic villains or Linux and hippies, but the Slashdot community in general has a huge tendency to make a mountain out of this particular molehill. It's not that important what name is on your OS directory, as long as the computer does what you ask it to.

Re:fucking linux wannabes

[BiOFH]

I agree. While his prose is reminiscent of the early English trolls of the 1700s, his clear and obvious misunderstanding of what Slashdot is harkens back to the post-fascist-neo-fuckian writers who were in fashion in the 20s.

As I glanced at the sidebar (Apache, Apple, Books, Science, YRO, etc.) noticing that the only Linux references were his post and the Penguin icon up top, I couldn't help but feel sorry for him. Perhaps one day a good troll coach can give him the training he needs to be a first-class troll. We can only hope.

We expect a better calibre of troll these days. Is this fair to the lesser trolls? Maybe not, but that's how things are. Here... at Slashdot... which is about "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters."

Filthy F. Coont, America's Science Whore and Troll Critic
===

I've said it before...

[aengblom]

And I'll say it again. I'm the geekiest guy I know. I ran a BBS in the 90s, have earned a few bucks setting up an office network and am generally known as the local/family tech guru. I've used Windows, OS 9, OSX and BeOS, but no linux. BUT I've never even seen a computer running Linux. At least not with it's monitor on.

Why?

Because most of my friends are not geeks. I'm not in comp sci. I don't run servers and I have only ONE computer. Windows may not be pretty, but it functions on par with 95% of the world. Sometimes that's enough.

Mostly, I don't like screwing around with the operating system. As a student, if my computer didn't work, I was fu**ed. A new OS gave me lots of chance to screw things up. As did its installation.

When BeOS offered the "install through windows" they got me. I tried it. I liked it, but the apps weren't there. The company also went out of business, so I gave up. If linux offered a similar thing? I'd be there. I might even pay to try it out.

I finally got "willing to pay money" fed up with Win 98 last year. I formatted my computer and set it up with a new partition for eventual dual boot. I moved up to XP for $50 (MS deal) a few months ago. It's slower than I'd like (old hardware, but has better stability)

(Key to this was XP offered me a program to check if my system was compatible.)

Will I putting Linux on there to play around? Maybe, if I get bored, but probably not. My GF needs it for her grad school. If it's down--I'm Fu**ed (or not getting... F'd as the case may be)

But in the end. I won't see it, unless *I* install it. And that's "expensive" timewise. Neither will any of the people around me. (My GF is still confused by my two weeks of switching between OS's as I moved things I needed over)

I'll have to go to significant effort just to learn what is neccesary to install. It's a lot of work--with a guarantee that things will be different, but not neccesarily better.

Mostly, asking to use Linux is like asking me to try out this great new product--and if I walk across town I have a chance to buy it without getting to kick a tire.

...and OS X comes on expensive hardware. I just grad'd and run a PII 400 Mhz. I could consider Apple hardware for the soon-to-be neccesary upgrade, but it's only worth it in my mind at the high end or laptops. Neither of which I have managed to justify in the wallet yet ;-).

I dumped Windows this year, almost

[stonewolf]

My desktop and my laptop all run GNU/Linux. But, I keep around one old machine with Windows 98. Why? Because once a year I need to do my taxes and the choice is to either have them done by an accountant, or have one machine that can run Windows. I can not find tax preperation software for Linux.

Oh, I suppose I might be able to find tax prep software for the Mac. And, when I'm rich enough to need the accountant I'll be rich enough to buy a Mac and that Rolls I've been wanting... :-)

No, really, the Mac is not an option for me. Way to expensive. I can build 3 good PCs for the price of one Mac.

Seriously, Have have nothing against Macs, they're great. I just won't pay that much for a computer.

Stonewolf

Re:I dumped Windows this year, almost

[stonewolf]

I take it that you are arguing FOR Windows?

Or are you telling us that you make so little and have so few deductions that you can file using 1040EZ?

I used to do that, then one year I was having a lot of trouble figuring out my taxes. So I took them to an accountant. After examining everything we filed ammended tax returns for as far back as we were legally able to and got back several thousand dollars that I had paid, but didn't owe.

I used the account for about 15 years until I tested some tax software and found that it was doing as well as the accountant. So, I swithched.

Only an idiot would do their taxes with pencil and paper. It takes an expert to file a US tax return.

Stonewolf

Lesser of two evils - Win2K

[BSDevil]

Ideologically I don't really like forking over my money to a huge corporation like Microsoft. Computationally I don't like an OS that has 128M of RAM and 1.5 gigs of space as a requirement (WinXP, I'm looking in your direction). Interface-wise, look at the default layout of XP. Enough said about that.

But the fact is, it works. Whenever anything I might need comes out, it's available almost instantly for Win2K (my Windows of choice). The Office file formats are de facto standards, even if the pirce for them is outrageous. It tells me when I need to update and patch the system, even if that little box comes up much more often than it should. When I reformat, I can reboot with the CD in the drive, select a few options, and half an hour later my system will be up and running, having located all the right drivers for what I have. It's stable - I think the only time I've had a Win2K crash was when I tried to launch 300 instances of WinAmp at once.

So in short, it does the job. Ideologically I may not like it, but when I have to reformat and write a ten page essay in one night, ideology won't help me. Speed and efficiency will. For better or for worse, I've been using Windows for about eight years - I know how it works, I know how to do what I want with it, and I have no practical reason to switch. Give me a Linux that does what I want it to do, in a way that I know how to do, and has software/is compatible with other system, and you'll have a new user. But not until then.

Bottom line: W2K is the right tool for the job. Make Linux that tool and you'll have more people using it. But right now, Winxx does the job.

My Apps

[droyad]

Visual Studio .NET - No competing product on linux
Word - Sure I could use Open Office, but the UI sucks
PowerPoint - I won't even go into how KDE and OpenOffice handle powerpoint
PDF - Adobe is easy on windows, a Pain in the ass on linux
UI - Some of the less popular apps just don't live up to the windows equivalents
Windows XP - stable and easy to use

my wife..

[Hooya]

i've got the only GNU/linux installation on the desktop at work. all of our servers are GNU/linux. at home i have to run win2k for my wife. or rather, i had to run win2k for my wife. after getting really really pissed when the system locked up on her after her 20+ pages of paper on three different occasions (yeah she's got the autosave turned on but she's pissed that shes spending more time rebooting than writing her term papers) and now she wants me to install GNU/linux with openoffice on there. i'm doing that this weekend. so whoever says their win2k never crashes, well you're one lucky SOB. but now that the boss says it's ok to run GNU/linux on her machine, i'm all Free!! so to answer your question, nothing. nothing is going to keep me from running GNU/linux.

and yes i do prefer to say GNU/linux. because i'm running linux for the GNU part of the equation.

Re:No Windows, No Gates, Apache Inside.

[MikeFM]

Please see SDL, OpenGL, and OpenAL. All roads lead to nirvana. If you want to get your hands dirty see Pygame.

Let's Be Honest Here

[Col. Panic]

It's pr0n. If you really want Linux to take over the world, make it the only platform that supports a revolutionary new form of virtual sex.

Like Dennis Miller said, "If some unemployed punk in New Jersey, can get a cassette to make love to Elle McPherson for $19.95, this virtual reality stuff is going to make crack look like Sanka."

I should never have come to the store in person...

[TellarHK]

I just bought a TiBook, 867Mhz, for $250 off as an open-box deal. This... was a dangerous trip. And I love it. I'm standing in the store waiting for it to get a RAM install done, then I get to take it home. Sigh. I am -so- broke now. :)

The usual stuff...

[WWWWolf]

1) Games. 'Nuff said. Though, most of the games I really really like to play (SMAC, NWN, Myth II, Nethack, Ultimas) already run on Linux, or are coming. 2) Video capture and editing. (the fact that nvrec almost works and almost keeps sound in sync and almost does tolerable bitrate MPEG isn't enough. VirtualDub on Win98 works 100% =) 3) Um... yeah, and my scanner (CanoScan D660U) isn't supported by SANE. That's

I'm sure I'm going to get flamed here...

[kemster]

I've been a Linux user since 1996, and at one point used it exclusively. Now I exclusively use Windows 2000 on the desktop, although I still use a (GNU/) Linux box as a server of sorts. There are a lot of reasons why I switched back to Windows (on the desktop), but here are a few:

1. X Fonts Suck : I know this topic has been beaten with a dead horse, and I know there are probably ways to make the fonts better. But the reality is that out of the box, the X fonts suck.
2. No uniformity across applications : You can't cut and paste, drag and drop. I know people will flame me saying that if I use all Gnome (or all KDE) apps across the board then there's a way to do it among them. The fact remains that there's no standard way to do it across everything.
3. Game support : Again, beaten to death. Some games are ported to Linux, but until all the best ones are then it remains easier to use Windows to run them.
4. No good browser : I hate Microsoft as much as anyone (Bill Gates is the anti-christ), but IE is the fastest, most stable browser out there. I've used Netscape (mozilla), and Opera quite a bit, and they don't compare. Browsing the web with Mozilla/Opera in X just isn't as nice as IE in Windows.
5. The wife: I'm not the only one using this PC. I don't want to have to explain how to use Linux to my wife, parents, or any other guest who may come over. Everyone knows how to use Windows.
6. MS Office : It's the best office suite out there, and I'm biased against MS. Many people need Excel, Powerpoint, etc for work so are forced to use Office, but from my experience it's the best option out there.
7. Work : We use Windows for mail at work, so when I connect to the work VPN from Windows at home I need to use Outlook. I know there are probably ways to do this in Linux with Evolution, but I assure you it's not as easy as doing it in Windows
8. Hardware : I have a bunch of random cards like an ATI All-In-Wonder. I know Linux supports it for viewing television, but can I do video capture with it? Do I have all of the flexibility of the Windows video capture software that came w/ it in terms of recording format, quality, Digital VCR settings, etc? The answer is: I don't think so, and if it does, it is going to be a huge b#tch to set up. The Windows software that came with it works just great.

9. This list is just off the top of my head. I'm sure there are other reasons, but it's past 5 on a Friday and I want to go home.

   No doubt a dozen people will reply telling me I'm an idiot and all these things are possible under Linux. I agree with you, however the last thing I want to do after spending 9 hours coding at work is come home and f#ck with my Linux machine trying to get everything working perfectly, only to have everything break when I upgrade it. I use Linux for my home server, but it's not worth the aggravation of setting up for my home desktop. IMHO Linux just isn't there yet for home desktop use. It isn't too hard to install Windows 2000 and get everything working perfectly. As long as it's behind a router or firewall it's reasonably secure, and I have the Linux server for all my needs that windows can't do. I'm not saying Linux doesn't have advantages over Windows, because it certainly has a ton. I'm just answer the question of why I use Windows on my desktop and not Linux..

   P.S. And don't think I gave Bill any money. My 2000 didn't cost me a thing.

Mainly three programs

[teslatug]

I'd like to see ports of UltraEdit, Microsoft Word, and Windows Explorer. Vi, Emacs, OpenOffice, Koffice, Konqueror, Nautilius just don't cut it for me. The reason I said ports and not alternatives is because I'd get slaughtered with replies mentioning the above-mentioned replacements. Clones would be acceptible as long as they offer most of the functionality (possibly more) at the same performace and stability (possibly better).

Doesn't tally with my experience

[Goonie]

Whilst I can accept that maybe X is slower than Windows on the same machine, it's surely fast enough (and yes, I am forced to Windows on a daily basis at work so I have a basis for comparison). I run X with a Matrox G400 on a PIII/733 at 1600x1200, and it's fast and responsive. I can expand xine to full-screen size and play video smoothly, for instance, and photoediting with the gimp is very smooth.

I'll take your work that you're sincere, but I really have to say that you've either configured your Linux systems wrong (don't have DRI working, perhaps?) or you're just letting your assumptions about X cloud your judgement.

Keeping me on Windows? Not here

[bee]

Personally, I've never owned any computer that ran Windows. I once had a 8088 that ran DOS, and that's it.

Granted, sometimes I browse slashdot from NT (like right now), but that's because it's forced upon me at work.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[karlm]

No, older versions of Windows. Oh, and non-professionaly admin'd installs of Linux.

I don't remember the last time a PC crash stopped me in the middle of using my computer--I suspect it was playing UT, which is hardly Windows's fault.

If a user-space app crashes your OS (and a fork bomb brining it to a crawl doesn't truly count as a crash), there's something wrong with the OS. It's a design or implementation flaw somewhere.

It's really hard to administer Linux so poorly that it has stability problems. I've only had Linux crash for two reasons, both being hardware failures. (And when my HD locked up, it didn't even really crash, it just started printing out all of these errors that it couldn't save logs to disk.) In order to have non-hardware stability problems under linux, you need to go download an experimental kernel or kernel module. Sometimes you can't configure X11 and can't get X up and running, but the system still runs. Netscape isn't stable, but there are plenty of stable browsers out there.

I challenge you to find an app that can crash Debian-stable from an unprivledged account. Tell you what, I'm running Debian-testing/unstable. find a program that'll crsh my box from an unprivledged account. Here's one for WinNT/200/XP :
int main() { while(1){ printf("\t\b\b");} return 0;}
Try running it from the command line. (You'll need to include a header file or two, and you may need cygwin to compile it as written.) In NT and 2000, it'll BSOD. In XP they "fixed" the problem by having it autmatically reboot instead of blue-screening. It's a buffer unerflow flaw in the DOS emulation. It believes the DOS emulator is a vitalpart of the system, so it freaks out when it's forced to kill the DOS emulator. Instead of just restarting the DOS emulator and letting all of your DOS apps die, it immediately kills all of your apps and BSODs or restarts. NT 4.0 gets no more bug fixes, so it's a permanent bug in NT 4.0.

"No Excuse"?

[aziegler]

this discussion turned out: "Use Windows, or use Linux". For most people Linux just isn't ready as a desktop OS, even if the apps are there.

This is true. I use my Linux "desktop" box at home as a Samba fileserver and a test environment for my web-based development -- and even that isn't getting much use as a fileserver because the better CD burner is on my Windows XP Pro desktop (both laptops are also Windows XP Pro).

Of all of the machines I have, the Linux box is the hardest to deal with (although installing SuSE fixed a lot of that, and some of it has to do with the security restrictions I've put on the Linux box; I tried Debian on it but removed it after four hours of trying to install the bloody thing and not getting a damned thing working).

I find that I just don't use Linux desktop applications -- they're barely usable -- but I still want the graphical configuration because I don't *like* editing configuration files directly in 90% of cases.

But there's NO EXCUSE not to use a Mac. And, no, they're not as expensive as everyone thinks. You can get a really fast iBook or eMac for $999. The apps, are there, stability, UNIX, ease of use and power.

The apps *aren't* there, actually. Among other things, I'm a PalmOS software developer. The tools that I've chosen are primarily available and supported on Windows. They might work under WINE, but I don't have the patience to try. (I also play a number of games, and those are Windows only.)

My new favourite language, Ruby, isn't as solidly supported on Mac OS X as it is on Windows (and it's not as solid on Windows as it is on Unices, but it's closer); this is in part because of the act that the windowing isn't X and it doesn't like competing graphical toolkits ...

Of course, to me there is one HUGE reason not to get an iMac: they are the ugliest computers out there. They can't just "hide" -- with an integrated display, they MUST sit on the desktop taking up a set amount of space. Once the iMac is eliminated, the iBook and PowerBook are also eliminated because of the bloody single-button-mouse concept. I'm not 100% certain, but I also think that the rest of the Mac line is eliminated because I use a KVM and it isn't using an all-USB keyboard/mouse setup because my old Linux box doesn't support USB mouse/keyboard (and I don't think that it will support a mixture).

To me, there are also other reasons that I prefer not to use Macs: I don't like the single menubar (this may be changed under OS X; I really don't know); I like the taskbar concept in Windows/KDE. There are others, but ... I might get a Mac ... to replace my Linux box.

It doesn't matter if you can get a Super-Athlon 2.6 Ghz at half the price of a PowerMac if the OS sucks.

Windows XP Pro doesn't suck -- even though the EULA does. I've had *zero* problems with the machines I run (and I run Mozilla and OOo and a lot of non-MS stuff). Also, I prefer laptops at this point. I can get a wider variety of Windows-based laptop formats at this point than I can of any other type. I've got two laptops on the "purchase in the next 12 months" list: a micro-laptop (like the Fujitsu Lifebook or the Sony Picturebook) and another desktop-replacement where I can play the latest games (using the latest ATI or nVidia chip).

My explanation why Windows is so popular, that noone has mentioned so far, is that people pirate software. A lot. It's extremely easy to find all kinds of windows apps/games without paying for them. Why do you think the filesharing apps are so popular? You can get the latest game within an hour and don't pay a dime for it.

I don't have anything pirated on my system. I prefer Windows because it works like I expect it to do, at least in a graphical interface. I like Unix-style boxes for servers because they do excatly what I expect them to do there.

-austin

Why I stick around..

[Forkenhoppen]

I used Linux for a little over a year, three years ago. Several reasons forced me back to Windows, one of which was the need to have Visual Studio, but now that I'm a student again, there are still several things keeping me from going back:

Virtual Dub - Linux has no equal for manipulation of .AVI files. It has no Premiere either, but let's not even go there..

Cubase - Linux has no equal here either. (Installing five different packages of something so I can use something half written in Tcl/Tk and using Motif for a GUI doesn't count.) Likewise, show me how I can load my MIDI soundfonts for my Audigy under Linux automatically with every boot, without having to hack a boot script or cron job. (Or are soundfonts for MIDI even supported under Linux? Last time I checked they weren't..)

Hardware support - ATi Radeon 8500LE is not supported for 3D under Linux. Given as my main field of interest is 3D graphics, and I play with shaders all the time, there's no way in hell I'm going back without this.

Webcam - USB, and not supported under Linux. I'm not going to shell out for another one.

TV Tuner - Hauppauge, but just way too much work to set up under Linux. Would my remote control still work? If not, forget it.

Document support - Can you import PowerPoint files yet? One of my prof's notes are exclusively in those.

CDR burning - Does your burner app support .cdi and .nrg image file formats?

Games.

And now the biggie--X. I hate it. My reasons:

- It's not the OS, already, get over it. It shouldn't run as root, and it shouldn't be required for advanced graphics support. If someone wants to write a driver for a card, they shouldn't need to target DRI/DRM for best speed. If libGGI and KGI or something similar became the lowest level entry point for graphics, I'd be more than happy to switch back. But as long as X is calling the shots, I'm not interested.

- The interface is not centralized/standardized. Yes, I know why, but that's not why most people who'd use it on the desktop would use it today. (OSes whose interfaces I do like; BeOS, MacOSX.. Heck, even Windows is kinda nice. With Windows XP, you now have network transparency, and quicker than X, too. I think it's time to rethink this one.)

- I need Japanese entry support. Compared to the Microsoft IME, the X entry method is a turd, and a pain to toggle on/off, depending on the application. I'm either logged in in Japanese, or in English; there's no way to have Japanese entry with an English interface. Likewise, behaviour varies from toolkit to toolkit. Crap.

- GNOME is a dog. If you turn up it's settings so that visually, it's halfway acceptable, your speed drops to half, as things that modern video cards can compute easily are done on the CPU. Under Win2k, my Radeon 8500LE cheats, using it's 3D acceleration capabilities to help accelerate transparent objects, from dragged objects to windows to text.

- Windows has more useable fonts available out of the box, period. I don't care if X has more; if it looks like someone spat on the screen, I ain't usin' it.

Probably the flames I get from linux users mostly.

[gatekeep]

Honestly, the biggest thing keeping me in Windows is that whenever I've tried to switch, I invariably end up with some questions and head to IRC, Chat Rooms, etc. to ask people. The flames and insults I get for being a newbie are incredible. I really don't care enough to deal with that while I'm figuring out the intricacies.

Other than that, it's mostly games. Though there are a few other things... Photoshop, Office (Openoffice is close, but not quite close enough), Outlook (this is huge..), etc. I've got a linux box I use for a PHP server, and I've tinkered with it from time to time, but it's not my primary OS.

My wife

[MrResistor]

She didn't mind Linux when I was a newbie using KDE, but I found it a little too bloaty and unstable for my tastes so I switched to WindowMaker. She would probably like it if she took the time to learn it, but in her opinion one of the great advantages of being married to a geek is that she never has to worry about the computer, she can just sit down and use it and it will work, and Windows is what she knows.

Yeah, I could set her up with her own user account with a more familiar desktop, but then she would think I was trying to hide something from her.

On Windows I have installed OSS apps where possible. For the most part Mozilla covers all the wife's needs, since she pretty much just uses it for browsing and email. OpenOffice, PowerDVD, Nero, and Morrowind cover the rest of our Windows use.

Personally, I use Linux for everything except playing Morrowind and watching DVDs. DVDs I just haven't had the time to get working in Linux, and Morrowind taxes my system enough without the added overhead of WINE (assuming it runs on WINE at all, I haven't checked).

I am working toward the day when I can switch my wife over to Linux completely and my Windows partition will become nothing more than a dll repository for WINE.

Games, of course!

[ancarett]

I just donated my Linux box to a local school, actually, since I was only using it to geek around. Since most of the games that I and my family play are only available on Windows (MMORPGs, etc.) Microsoft is profiting nicely by me.

In my case, only a couple of reasons...

[cr0sh]

At work, I have to use Windows (NT4 Workstation) because I do development work on a custom CRM application written in VB and Access. Just about every other application, though, on my machine is an open source app, GPL where I can get it. I use Mozilla as my main browser (though I keep Netscape and IE onboard for testing purposes).

I am working on migrating the CRM app from VB and Access - first step will be to migrate to another DB (PostgreSQL likely, or MySQL), then begin the recoding of the application to allow it to be browser based (likely PHP or Perl or some combo here, or maybe Java). While the application works now, it could be made a lot better.

At home, my main machine is a SuSE 6.4/7.2 "hybrid" box - I use it for any new development (mostly Perl, PHP, and Java), browsing (using Mozilla, once again), etc - I really enjoy it, sometimes I "break" things that I have to "re-fix" (3d acceleration is a big one - linked libs get jacked around by various config utils, mostly), and some things don't quite work how I want them to, but mostly it is a *good thing*.

I am working on putting Debian on an old 486 laptop as well, soon. Linux is something I love, and at some point I want to be completely on it.

I do have one app, though, that is on a Windows box, and is the only thing I use on that Windows box - it is the old Checkfree software. I use it, rather than the web interface, because of the reporting, and the fact that you can enter other transactions into the account, etc. Online banking is not an option, because that shows the same things as your statement, rather than what you have vs. the statement (thus, balancing your checkbook never really happens, and you can't tell when a mistake or extra entry has been made - and such incidences have happened with me).

Yes, I know about GNUCash, and I would love to use it, but last time I checked (and I really should check again), it didn't have electronic transaction capability to allow online electronic bill payment - so, you end up writing checks (which I hate), and entering in amounts - or doing online banking, and doing double entry of amounts (which you can EASILY screw up - so it isn't an option for me).

My only other alternative is WINE - but really, I would love to just have a Linux app, and drop all pretense of any mention of Windows altogether.

Anybody got suggestions?

Re:Windows? What's that?

[RealAlaskan]

You missed the point. The browser war that MS was fighting was the war to keep the browser from making the OS irrelevant. They lost. Their browser may be the most popular, but it still makes the OS irrelevant. Don't believe it? Try a spoofed header on Mozilla. Today, mine is Mozilla/4.0 (compatible; MSIE 6.0; Windows_98_under_Linux_on_SGI_Octane). Not a word of it is true, of course.

I haven't run into a site that won't function for me on Mozilla. If I do, I'll tell the operator that his site is broken. You mentioned credit card payments; credit card companies are begging for your business. So are banks, and most other businesses. If they won't do business on MY terms, they won't do business with me. That's not about browsers or operating systems or computers, that's about the customer (that's me) being right. The customer is always right, as long as the customer pays the businesses' bills. I've never had a problem with a bank which involved computers, but that would be reason enough to take my business elsewhere, just as surely as not being open at convenient times and locations is.

It seems funny that you say GNUcash isn't there yet. I find it's a bit of overkill: I wish there was a slightly less complicated and less capable program. GNUcash does the job, but it does way more than I need.

The parent post was correct: MS lost the browser war. They won the war to have the most popular browser, but they never wanted to win that one. What they wanted was to make sure that NO browser could undermine their OS monopoly.

Lack of ports... (and hardware)

[dasunt]

What is keeping me from linux is a combination of things. First one is a lack or ported software. Sounds familiar? Here's my twist: A lack of GPL unix software ported to windows.

First I would like to say that its getting better. OpenOffice, the Gimp, gvim, abiword and the like all have windows ports. But there is some software that I'd like to try without having to jump into the linux OS boat - Such as gnucash.

I'm not alone with this train of thought. If I can everything in windows with the same gpl apps that I can in linux, then there is just a little jump from learning windows to the $x_environment_of_choice. But if I have to learn all new apps to get things done, then the jump from windows to linux is bigger.

So please, give me windows ports.

(As for the hardware - my second video card is buggy under linux. I think its hardware related. Anyways, even though its a simple tgui-9680 chipset, with the default VGA drivers and with the trident drivers, I get a corrupted display under X. I believe its a hardware problem, and will try a newer video card to doublecheck later.)

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Sylver Dragon]

Thankfully I am not forced to use XP at work (our IT director feels roughly the same way about it), but I know many people who are, and every one of them has continuous difficulty with it.

Sounds like you have a problem between the chair and the keyboard. I've been running XP for close to a year now, and haven't had any stability issues. And I'm one of those horrible people that install and try things out constantly. (What can I say? I'm a technophile).
So why am I using XP? Ok, first and foremost, games. Plus, having MS give a a free copy of XP Pro helped. The driver support is nice, I've almost never had to run around the internet looking for drivers. And not having to track down a million different dependancies just to install a driver.
Also, I don't hate MS, I have no reason to. What exactly did they ever do to me? Overcharge me for the OS? No, they charged a price, and it was not above the amount I was willing to pay for it. Security holes? Not seen an OS that didn't have those since I ran DOS 2.11 (I think that the lack of networking might have helped a bit). Horrendous licensing agreements? Not really, so I can't put it on multipul machines, that's fine, I see no reason that I should expect it to be free. Monoploistic practices? In a lot of ways Netscape did themselves in, I gave both a try, I forget version numbers, but I liked IE better at the time. Same reason I now use Mozilla, I like it better.
So far the only reason I have considered switching to Linux was the inital buy in cost. $0 vs $250, nice trade off. Of course there is the learning curve to deal with. The phun of drivers to deal with. The fact that I'm not a programmer, and so don't need to be able, nor am I able, to read/modify the source code. And of couse, there are the ever present man pages, oh boy is that ever one of the worst sets of documentation I have ever seen. I challenge anyone to hand those to a user, that has no programming knowledge, and have that user explain them to you.
Now maybe it was just the distrobution I was trying (RH 7.0), but the attempts I have made at working with Linux have left me less than happy. And it eats up time, which I consider to have value.

My personal reasons

[mbourgon]

Work:

1. Outlook on Exchange
   
2. Enterprise Manager (MSSQL)
   

and that's pretty much it. Hell, I use cygwin half the day, to parse things, write scripts, etc. But I need both to do my job. So that's simple

Home:

1. Games
2. Internet Surfing
3. Newsgroup downloading
4. Watching downloaded TV Shows, or capping my own (I HATE ATI on Linux! Gatos is getting closer, but dammit, release some frickin real drivers for the damn things!)

Of all those, the only two that I'd have issues with would be the Newsgroup (BRN2 isn't there yet, though Newsbin is working on either getting it working great on Wine, or an actual version) and, most importantly, Games. The rest of it is all minor stuff I can work around, or find better options for (on Linux or Mac).

Linux Switch

[dasheiff]

I switched to Linux about 2 year ago. I stoped wasting my time on computer games, I started to learn more programming and systems administration, and I felt more powerful using Linux. It changed me for the better.

However...

I am currently at home with the parents and they do not want to get cable for the sole reason they do not want me to enjoy staying at the house (next semister I'll be back in the dorms). We only have dial up and Juno, our crappy service provider, only provides a windows version of it's propriatory software. It's not even worth it for me to switch out my winmodem for one of my older ones. So right now I'm suck in Windows using Pheonix and will be happy to get back into Linux in the spring semister.

Thinkpad and very cool Trackpoint scrolling...

[aquarian]

I work on an IBM T20, which has a really neat scroll feature on the Trackpoint (joystick) pointing device. There's a third "mouse" button that you hold down, and it makes the little joystick into a mousewheel scroller. This is so ergonomically perfect that I've become totally addicted to it. Unfortunately, it only works with Windows, and even then not with all apps. I wish someone would add this feature to Linux desktops for the T20. The other Thinkpad stuff, like the volume buttons, swappable drives, etc., all works with Linux, but not the scroll button.

Other than that, I use Linux on my servers, and I run Knoppix to use some Linux tools I really like.

The fact I'm a hypocrite

[Plug]

I'd love to run Linux on the desktop but every time I try I find an excuse or a reason why not to. These aren't very big excuses, but each and every one drives me back to Windows. And I feel really bad advocating Linux-on-the-desktop (and I'd feel even worse trying to sell it to people) if I can't even run it myself.

I'd like nothing more than to run Linux, if not for my conscience than to shut up the more rabid of my friends. You can build a list a mile long of applications that would have to work seamlessly under Linux before people would change (and yes Photoshop is at the top of that list) - but all that is doing is saying "I'm really not ready to make that committment yet, and here is what I am going to blame today."

Gnome 2 is a big step as well. But now it's another excuse to blame another application. "Evolution isn't GTK2 yet." "Mozilla isn't GTK2 yet." (You try making a new Galeon2 build work. And then you can blame sub-pixel anti-aliasing for not working in all your programs, if you like that kind of thing.

Red Hat 8.0 has blown me away with a desktop that finally looks nice and doesn't require the Microsoft fonts to do so. Even though I prefer Debian, I might install RH8 and try again. But still, I'll install it dual-boot for starters, and then I'll find myself needing to boot back into Windows for something, and not going back into Linux...

The reason I am not changing is that I am used to everything being nice in Windows, and I am not prepared to accept even small drops in 'niceness' for the incredibly large gain in karma that you get for being completely open-source.

Remember, running Windows isn't an evil thing. I'm writing this from Mozilla. I run (some) open source Windows apps. But when it's as easy to get warez as it is in the world today...

If we were in a totalitarian copy-protective state etc, you'd see GNU/Mozilla/Desktop/XConsortium/whoever Linux (as a whole) improve 100 times quicker than it is now.

Re:I Tryed to Switch

[Zordak]

As far as a text editor, Vim works nicely in both Windows and Linux. There may be a tiny learning curve.

Utility

[Snork Asaurus]

Windows is like a Swiss army knife. It's easy to use and can do a lot of things, although none of them well. To most people, the "easy to use" and "do lot of things" parts matter most.

But saying that with either one you have security is a joke.

Personally, I hate it. But my PHB insists that our products be hosted under it and I have to eat.

Quickbooks Pro, ACT, and MS Access...

[aquarian]

I find these programs indespensible, with no Linux substitutes. I use other databases for myself, but the rest of the world is addicted to *.mdb files and applications.

windows

[sstory]

It's simple why I use windows. Anyone can install windows with basically no prior knowledge 99% of the time. Up until very recently you had to have esoteric knowledge to install linux. Video cards, modems, ethernet cards, it all just works in windows 95% of the time. If I want a shortcut on the desktop in windows, i just drag and drop. In linux (until recently) it was a pain in the ass. In windows i can open up a window and click on the diskdrive. Mount a drive? edit Xconfigurator in a command-line text editor? install a driver? If you just want to get something done without spending hundreds of hours learning geek stuff, linux was worthless. Most people aren't interested in devoting a significant percentage of their time to learning a machine, they have other things to do. I just want to get my physics done. Write reports, Graph things in mathematica, send emails. I don't want to have to read books to figure out how to compile my kernal because xwindows isn't working etc etc.

Windows are broken.

[miffo.swe]

Me and my gf has been on linux since 98 and neither of us has any probs with it. Once you know its principals and its underpinnings its much easier to use than most other systems. Atleast for someone skilled at computers. For a n00b i think linux can be hard at first. Some things can be made simpler than today but i hope it wont be on the expense of the flexibility. I hope linux will evolve past windows and god help us NOT into windows.

to each their own

[g4dget]

What keeps you using Photoshop is the same that keeps other people using Windows: you are used to certain tools, they get your job done, and you don't want to spend the time learning something new. There is nothing wrong with that. But that's your problem, not a problem with Linux or Linux applications.

Having been in digital imaging for 20 years, I assure you that Linux and UNIX are an excellent platform for digital imaging. In fact, once you learn the tools, it's a lot better than Photoshop or Windows in my opinion. I have used Photoshop, and you couldn't pay me to switch to it: it's just the usual, bloated, monolithic software style that is so common on Windows.

Re:to each their own

[g4dget]

If a new product or technology wants to replace an existing (and dominant) incumbent, then it has to make the transition as easy as possible or present an extremely compelling reason why it shouldn't. [...] While you may believe that your product is "worth it", unless your potential customers believe it as well, they aren't going to switch.

My point is: I don't want you to convince you to switch, nor do I want to hack up my software to make it easier for you to switch. What I do want you and anybody else to do is not to be guided by misconceptions when choosing software or to influence Linux software development to become more of a Windows clone.

It is perfectly legitimate to say "I'm going to stay with Photoshop because I know it and because it works for me". It is, however, irrational and counterproductive to approach the issue by saying "Linux imaging software is no good because it doesn't work like Photoshop".

The problem with free software is that nobody is interested in convincing other people to switch. The developers of free software are doing so predominantly for their own benefit ("I want to make a tool easier for me to use"), and while that ability is a major plus for some people, it shouldn't be any surprise that "regular" people aren't impressed with the results. After all, they aren't catered to, as they are with "commercial" software.

I don't see this as a problem, I see it as a strength. I don't want software design to be driven by marketing considerations. And I definitely don't want open source software to behave like Windows software--if I wanted to use Windows, I would be using it.

Three things keep the majority of people on Win

[Zeddicus_Z]

1) At home: Games. Games may be appearing more and more frequently on Linux thanks to WineX but until the time comes where there's a dedicated Linux client for every new game that appears, I'll be doing what most people are - sticking to Windows as my main OS so I may game on a powerful machine without a reboot. WineX just doesn't cut it for many games, especially some older ones that I still love to play.

2) At work: Applications - primarily Exchange and MS Office. I'm SysAdmin for an SME publishing company with around 40 users. The publishing industry is extremely windows-centric, and the majority of files passed around are in doc format. Now before everyone starts screaming about Open and StarOffice, I can say that OpenOffice and MS Office are most definately NOT interchangable, even when using RTF format for documents. I recently wrote a work-related proposal for presentation to my manager(s), only to find the bold, italic and fonts totally fscked up when the RTF was opened under Word 2000. Luckily I managed to reformat it all under the MS solution before my boss got hold of it, but had I not double-checked my proposal most likely would have been dismissed out of hand. Oh, and it's not like it was a complicated document in the way of formatting - standard fonts, bold, italics and bullet points.

The other major app that keeps us from using Linux at work (aside from retraining every user, most of whom have never used Linux before) is Exchange. There is simply NO Free (as in speech - we will pay for a GPL solution if it can meet our needs) that is a plug-in solution for Exchange! My users need shared calenders, free/busy scheduling and everything else Exchange provides. Until the day comes where someone releases a reliable plug-in Exchange replacement that duplicates *all* of Exchange's features, we won't even consider switching.

I think you'll find that these three things are what keeps 95% of people from attempting a total conversion to Linux, in both the home and business markets.

Lack of reasons, not of things holding me back.

[Kjella]

Don't get me wrong, I do play around with Redhat on a secondary machine from time to time, but it's never come close to actually taking over. I'm reasonably sure that I could find replacements for all the applications I normally use, and run most of the games that I like under wine somehow. But, short of giving MS the finger, what reason is there really for me to switch?

Something availible on Linux but not on Windows? Not that would matter to me, no. Maybe DRM-less stuff in the future, but not now.

Cost? No. Ok it could be if I was considering buying something new, but otherwise it's a sunk cost (ie, switching to Linux won't pay me back the cost of Windows)

Free applications? See above. I got a set of applications I already have, and that I'm very familiar with what they can and can not do.

Stability? Could have been up to Windows 2000. Now that argument is rather moot.

In the end it comes down to 7 years of experience with Win95/98/2k/XP. "Start/Shut Down/Restart" to restart doesn't make sense, but now it could just as well say "Oooga/Booga/Dooga" for all I care, I know already. If I had grown up with Linux and learned that in the same way I learned Basic (C64), DOS and Windows in my days, things would be very different. I'm not a programmer, but I still grok VB programs the best (or at least better than C/C++/Java) because of my C64 experience. It's literally years of training, and it was fun. You don't get learning that'll stick better than that.

Kjella

Yes it is slow; How do you speed it up

[serutan]

It's not my expectation and it's not the power of suggestion. When I drag my mouse to move or resize a window in KDE (Mandrake 8.2), the window does not move or resize as I drag. Nothing happens for a second or two and then the change occurs. PAIN! When I drag a slider on a scrollbar, the scrolling happens in jumps at least a half second apart. Contrast this to Win98 running on the same box (K6-2 350, 192 Mb) where everything happens smoothly.

Is it my strange memory configuration or what? If this is supposed to be better let me know how. I would love to drop my Win98 crutch.

Re:Yes it is slow; How do you speed it up

[Shelled]

Are you using opaque move? Windows doesn't, drawing the window after you release the mouse button. With most linux windowmanagers you have full access to make your desktop as slow or as fast as it will go. For comparison, I run Gentoo/Fluxbox on a P2 - 300 notebook with a 4 meg video card. It plays 1024x768 full screen AVI's and MPg's without skipping. Try that with 98.

Re:Yes it is slow; How do you speed it up

[aussersterne]

Your're slowness is definitely caused by KDE, not by X. KDE is much more heavy than Windows 98, but you get what you pay for in features because KDE can do a lot of network transparent and scripting stuff that Windows simply can't.

But you really must learn to separate X from the programs which are running on it.

To run a modern version of KDE+X and get an instant response, the most important thing for you to do is get more memory (preferably 512MB, but 256MB in a pinch) and nicely accelerated display hardware (Voodoo, GeForce) rather than older display hardware. A faster CPU wouldn't hurt either.

Alternatively, you could simply go to http://www.windowmaker.org and get a blazing fast X desktop with your current hardware.

Two words...

[frank_adrian314159]

Turbo Tax.

Other than that, my home could be Windows-free. I would doubt, though, that one could ever successfully build an Open Source tax package. And for some of us, that keeps the Windows box around (at least around Apr. 15).

My paycheck

[unicorn]

The office I work in, is an all MS shop (Well 2 macs in the graphic design department). I'm responsible for supporting everyone on a daily basis. And believe me, there is NO way any of the users here would last a day with a *nix box. The people that we hire here are professionals that do a fairly specific job function for our clients. And technology CAN'T get in the way of that. They don't know anything about computers, but they aren't supposed to.

Further, they exchange documents all day long, with other Windows users. And that isn't going to change either.

At home, I use my machine for email, IRC, and games. The first 2 functions can be done on any platform. The third, is by far a Windows selling point. The gammes I play, simply don't come out for *nix.

Another biggie: NTFS support

[Xeger]

OK, so it's not open source's fault that Microsoft are information-bigots who won't open their standards or permit people to write third-party filesystem drivers.

Whoever said the world was fair?

Regardless of who's to blame, if Linux had decent NTFS write support, or even if it had a stable NTFS read-only driver, I would find myself booting into Linux much more of the time.

Until such time as we get full NTFS support for Linux (or full ext2 support for NT/2000/XP), FAT32 must play the role of Switzerland in the filesystem world, hosting shared data and apps.

And guess what: FAT32 just don't cut the mustard anymore. It's got a ridiculously small maximum partition size, weird file size restrictions, bad fragmentation problems...if the real Switzerland were this buggy, they would've all frozen to death long ago.

I find it frightening and sad...

[Broadcatch]

...that there are so many posts from so many \.ers who are defending their use of Windows.

Get off of it. If it's games, break the habit (and go outside and play a real game with your friends).

Disclaimer: though I have been and will continue to be a UNIX user (since 1975), I bought a Mac in '85 as a document appliance and two years ago I bought a Windows box 'cause it made working at home for some of my clients easier.

Professional Industry and Computer Gaming

[MindNet]

I do not use Microsoft Windows on my desktop. I haven't for a long time. I am a Debian GNU/Linux user who is greatly satisfied with Gnome and Enlightenment (except for the lack of alpha channel support in X). I use Open Office, Vim, multi-gnome-terminal, Mozilla, XMMS, Bluefish, Gnomeicu, Dia, Abiword, and a breadth of other applications that allow me to do much of what I can do on a Microsoft Windows machine. My workstation is much more solid (stable) using Linux.

Unfortunately, I still have to keep abreast of whats going on in the Microsoft world because of my business, and the best way to do that is by actually using the operating systems and applications that I have to communicate with.

Our company is a consulting firm focused on large scale network design and implementation. This requires us to research a large majority of hardware and sofware solutions. This also means that to be objective, we also have to consider Microsoft products. One of our clients has given us access to one of their terminal servers (rdesktop) so that we can fulfill that need.

Recently, my company held a LAN party to celebrate moving our office to a more spacious location. Although half of us were Linux gurus, I was one of the very few who did not have a machine running Windows at all (not even on some tucked away partition).

However, I love LAN parties, as I enjoy gaming very much (at least I did until I went totally linux about 2 years ago). Anyway, to make a long story short, I ended up grabbing some spare hard drive I had with 20 or so free gigs of space, and installed some version of Windows my buddy had. It all came back to me, fragging away my buddies, the adreneline rush, the co-ordinated attacks.. it was great!

I eventually got rid of the windows partition, but I strongly considered keeping it so that I could boot it up and play some games.

The point of this story is, there are two major reasons why a lot of Linux lovers are still running Microsoft Windows as their primary operating systems. One is that the Professional IT Industry is flooded with Microsoft's Products, and two is that the Gaming Industry hasn't made a committment to supporting Linux users.

I do not believe that WineX is a solution to the Linux Gaming problem. This only encourages PC game developers to disregard the Linux community, as they believe we'll find a way to get it running anyway.

This is simply not true, I don't want to waste my time trying to get games running on WineX when I could be spending that time actually gaming. I know that if I sit down and try hard to get a specific game running under WineX, that I could probably do it (with a little luck). But if I'm going to do that, then I might as well pirate the game, because I don't think I should have to work so hard to try and get a game running that I've already paid for.

My $0.02

Evolution!!!

[FreeLinux]

Give Ximian Evolution a try it is a perfect replacement for Outlook!

But I think what you really meant to say was Exchange. And here the solution is far more difficult. But, you don't have to replace Exchange in order to replace Outlook.

Using Evolution you can connect to and use your existing Exchange server via POP3 or better yet IMAP4. But if you want full on Exchange functionality in Evolution you need to buy the Evolution Exchange Connector. It is a per client add-on that Ximian sells for $40 (I think).

Additionally, replacing Exchange itself will get a whole lot easier in the next couple months. Look for OpenExchange from Suse and Kolab from KDE.

Linux Vs Windows

[daviskw]

I used to upgrade Suse Linux regularly. I don't do that anymore. I have two reasons.

1. None of my good games run on Linux.

2. I spent a lot more money upgrading Linux every six months then I have ever spent upgrading Windows.

This will change in the future due to the fact that Microsoft's Licensing and upgrade schemes mean that my computer is spending a huge amount of time talking to their computer. This drives me nuts. As time progresses this is going to get worse not better.

In addition, some of the desktop apps available for Linux are getting pretty good. While still not production quality I can see that they are on their way there.

I won't use Apple because they have an even larger app problem than Linux has. On the other hand if I was into desktop publishing or maybe if I was a graphical artist. Otherwise Apple is just a toy.

A mouse.

[edunbar93]

Nuff said.

Well, okay, maybe not. Basically, for a *lot* of games, the mouse is a much better and more natural controller than the keyboard or joystick, which is really all the PS2 controller is.

When they come out with a mouse for the playstation 2, I'll be right there. Until then, it's the best controller yet and only available for the PC.

ONE WORD: MULTIPLAYER

[waspleg]

let me know when you can play ANY console game with more than 4 people

and when i can use my trackball and mouse to play *anything* i will consider it, however there are a huge number of bad ass PC games that never come out for console.. the reverse is also true but not nearly to the same degree..

Re:ONE WORD: MULTIPLAYER

[waspleg]

and i bet you ahve to subscribe to MSN to use it

nearly every PC game on the market comes with MP for free

So far...

[Arandir]

So far I've read about a third of the posts. I can't read them all because there's a lot. But so far I have not found what I was expecting to see.

No one is claiming that they're staying on Windows because KDE and GNOME look different! There's this sense of urgency in the Linux community that unless there's a unified vanilla desktop, no one is going to want to use Linux. It seems that this is not the case.

But maybe I've missed those posts. So let me ask: is there anyone out there who has genuinely stayed with Windows precisely because KDE and GNOME don't have the same look and feel? [I'm not asking if you want them to have to same look, only if you have honestly refused to use any form of UNIX because of it]

Re:So far...

[onyxruby]

Actually, I consider this to be an important issue. I have played with trying Linux off and on since Red Hat 5.2 and inevitably give up every time after a short while. Part of the frustration is that I don't have anything consistent for interfaces. It's one of the things that MS screwed up with XP, they changed the interface enough that it can be a real pain in the but doing what you've always done. In short, don't discount the whole kde/gnome consistent interface thing. It is important for furthering adoption of Linux beyond a certain crowd that has already embraced it.

In short, I want to be able to "just use it". I want to go to a consistent place every single time and be able to enable a nic to use / not use DHCP regardless of flavor of linux I am on. That and the biggest thing that the linux community needs to do is have a serious attitude adjustment. The whole, holier than thou attitude and general unwillingness to help (with exceptions of course) have ruined it in many portions of society. I was working a very large gov contract position a few years back and when I asked why they didn't have linux in use (despite many of the workers privately using it), I was told bluntly, "because the community can't be bothered to step out of their white tower to help unless your a programmer". "The entire concept of anyone /other/ than a programmer administrating a machine has been lost on them". In short, I should not need to know "C" to admin a box. I am not, and have no interest in becoming a programmer, I simply desire to be an administrator.

In case your wondering if it's the whole CLI interface thing, no it isn't. I've been using computers since the TI80, have 5 years professional experience, and have absolutely no problem with the Cisco CLI. I'm also in school to pick up Solaris, Cisco, and Unix once Linux is finished. Thus I am hardly a newbie that is scared by the lack of a pretty interface. hope this helps.

Re:So far...

[IamTheRealMike]

Yeah, about the interface consistancy thing, if you try RedHat 8 they've done a lot of good work there with BlueCurve for instance. It's too bad there isn't a theming spec so things like BlueCurve and Keramik/Geramik are easier to create, but that'll be addressed with time.

The ivory tower thing: this has to be one of the biggest misunderstandings around. Frequently Linux users (especially in tech support channels) are painted as arrogant and unwilling to help. In my experience (and I give a lot of support on #linuxhelp) this simply isn't true. Usually, when somebody comes to me and says "I got flamed by arrogant geeks in IRC" it turns out they caused the flameage in the first place. A few things that can be done to avoid this (and please don't get me wrong, i'm not suggesting your colleagues did these things, but it's a common problem) :

• Getting frustrated if your problem isn't solved straight away. I've seen people who start getting angry because after a few mins and a couple of repeats, they still get no answer. Typically if you don't get an answer, it's because nobody who knows one is paying attention to IRC at the moment. It's a common misconception that we all spend our time with our eyes glued to IRC.
  
• Getting frustrated if the solution to your problem seems "too hard". You made a good point about how sometimes Linux users weren't interested in helping you if you weren't a programmer - it can certainly seem this way, but it's not true. More often, there is only an easy solution to the problem if you are a programmer, and because of that users who stamp their feet and say "Why is there no GUI for this like Windows, Linux sucks!" don't get a good response, for obvious reasons
  
• RTFM! No really, please do. It's such a common response that it's become a cliche, but all too often somebody could have found their answer by looking on Google. We're all guilty of it to some extent, sometimes of course you simply need to know the correct phrase or command (and i don't see people getting flamed when this is the case) but sometimes the answer to a problem can be found just by looking for it, as opposed to thinking "it's easier to ask somebody". Note that when you're getting started with Linux, you *will* have to ask questions that could have been found out by researching through the docs, but are easier to simply ask people. I did that a lot, and as long as you're happy with a "man sed" type answer, you can normally get a lot of help from IRC. Sometimes you just need to be pointed in the right direction.
  
• Complaining doesn't get you anywhere. I dunno why, I guess because people are used to phoning commercial tech support and insulting the people on the other end to cool off, but surprise surprise telling people their stuff sucks because you don't want to/can't invest the effort to learn it gets you flamed. In that case, you're the one being arrogant, not them. What's in front of you is the software, nothing is hidden from you. We'd all like for everything to be perfectly easy, but sometimes it isn't, and people who can't seem to accept that are the biggest cause of flamage on IRC.

I hope that little guide helps. Asking experiencied Linux users is one of the fastest ways of getting up to speed, but be careful not to abuse that facility, otherwise you will get burned.

Re:So far...

[onyxruby]

I know there are people out there like yourself. Without question, the people who are willing to help make a world of difference. Please understand that I have written a fair amount of technical materials for various employers over the years, thus personally I am hardly adverse to the idea of RTFM. I think one of the biggest problems, one that I know taco once talked about addressing with a book, is knowing /which/ manaul to read. In short, very good stable tools are out there, but how to know what to ask for? Many of the names (like grep or eth0) are logical for programmers, but don't make a lot of sense for those who aren't.

Without question I have seen people like you describe, those that come demanding answers without bothering to do any research. They are annoying, I won't dispute. Unfortunately, these impatient people talk to other people, and a /perception/ of an ivory tower is created. Right or wrong, people like the managers in my government contract job pay a lot of attention to perception. It's the perception that needs work, and this is not easy to change.

One of the things I have personally found frustrating is that there seems to be an assumption that the user will know what certain things are. In short, it's a matter of knowing what exactly it is that you need. A friend of mine is quite proficeint with linux, and it seems at time I have to use him as a translator. I'll tell him a problem, he tells me the appropriate *nix terminology, and I search online for the answers. Working on more common sense names would help immensely. I think this is the most common method of pointing someone in the right direction for *nix's.

I'm also not at all adverse to linux myself. I have a mandrake box running duty as a samba file server and another flavor running duty as a firewall.

Complaining doesn't get you anywhere, I couldn't agree more. Unless, that is, someone posts a story to /. asking you to do exactly that :-) In which case I can bring up my complaints. Of note, this could well prove to be the most popular /. story yet - almost 3000 comments upon last check. Believe me, I like many of the concpets of *nix, that's why I'm going to school for it. Unfortunately, it's joe blow six pack that dictates the fortunes in the computer world, and it's joe six pack that needs appealed to.

Short list of the most useful things from my beginner linux perspective.

Translation manuals, the tools are out there, but I need someone to tell what their equivalent to in a windows world so that I know what to ask for.

Consistent interface option. No need to get rid of custom interfaces, but to make available a standard interface that could be brought up (doesn't need to be the only one) to administer the machine, that would be available on all linux flavors would be ungodly useful.

Naming. Many *nix commands are named for programming functionallity since they were designed as programmers tools. Coming up with more familiar names that would also execute the identical function would be useful. For example, grep could also be brought up under "search" or "find".

Re:So far...

[Fizzlewhiff]

I've pretty much given up on Linux as a desktop OS. I think GNOME and KDE are crap. In my opinion they spend too much time focusing on eye candy and bloat. (Do Konqueror and Nautilus need to do EVERYTHING?)

I used to have the time to play with Linux and tweak it but now I have other things to spend that time on, like my family. The fun thing about Linux was the tweaking and the tuning, trying to shrink that kernel another 2k. If Linux were to ever win the battle for the desktop OS then I would imagine all the stuff that made Linux fun for me would have to go away or at least be very well hidden.

too bad for you

[g4dget]

No matter how fast they make the drivers, no matter how much they optimize it - a client-server based desktop environment is ALWAYS going to be slower than a non-c/s solution.

First of all, there are almost no "non-c/s" window systems left. Windows and Mac OS X are both "client server" windowing systems as well--all multiprocess windowing systems need a server to handle interaction among multiple applications. And, in fact, neither Windows nor Mac OS X applications draw to the screen directly either: in the case of Windows, they call a GDI server in the kernel, and in the case of Mac OS X, they generate PDF that gets sent to a server. Last I did benchmarks, X11 beat both Windows and the Mac OS X GUI handily in terms of performance on comparable hardware (although there certainly are going to be some graphics cards for which Windows outperforms X11, depending on driver quality).

Second, it just isn't true that "client server" is always slower than a "non client server" solution. As just one simple example, if you run X11 on a dual processor machine, you automatically get parallelism, where the application and the display code run on separate processors.

In addition, modern window systems can't help but be client/server: graphics chips have their own processors; applications effectively draw by sending requests to those graphics chips. Putting pixels directly into the framebuffer is very slow.

Finally, if anybody felt that direct rendering was important for writing a fast GUI toolkit for X11, X11 supports it: you can use DRI and fiddle around with on-screen bits as much as you like. Toolkits don't do that because it just doesn't make sense for a general purpose toolkit.

X continues to feel just a bit sluggardly on all my systems, even with the latest, fanciest drivers from whoever.

Well, the most likely cause of that is not X11 but your chosen desktop environment. For example, if you are running Gnome or KDE, that's the source of your performance problems. Those environments (and their toolkits) impose enormous and unnecessary overhead. They don't use a lot of the rendering facilities available natively in X11 and do a lot of rendering in software and then blit it to the screen. Of course, most people aren't bothered by that because even with their overhead, Gnome and KDE are fast enough on modern hardware.

The second biggest problem I have with Linux is stability. Linux itself is a rock, but I have not used a single X app that hasn't crashed at least once. It's a dismal record.

Well, you seem to be using the wrong applications, then. There are buggy GUI apps on any platform. On X11, at least you are guaranteed that a buggy GUI app can't take down the whole window system. And because X11 is a protocol rather than an API, you can eliminate the most likely cause of crashes from your programs entirely: C-based APIs. Languages like Lisp, Java, and ML have bindings to X11 that are entirely free of C code.

X11 is far more stable as a window system than anything else I have seen, and it's by far the best architecture around for building stable GUI apps because it separates the display code from the client code so cleanly (DisplayPDF and DisplayPostscript come close). The fact that there are some big and vocal projects producing buggy clients for X11 isn't X11's fault. Judging the stability of X11 by the stability of some free clients is like judging the stability of Windows by the stability of shareware apps you download.

I don't see how it's ever going to do it relying on X, and I don't see the desktop environments coming anywhere near more polished corporate-funded alternative

X11 is one of the biggest strengths of Linux. If it didn't exist, it would have to be invented.

And X11 is widely used in corporations and businesses, in particular in mission-critical applications like banking.

Ditch X and come up with a really solid desktop environment that doesn't require it, and I'll be back in a heartbeat.

We can't make everybody happy all of the time. So, have fun with Windows. You won't be missed.

Some people just like it.

[amokk]

Did it occur to anybody that some people just like windows, office, and IE?

I personally like them... A lot.

(Repeated for emphasis)
Windows XP does not crash on my machine. Ever.
The thing about Windows XP is that it doesn't ever seem to crash on my machine.
I don't know where all this "linux is more stable" stuff is coming from. In my experience, Windows XP doesn't crash.

Office is a fantastic package for which there isn't any good open-source competition. Even if star office were better I would not switch. I like office. It works, I can do things quickly, and it also doesn't crash.

IE is a good web-browser. No, nobody has tried to attack my computer with whatever security exploits _may_ be present in it. If they want to more power to them. After they are done, they can tell me what a blast they had doing it and we might share a beer. I simply don't care.
IE is snappy, makes a satisfying little "click" when navigating through web-pages, works with my mouse 5 button mouse, smooths fonts to make them easier to read, and is much faster than mozilla will ever be.

My other computer is a mac. I love that machine as well. OS is a pleasure to work with and never gets in the way.

The bottom line is that I like Windows XP and Mac OSX. Whatever my reasons, know this: I will not switch to linux any time in the forseeable future. Switching would only make my computer a pain in the ass to use.

One other little note: I don't want to hear any bullshit saying that I only like windows, office, ie, etc. because it's all I've ever used and don't make an effort to look for better products. I don't want to hear how on your system, mozilla runs faster than IE despite being twice as slow as mine (I won't believe this statement, so don't bother telling me).

I like windows. I like OSX. I won't switch to linux. No politics. No agenda. No hatemongering. Just personal preference.

It's easier

[Nameles]

I've tried *nix before. Mandrake, because of the easy installer. I like easy. I'm a full time HS student and I work part-time (borderline full time) at a local crappy computer store. Since school is 7 1/2 hours a day for 5 days, and work is 6 hours a day (average), that is 14 hours (adding in transport time) to an average day. That means I have 10 hours to fit in relaxing (yes, I relax every day. If I didn't, or didn't try to, I would have gone insane before), sleep, food, and a new found social life (I just picked mine up this year).
That means I don't have time to go around messing around with my OS to get it how I want (tm). Admittedly, the way my XP machine is now got there after a total of 2 months or so, but they were little changes. Updating releases of software, like my GUI (Blackbox4Windows 0wnz you), as well as configuring obscure software to do cool shit (I have an Intellimouse explorer, where I can change to the next song in Winamp by clicking a side button. The side button is mapped to F11 which then is grabbed by a SW title not being produced anymore (DreamKeys) which then skips the winamp track.).

I use Windows all the time at work, fixing people's computers. Only about three of our business customers have *nix servers, and we have a guy more skilled than me there to cover that. I'm basically paid to remember and know how to get around all of the quirks in various Windowses (If Win98 doesn't boot into normal mode, go into safe mode and then restart. It will then work most likely, unless its another apparent problem).

Now I know this sounds like BS, but last time I tried Linux (Mandrake 8.0 I believe), shit either didn't work (modem, but it doesn't matter), just started working (my printer, HP Deskjet), or stopped working after working once (XMMS didn't output to my soundcard). That and finding the right software for me was a pain in the ass. GAIM was installed with bad settings, which made me have to go ask the help channel, which amazingly DIDN'T flame me. XMMS stopped working, like I said before, which led me to use mpg123 which didn't appear to recurse subdirectories when finding stuff to play and didn't support mods.

I can deal with Mozilla as a browser since it hit 1.0. I can deal with GAIM, because when I got it to work, it 0wned. I hope XMMS is fixed. Now all I need is good CD-R software to burn data and audio, a video player (I hear mplayer is good), image software (I didn't HATE the gimp when I tried it), and that's all I use on a constant basis. That, and if I could get VMWare to work, I'd be set having a virtual XP or 2K machine.

Linux is ready - I am not

[Darth_Burrito]

Many posters seem to be saying that particular applications or lack of linux desktop support keep them tied to windows, but I think it is something more fundamental than either.People in general don't like massive change. Once you know how to do something a certain way, it is often very difficult to willingly adjust to something new.

For instance there are a couple prototype cars out there that have a joystick instead of a stearing wheel. Most people would see that and say, "WTF?!?!?!!" Maybe a joystick interface is easier to control, they would certainly be safer where airbags are concerned... but people aren't going to run out an embrace the joystick as an auto steering mechanism.

Another example would be those "ergonomic" split keyboards. I took a chance on one and I absolutely love it. Yet, most people I know still use the old kind. Why? Because they are used to it. Because learning to use the new one well takes too much time.

A more softwarey example... Today I found I needed to get a list of all Groups in a domain and their members. After fiddling with Active Directory for about 5 minutes, I was like, wtf, I'll just do it in perl. I spend about 20 minutes trying to get Win32::AdminMisc through the proxy using ppm, give up, download it manually, spend about 20 minutes looking for a version 5xx build of perl or a 6xx compatible version of AdminMisc, give up, spend another half hour figuring out how Win32::NetAdmin works, realize that's actually what I used when I did this stuff two years ago, then write the script, most of it anyway. The point is, there was probably some easy way to get the information I needed from within the User interface, but I didn't know how, and I wasn't willing to learn when I had a known option available to me.

It's pretty obvious how this behavior pattern ties in to Linux. People everywhere have grown up using Windows. They know how to browse the web in IE, to create documents in Office, to install software, to install drivers, etc. In Linux, everything is different. Switching to even a user friendly distro like RedHat is like coming home one day to find some dude has moved all your stuff around. Your furniture is upside down, the walls are painted green, all your food has been replaced with organic variants, your universal remote control no longer works with anything, and for some reason your monitor is stapled to the ceiling. You have to relearn where everything is and spend days getting it back into a state in which you can work effectively. To make matters worse, you now have 3-10 very different versions of everything. While I like having choices, I only like making informed decisions.

So what's my point? Hell, I forget. Oh yeah, the question is what is keeping me on windows? The answer is, ease of use. I know where everything is. Of course if you asked me what was keeping me on Linux, I'd give you the same damn answer. Ever try to find free anti-spam support for Exchange (shudder)?

I use Windows on the "Main" PC, run RedHat and Debian on my two servers, and use Deb on my thick thin client laptop. I stick with Windows on the desktop because the amount of time it would take me to reach my current level of desktop mastery on linux is well worth the price of XP and probably the next Windows as well. Right now there's room for both in my world. After using linux as a server for near 2 years, I'm getting a little better learning my way around, and while I'm sure the Linux desktop is ready for me, I'm not yet ready for it.

Re:Linux is ready - I am not

[Darth_Burrito]

Absolute hogwash... ...Change is what people are seeking (not avoiding), because they know M$ sux.

Allow me to rephrase then, it is not change itself that people do not like, it is the large amount of relearning of everything from basic to advanced tasks which they don't like. People dislike it when change requires vast amounts of effort, especially when the alternative is a functional known method.

if Linux improved on the Desktop

I have no doubt that many folks out there greatly prefer *Nix desktops. From what little exposure I've had to the desktop, I can see many ways in which it is superior to its Windows counterpart.

was a little easier to configure
If you know how to configure Linux, it can be much easier to configure than Windows. Many things in Linux are extremely easy to do IF you know how to do them. I guess this distinguishment really only makes sense when you are thinking about maintaining lots of machines.

Re:Two words... (from me?)

[perrin5]

why not?

"I would doubt, though, that one could ever successfully build an Open Source tax package."

Even if you're right (and you shouldn't be, in fact, I can see this as some poor CS Ph.D. thesis - "Natural Language Programming as Applied to Tax Law" - since the laws are supposed to be some sort of elaborate decision tree), There's no reason someone couldn't write a closed source FOR PROFIT app on Linux to do taxes. Hell, Turbo Tax could even do it themselves, and maybe write up a server version, and sell access to it...

Re:Keeping me on MS

[Glock27]

or the constraint of having to use JBuilder for Java projects.

JBuilder (like most Java things) runs fine on Linux. Borland even supports it on Linux. :-)

Why I use Windows XP

[Mondain98]

While I'm all for Linux where applicable, all my primary systems are XP for the following reasons:

1) Cost is footed by work. (Also, ActiveDirectory domain support is necessary) 2) Huge selection of apps (Cakewalk's Guitar Tracks Pro on Linux? I wish.) and games. 3) Desktop usability that blows Linux out of the water. 4) Intuitive application paths, no dependency hell. 5) Wide selection of hardware drivers not written by 14-year-old Koreans. 6) Years of familiarity, for what its worth.

While I run several 2000 Adv Svrs including IIS servers, I do feel that Linux/Apache is a killer combo and look forward to mastering Apache 2.0.

So while I am primary a Windows guy, I dont knock either Linux or Windows just for the sake of knocking.

Have to work in the real world

[ToasterTester]

I'm SA and SE in a large Windows and Unix shop. I would like to use more Unix, the Unix I mainly use is Solaris, but would like to use more Linux. But I need to use Windows app's to deal with the company execitives, to work with vendors, and others. So my desktop and laptop have Windows. Don't say StarOffice or OpenOffice they don't support the lately version of MS Office and all the embedding of Office apps in each other. For servers we are moving to more Unix, but many of our users develop app's and start using them, but for they come to us to officially become a production app. The Windows world with RAD tools like VB, ASP, and so on are so easy to use department can easily build tools they become dependent on. By the time they come to us to become a support app and server it too late to try and make them start over. On the other hand this is how some Linux projects first got started. Then for using Linux instead of Solaris is all about have support and a company who you can hold their feet to the fire when things go wrong. The executives are leary of Linux because there isn't a brick and mortar business to say that's who were using. Also Linux isn't ready for mission critical project that require HA features. I even I won't use Linux for a "Five-9's" project that I need HA. The work is going on for Linux HA, but its not ready for prime time. Now at home I split my time between Linux, Solaris and Windows. Which I use depends on what I'm doing and who its for.

i'm a fan

[xo0m]

i'm a big fan of microsoft for many reasons - and i know all you open source junkies are gonna hate me for this - but it gets the job done.

i'm not really that big into configuring every little aspect of the operating system, etc, etc, etc, its just more of a convenience thing.

it all depends on what you want out of a computer. if you are the type to compile and configure every little thing, then i guess *nix would be the OS for you.

i, on the other hand, use computers for convenience (and thank god for win2k/XP cuz win9x was disastrous)...i honestly don't see how linux (for home users) is "convenient." sure its pretty "convenient" when it comes to the corporate world, but as a home user, it just is not all that practical. especially if i'm not the only one using the computer. however, i tip my hat to those distros out there that try to provide a very user friendly experience (redhat, mandrake, etc).

I use MS because I'm in an MS-only shop...

[crazyphilman]

But, and I know this is going to get me flamed, there's another thing. In the year and a half I've been in this job, I've found out that the Microsoft tools I'm using are really not that bad. Back in my dot-com Java days, I figured VB was a fate worse than death. It's not. It's pretty ugly at times, sure, but it's got a lot of nice points to it. I can whip up an application in no time at all, for one thing. I can integrate web sites, client-server components, MTS components, and databases with ease. It really is a piece of cake working with this stuff. And, I think a lot of the Linux-only guys miss this basic truth. When it comes to developer's tools, Microsoft is truly on the ball.

Why aren't there equivalent, GPL'ed tools for Linux yet? I don't mean "functional" I mean equivalent. Sure, some of the Java IDEs are nice, but most of them run kinda slow, don't they? And, you're at the mercy of the JVM running on any given Linux box. Your apps are not going to run blazingly fast, ok?

What's wrong with putting together something like Borland's C++ Builder and making it available, GPL, for Linux? Something where you have a GUI that lets you do UI design and then snap right into code, set properties, etc, without having to use multiple tools (like KDevelop and its UI designer, or am I thinking of a QT thing? It's been a while)? Maybe such an environment exists; if so I'd like to hear about it.

Basically, I think Linux needs to address this. Borland's making some strides, which is nice. I'm very interested in their new environment. But I'd much rather see something GPL'ed. Sun offers Forte, but it runs SO SLOOOOOOW on my machine. Give me something I can sink my teeth into.

I can't promise I'll use it at work -- that's not for me to say. But I'd use it at home.

Note: as far as games go, that's a non-starter with me. My gaming platform is the Playstation II. I can sack out on my plush futon, ten feet away from a big TV, and fight my heart out without getting carpal tunnel or wrecking my eyes. And, it plays DVD's too!

I originally posted this on desktoplinux.org

[walterbyrd]

but, since you asked:

1) Difficulty, and expense, in supporting two or more standards. Dual boot, emulators, running two machines, or whatever, is a pain. It also kills of your cost advantages. Businesses can't just hire MS support people, they would have to hire MS and Linux support people. Windows exclusive users don't have to do this.

2) Entrenchment. If I have a lot of Viseo files, and MS-Project files, then Linux isn't even an option. If I have already paid for the OS and applications, what's the point? It can be a pain to learn a new system, or application.

3) Confidence in big names. Names that don't support desktop Linux. Many individuals and businesses like to buy from trusted name brands, like Dell, HP/Compaq, Gateway, or Apple. These big name brands usually have the OS installed. You could remove the OS, but there is no cost advantage. Dell used to sell server systems with Linux pre-installed, I don't think even Dell does that anymore. Having the OS pre-installed can save a lot of time, especially since you don't have to worry about un-supported hardware. I think a lot of potential Linux users would be more confident in using Linux if they could go to CompUSA, Circut City, or BestBuy, and find a Linux system set up and ready to go. Then they could try it out and know for sure that it works okay.

4) ISP support. This applies more to individuals than businesses. A lot of ISPs may allow you to use Linux, but if call with a problem, no matter who is at fault, that ISP will probably tell you they don't support Linux. This is especially true with broadband.

5) No compelling reason to switch. No "killer" Linux applications or anything like that. I don't know of any "must have" desktop Linux application, that I can't find the equivalent for in Windows.

6) Convenience. I don't think many users want to have to order their OS from cheapbytes, or download. You can buy the full version from CompUSA, but you will bay about $80, thereby losing your cost advantage.

7) Reliability advantage is negligible at best. MS is improving. At least, in some ways. XP and 2000 seem stable enough - much improved from Windows 9.x.

8) Cost advantage is negligible at best. A PC with windows pre-installed only costs about $75 more. If you use that PC for three years, that comes to $25 a year. Just like Linux, there is tons of freeware for Windows, including OpenOffice and Mozilla.

9) Performance advantage is negligible at best. I get better desktop performance with MS. I suppose you boost performance by using trimmed down, relatively obscure, windows managers. But, you lose functionality.

10) Security advantage is negligible at best. Use decent AV software and your PC will be safe enough. Linux has also had virus attacks. The vast majority of security related problems is caused by user sloppiness, not an OS flaw.

You are right...

[agilen]

It does take time to learn. Its not a walk in the park, especially if you know your way around Windows the way most of us do.

I had always dabbled in Linux, but didn't make the switch for mostly those reasons. Then over the summer I had some time off, and I just decided, screw it, I'm sick of whining about windows going slow, crashing, etc. So I did. I spent a weekend installing Gentoo.

It took some time, but less than you think. And it was every bit worth it. Now, I am more productive, no more crashing computer, freezing apps that take 5 minutes to close (there are still freezing applications but a quick ps -aux then kill is far faster than doing ctrl-alt-del and dealing with all that crap) I can do file management tasks on the command line in half the time you can do in explorer.

Do yourself a favor, spend the time learning it, you'll be glad you did.

Windows--fine for web browsing

[g4dget]

I think Windows is a piece of junk as an operating system. But there is software that only runs on Windows, so I have a low-end Windows laptop sitting around (I can also dual-boot my Linux machine). One of the best applications (relatively speaking) on Windows is IE--it's a decent web browser, and since the Windows laptop isn't good for much else, I use it for web browsing.

Simple answer...

[Andy Smith]

I choose Windows over Linux because I think Windows is better.

And when I recently purchased a new computer I wanted to buy an iMac but after using one for a few hours I realised that OSX is basically an untidy, nonsensical wannabe, so I got a PC instead. I use WinXP and despite a few grumbles I'm happy with it.

This week I lost three days to a corrupted driver. I had to spend one day running diagnostic tests, a second day running multiple repair attempts, and a third day reinstalling from scratch. So after three days of cursing Microsoft, which OS would I say is the best? Windows. Because despite its faults, it does much more right than other OS's and much less wrong.

Configuration and Apps

[emarkp]

Several people have already commented on the apps situation (I have a few apps which only run on Windows, and there is no Linux substitute).

In windows (2000 and XP are what I run) I can right-click on nearly anything and configure it. How easy is it to change your display resolution and refresh rate on Linux? I've never seen anything that's easy. Configure your networking? Sure if you remember or know the GUI app or config files to do it, that works fine--but if you don't you're screwed.

I think Linux will have these features within 1 or 2 more cycles, and then I'll be ready to switch (with WINE for my windows-only apps).

Photoshop for Linux is possible, here's how.

[aussersterne]

Get ahold of Win4Lin.

It's cheap, it's stable, and it runs every version of Photoshop I've had to use, from 5 onward.

Don't worry about speed, either. I clock most of the effects as faster running in Win4Lin using Windows 98 SE than in native Windows 98 SE and the Windows desktop in Win4Lin (which runs in a Linux window) is snappier than native Windows 98 SE as well, I assume because of the much better filesystem caching of Linux.

I also use Win4Lin to run MS Office. It's a great application and it won't cost you a bank!

I have the opposite experience

[ubernostrum]

I've been using Linux on the desktop for two and a half years, with very few glitches. The vast majority of things work out of the package. The rest take only a bit of tweaking (MPlayer excepted). To me, your situation is atypical for Linux, and makes me wonder what distro/version you were running and when; nothing gets me more riled than people who complain about, say, X configuration when they haven't used a Linux distro since 1999.

Re:I have the opposite experience

[ubernostrum]

Then you're going to have to accept that you're pretty atypical...what kind of hardware/setup are you trying to run on and what sort of specific problems do you have?

And I've used every version of Windows from 3.11 for Workgroups up through XP; I still prefer Linux on my desktop.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[GreyWolf3000]

First off, I compiled KDE from scratch using prelinking and a good amount of optimizations. I also compiled Mosfet's hi-perfomance liquid style engine. The ui looks better than Windows, but that's not what we're debating. I haven't installed Windows on this and never will, so I can't compare, but KDE runs fine for me.

As for the pre-emptive patch, that doesn't mean Linux is slow, it merely increases how often the kernel processes messages, so for example the 'networking' latency involved with moving windows around in X is reduced. Is this the patch you're talking about? It did get merged into the devel source tree iirc. If not, you know a nice kernel buzzword to impress people on Slashdot with (but speed is not pertinent here; merely KDE not being a Windows clone).

Anyways, your point (which you now claim I bolstered) was that KDE is trying to be like Windows, but fails because it's too slow. I showed it to be untrue first of all because KDE is made to look like Windows in distros, and can really look and behave like almost anything you want it to. That was enough to show that the point was moot. As for the slowness, I didn't seriously address it beyond giving my testimonial, since speed is relative to the machine and user. KDE is fast *for me*, but maybe that's because I have 512mb ram and 2 1ghz p3s.

Your post then goes on to refute my consideration of slowness, because I did not intend to construct an argument on that (nor could I effectively). You don't even mention the real meat of my original post. You took what you felt you could argue easily and ran with it.

Even if I were to give up on the speed thing, the fact remains that saying KDE is a slow Windows look-alike is complete fucking bullshit because KDE is not a Windows look-alike.

Just one more opinion...

[dargaud]

I'm a software engineer and sysadmin. On my desk I have a G4 with OS-X, a Gateway with Win2000 and no less than a 4 processor SGI 2100. Oh, and also a Linux box used only as a server. Guess wich one I use ? The PC. Win2k is, once configured properly, an excellent no-nonsense user interface, and once completed with Apache, ActivePerl and Cygwin there's nothing missing.

The Mac is a waste of time: software that you can't configure because you don't have any damn option or it's too 'experimental'... Sugary sweet interface that makes it unusable (semi tranparent windows ?!? Anti aliased [=blured] fonts !?!?!? are they on acid or what ?)

The SGI and linux boxes are good for computations, grepping log files, servers and such but... user pleasure is just not there. Windows come with long delays and plenty of other UIR little things that tell you that it's just not quite right.

Anyway, that was just one more opinion.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Guspaz]

If you run a server on your gaming rig, and the server goes down because your game crashes, don't be surprised. When you are using a computer for gaming, it's supposed to be the only thing you're doing on your machine, for a variety of reasons.

3D games crash computers. They do it on ALL platforms with no exceptions. This can be caused by either hardware OR software reasons, and in very few cases is the fault of the OS itself.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[fenix down]

Holy shit, he's a fucking gov't supporter! Burn his fucking civilized ass! Jesus fucking Christ. I'm sorry you feel it's just so terribly fucking fascist to try and maintain reasonable competition in one of your country's major industries.

It doesn't fucking matter if they haven't hired assassins to shoot at you personally yet, they're still the dominating force in an industry the livelihoods of millions of people depend on. They don't have to be wrong. They're a publicly held company, which means it makes decisions based on the extracted greed of 100 million stockholders. It's called thinking when you try and steer them so that they don't end up in a situation where it's likely those decisions would be bad for your fucking citizens.

There's a reason it's called a remedy and not a punishment. They weren't punishing IBM or Standard fucking Oil, they were trying to keep industries from going to fucking shit on a waterslide. One of the "gov't" jobs is to keep your ass happy. That's why they pay some fucking attention to the companies the country runs off of. Wheather you like it or not, MS runs battleships. MS runs 90% of the computers our economy is based on. Just like IBM did. Just like Bell did with phones, and just like fucking Standard Oil did with the fucking oil that keeps Wisconsin from freezing to death between September and May. It's called being a fucking moron when you just ignore a company that could theoretically trigger a fucking recession all on it's own, whether people like their products or not.

What keeps me on Windows

[Robotech_Master]

Games (Starcraft, Half-Life, The Sims)

DVDs (until someone comes up with a regionhack for the Linux Netstream 2000 drivers, or else makes Ogle play DVDs without interlacing artifacts)

My cheap little Yahoo digital camera toy

KaZaa (yeah, giFT works great, but it doesn't have very many people using it compared to KaZaa, which means I'm more likely to find the stuff I want there)

MS Word (to edit my resume; I haven't yet been able to find a Linux WP that will work on my system and read/save MS correctly)

But I use Linux for everything else. Thank goodness for dual boot!

Here's my list.

[Mustang Matt]

Looks like everyone pretty much beat me to it for this thread so I doubt this will get read, but here goes...

Before I start, let me say that I WANT to switch to linux and I'm almost there.

I should also say that all of my servers except one are running some form of linux (usually SuSE). I keep one IIS server around for customers that need ASP and because I started on the Microsoft side.

Alright here goes...
1. The single biggest reason that I haven't switched 100% to linux is driver support. Windows has done this right, you plug in hardware and download a driver or pop in a CD and walah, your hardware works. I know this isn't 100% true, but it's at least 90% true. Linux hardware support has grown leaps and bounds over the past couple of years, but the problem is when you run into problems... If you've got an odd ball network card or other device that just doesn't want to work under linux. I think over time, companies will release linux drivers at the same time, but hopefully some of them will learn to release linux source for their drivers so that their products will rock.

2. Speed... Windows XP on my old 650 MHz Sony VAIO w/256 mb of ram runs circles around KDE for the most part. I've never tried Gnome just because I don't know how to easily switch using SuSE's built in management (yast). Anyone want to point me in the right direction for a how-to?

2. Macromedia Homesite... I really love how easy it is to use Macromedia homesite and have a nice easy global search and replace tool that doesn't require me to learn regular expressions but allows them if I know them. The color coding and various other features make it my ASP/PHP script editor of choice. Maybe it would run under Wine, but I want native speed and stability and macromedia hasn't announced a linux version yet.
Zend Development Environment is the closest thing I've found that's acceptable but ironically I've never run it under linux.

3. I like Outlook Express. It's fast, it's easy, it has all the features I need (except the ability to disable html, but you can buy noHTML for $20). I would use Mozilla but it can't tie multiple email addresses to one identity. I found the feature request for this on bugzilla, but nothing has really happened with it yet. Once Mozilla gets that single feature, it will replace the Opera/Outlook Express combo I use now.

4. Gnucash is getting better, but there are a whole lot of things I need to do (Quicken) that it can't do such as recurring transactions and loan calculations.

5. Usability... There are times when things just don't work as expected. Windows software generally costs money, but most software works as expected (most of the time.)

A couple of the things I hate are that when I hit abort and nothing happens. Different applications behave this way. Sometimes I have this problem in windows as well, but on a slower linux system it's terrible!

Also, sometimes I'll be doing things like running GNUcash's QIF import and suddenly the window I was working with gets set behind the one I was formerly working with... Little stuff like that drives me bonkers.

I can't get Gnomemeeting to work... Ah, the list goes on and on. I like linux a lot, especially for server stuff, but on the desktop, it has potential and it really can do some great stuff (and the price is certainly right.) but I can't quite switch over yet...

Re:Here's my list.

[FLoWCTRL]

> 1. driver support
Linux users have become accustomed to checking for drivers before they buy the product... As you say though, support continues to improve.

> 2. Macromedia
You say Zend is acceptable...

> 3. OE
Check out Evolution (www.ximian.com).

> 4. Quicken
Several business people have told me they'd dump MS-ware in their office if it wasn't for Quicken. Its too bad Intuit doesn't port it, but eventually GNUcash will mature enough that people can switch.

> 5. things not working as expected
I've never used Windows as a primary OS, and this is one of the reasons why! The issue of usability is probably pretty subjective, but I can offer an anecdote: I presently support ~50 UNIX users and ~10 Win2k users. 80% of support calls are from the 10 Windows users, and it is usually MS software confusing them. Its mostly quirky error messages and weird work-arounds to get things to work they way they want, and of course interoperability issues due to the "embraced and extended" protocols, even between different versions of MS products. All of these people have been using Windows for years, too. New UNIX users often have a bunch of questions when they start, then I rarely hear from them again.

Cheers.

Re:Here's my list.

[dvNull]

If you are a homesite user, you can use quanta on *nix ..

dvNuLL

Yup.

[SaDan]

Gotta have my games. Empire Earth, Mechwarrior, MechCommander, Delta Force, etc.

I use Linux everywhere at work and at home. All of my systems are either strictly Linux or at least dual-boot. I won't give up Windows until there's a decent amount of games I can live with for Linux.

Ease of use.

[Guspaz]

For me the big item is ease of use. Most things are way more complicated in Linux, and the lack of a central standards organization is a serious cause of that.

Linux has a long long way to go for usability before the majority of users can consider it a viable option. Many people couldn't even install Linux, let alone use it. Linux has made great strides when it comes to ease of use, but as far as I'm concerned it's still back in the late 80s as far as use go (Not talking about how nice KDE/Gnome looks. That has nothing to do with it)

CHEAPER in terms of time too.

[prisoner]

Title says it all. Who wants to spend hours trying to get shit to work when you could just intall and play under windows. I think this is the most over-looked piece of the pie. Not all of us have endless hours to piss away trying to make things work. I use linux where it makes sense, for everything else, I use windows.

Re:CHEAPER in terms of time too.

[Some Dumbass...]

CHEAPER in terms of time too. [That] says it all. Who wants to spend hours trying to get shit to work when you could just intall and play under windows.

I have to wonder, though, whether arguments like this really boil down to "lack of experience with Linux".

Now I'm not trying to say anything about you personally. This isn't intended as an insult. For all I know you may know more about Linux than I do. I just wonder if Linux is harder for most people simply because they were brought up on Windows, not because of the complexity of Linux (or of Linux distros?) itself, and if this then causes them to say that it's harder to do things on Linux. After all, people who have used Linux more would say exactly the opposite.

I suspect that this is true. I'm pretty knowledgeable about Linux - I've used it for about 4 years at home, and quite a bit at work too. Recently, I installed W2K Pro on a spare system to mess around with. Guess what? I ran into plenty of problems of the "not knowing how to do things" type. For example, since this system was hooked up to my DSL line, I tried to set up the built-in firewall. I seem to remember trying for a long time to figure out where it would let you make rules for outgoing packets. I also seem to remember having problems selecting multiple ports for one rule (Okay, it was a year ago, and my memory's a bit fuzzy). Of course, I knew that there were better firewall products out there, but to figure out which one would work best for me (would run well on a near-minimum specs system, would have all the features I wanted, etc.) I was going to have to "piss away a lot of time" doing research. Note that I can set up an iptables firewall from scratch fairly quickly.

My point is, of course, that what people are really saying when they complain about the difficulty of Linux is actually the old "mindshare" problem. Much like most users were probably baffled by the difference between "User" and "Administrator" accounts in newer Windows versions, almost everyone is baffled by Linux at first.

This is still a real problem for Linux. I'm not suggesting that it isn't. Instead, I'm trying to say that the whole "having endless hours to piss away trying to make things work" complaint might not be about Linux itself. Linux is relatively easy for people who are used to it. Rather, it's a familiarity issue. Most people are used to Windows, not Linux or Unix, and even with all the hand-holding which newer Linux distros do (esp. Mandrake and SUSE), it's still foreign to most folks. Perhaps that's what makes it hard, not Linux itself.

Re:CHEAPER in terms of time too.

[Sycraft-fu]

Well, having used both quite a bit, I can say that for most simple, Joe Average User type activities, windows is just as easy or even significantly easier.
For example:

Upgrading to the latest nVidia driver.

In Linux, download the GLX file, find and download the necessary kernel file from a list of over 30 choices, check for dependencies, install both rpms using the command line, edit XF86Config to change Driver "nv" to "nvidia", and remove a couple other lines.

In Windows, choose which OS I have from three choices (NT4 or 95/98/ME or 2000/XP), download the one and only driver file, click on it and let it auto install.

I mention this since I've done both fairly frequently lately. For software, espically games, it is very often much teh same. In Windows, you insert the CD and follow the onscreen directions. In Linux there is often some fiddling and such to get it to run.

From your average, non-computer literate user's perspective, Windows is a whole lot easier. The driver install process is simple enough that even a novice can handle it. The driver install in Linux was complex enough that I screwed it up the first time because I acidentally clicked on the wrong kernel file.

As to your firewall problem, I'm not supprised. 2000 doesn't really HAVE a firewall to speak of, just very, veyr simple IP filtering. You need to get a 3rd party firewall like Tiny Personal Firewall. XP's firewall is very easy to use, though simplistic (on purpose).

Re:CHEAPER in terms of time too.

[IamTheRealMike]

Actually on SuSE (and a few others) if it detects you have the nVidia drivers it'll go and download the correct RPM and install it for you automatically. On Redhat you just install the RPMS from their site and use the graphical display config tool to pick "nvidia" from the dropdown, ok, so it's not as automatic as SuSE but no text files are involved.

Re:CHEAPER in terms of time too.

[Some Dumbass...]

I believe his point was it's easier to install a Windows game on a Windows machine than have to mess around trying to get it to install and work properly on WineX.

You think that's hard, try installing a Linux game on Windows! ;)

Seriously, though, Windows and Linux games are probably of roughly equal difficulty to install on the platform that they're designed for. Installing a Windows game on Linux should be harder for obvious reasons. Having said that, there are programs like the WineX Game Installer which are supposed to make the process a lot easier. I have no idea if they're any good, though.

I see a lot of replies

[asv108]

Stating that they use a mac, but how is Apple a better company that Microsoft? OSX is not free and surely Apple has been just as protective if not more when it comes to it's intellectual property and Trademarks. People seem to be reading too much Wired, buying a product from a particlur company doesn't mean your part of some "movement."

Are people here really stuck on 1 platform?

[EvilStein]

I've got 3 desktop machines attached to a KVM. I use whatever one I happened to be using at the time to read Slashdot.
Sometimes I was playing with the XP box to work out issues with Mac OS X Server/Samba.. I'll browse from that box for a while.
Sometimes I'll play with Mozilla on the SuSE box.
Other times I'll be using the Mac OS X box to goof around with.

But honestly, the reason I use XP these days is because it's on the fastest machine I own. A blazing 1.3ghz.

Mac OS X on a beige G3/233 with 192mb RAM and stock video is..well, it's kind of like smacking yourself with a shovel, except a bit less painful.

Anybody want to add to the "Buy Jon a new G4 fund? PayPal me sum cash at drstein@mac.com!" :P

Re: same here

[Kargan]

If there were as many games for Linux as Windows, I would happily throw all my M$ software away forever.

But there's no monopoly, oh no. It's not for that reason that every single game that's meant to be played on a computer comes out for M$ but a tiny fraction of those for Linux. No, Sir.

what to do about the proprietary format problem

[xeno]

It's the file formats. Not the apps themselves, but the goddamned proprietary formats. I use Linux at home and my wife & son use OS X, but I'm stuck on W2K at work because of complex Word documents and inscrutable Visio files. Just a few minutes ago, I overheard the document production manager for my company (responsible for coordinating big bids/proposals) insisting that she needed Office XP because there might be subtle errors in some of the complex Word XP documents that she was trying to open with Word 2k. Now if I had my druthers, the answer would be a resounding "no" and those who were producing documents and failing to save as RTF or other slightly-more-open formats would be thrown from the roof onto pikes, where they would hang impaled as an example to others.

But that's just me. I'm more concerned than the average geek about the long-term viability of my company and the ability to retain knowledge over the course of many years. Sure, I downloaded and use OpenOffice. But there are idosyncracies within proprietary documents that just don't translate well, and it's difficult to convince others in the office to save-as to anything but the latest default format. They're just too lazy, and don't have the foresight to understand that saving in the format-of-the-day is bad for knowledge retention. Thet're more concerned about kewl toys and not looking behind-the-times. Even my local IT lead referred to the Office XP upgrade as a "tithe," unable to cite even one functional requirement that the latest upgrade would satisfy. The result is that we waste money on unnecessary app upgrades. And with them come the recursive traps that are proprietary data formats.

Here's a first step: Proliferate open, fully disclosed, non-patented formats. What should those formats be? The OO XML formats are a good start. The Microsoft XML formats are contaminated with proprietary external reference bits and are a very bad start. I've read postings (a good one on OReilly.net) to the effect that open file formats ought to be required for government procurement. Bravo; that's a nice start. But the immediate obstacle is a practical one, and a very real one at that: You and everyone else in your office needs to get work done, and any switch must be unobtrusive.

So let's embrace and extend the Microsoft dime-bag model. Remember (for those old enough) how someone sent you a MSWord document that you couldn't open, and refered you to the downloadable MSWord Viewer? And when you got a few more .DOC files you bought into it and asked for a copy of Word? Let's use the same method to wean people off the bad stuff and onto the good stuff. It needs to be trivially easy for people to save and work in open formats. First, the OpenOffice developers need to write application plug-ins for Word, Excel, and Powerpoint (on Windows and Mac) that set/enforce an open format as default. Motivated IT folks can install the plug-in everywhere, and let MSOffice's auto-convert feature hide the gory details of what's going on. Then we need a compact viewer program (or set of programs) that are quick downloads -- preferably under 1MB, and available on every notable platform. Remember, MS got a hell of a lot of market penetration through Word Viewer, Excel Viewer, and the like. Pretty soon the office will be using open formats with minimal pain within MS Office . Someone outside the office complain about open formats? Send 'em a tiny open viewer program. They whine about editing it? Give 'em the open format converter plug-in and a link to the OO.org site for a full download. But...

But don't try to displace MS Office with OpenOffice or anything else. Let Microsoft do that. Let the users come to their own conclusions based on experience. If you have enough people using open formats and there's an obvious alternative, you need only wait for Microsoft to come asking for tithes in the form of license renewal payments. Don't spend the time and effort to try and rip it out roots and all; let it whither and die in the ground.

Jon "open formats to the people"

Why I still use Windows

[ewieling]

I use Linux as my main OS, but I still have VMWare with Windows running inside of it for two reasons: pcAnyhwere (no, vnc just doesn't work as well or as fast) and Internet Exploder (for the occasional site I want to go to that requires it). I also run Windows as the only OS on my laptop. Now that I think about it, I'm not sure why I still run it on the laptop.....

Why I use windows

[nelsonal]

I am using windows 2000 currently, and have been a windows user for almost all of my computing experience. I keep using it for several reasons, but primarily because MS gave me the licensed disk, a rep came to our campus and passed them out to students, the meetings were only advertized in the CS wing of the campus, but they never asked about majors. So this removed one of the major advantages of Linux over windows, cost. Win2k is more than stable enough for my needs, and I haven't had any major security problems yet, although I'm certainly not advertizing my IP just in case.
I have run Linux in the past, even on my main computer, and while it was an excellent OS, star office 5.2 for linux was much slower than the windows version, it was un useable on my P133, which was my only PC at the time. I needed an office suite, of at least that capability, si I had to switch back. I realize that Open office and SO 6 are probably much better now but really like Win2k.
I like it because I play the occasional game, and most of them seem to run much better on Windows, if on anything else. It also comes in handy at work, where we use Windows, and I end up being the quick problem guy, our tech is usually busy, and I'm next door, so my officemates, usually pop in to get some help. I do run Linux on my second PC, but I don't boot it as often as the Windows one.
In the future, I am thinking that my next PC will either be an old workstation, hopefully an Alpha (21264 if I can find one) or a Mac, MacOS just looks nice, although HP's Power stuff gets pretty cheap on the used market too. If those hammer's, or Opeterons, or what ever are cheap enough I might build something based on that instead. If I run an old workstation, I will probably have to run the UNIX flavor that their supposed to, or maybe BSD, I don't know about Linux on the PA stuff, but Linux on the alpha's works pretty well. A Mac would run OS X, of course, and the hammers would probably get my Win2k again, maybe linux.
If I do any server level stuff, I am thinking about a client server level system in my next place. Silent, flash or similar clients in strategic places with a main server somewhere, and possibly one real PC in a den or something, the server will probably run Linux.
Those are just my current leanings, and they could change tomorrow with new information.

troubleshooting other people boxes.

[clarkie.mg]

I do support for people who fuck up their windows box. Often, windows can even fuck up by itself.

For example, someone called me telling his XP won't boot. The error was : "unable to mount boot partition". Of course, the safe mode won't boot either, and booting from the CD won't work. I did boot at last but NO WAY this could have been done by a basic user.

Thank you micro$oft, more easy money.

So i use windoze to keep updated about what's happening with their OS. But all my data is on ext2fs.

-- number of XP forced reboots today : 2

Linux as a Time Sink

[dzigavertov]

Some of you may be like me, having a mixed network at your decorating-neglected urban manor. I can sit in the same chair, use the same monitor, and carpel-tunnelate myself on the same keyboard and mouse to use either XP or Mandrake (please feel free to flame me on this, I chose that distro was because I liked the star in their logo). Mostly, I work on the XP. The key word here being work, because I simply cannot accomplish anything on the linux box.

(Now, before you start cracking your knuckles in anticipation of crafting a response, please, read on.)

This is not to say that Angelica (the Linux box) is unstable or packed to the brim with nearly every possible application for my needs or even lacking an easy to use interface. The truth is that there is just too much tinkering possible with Linux.

How many times have you intended to play a single game of solitaire before returning to your coding only to discover that five hours later you have somehow decided that the best use of your time was to configure an apache server so that your (meaning only you, for there are no other home occupants that might find it useful) network would have an intranet?

Does it really help your productivity when a voice in the back of your mind is urging you to figure out how to change the block colors in L Breakout 2?

Granted, Angelica doesn't have all the software I need, she loads programs slower than an Apple II E preparing the cut scenes for Space Quest 2 (cursed Mandrake), and my windows machine appear on each other's network neighborhoods easier than two GameBoys linked for Mario Tennis - but ultimately it is the tinker factor that forces me to work in XP.

I'd love to write more, but I have to go fiddle with my samba config.

Why don't you use PDF for your CV

[clarkie.mg]

I use PDF file format for my CV, it's easily readable by acrobat reader.

Audio apps needed for Linux/FreeBSD!!!

[MsGeek]

Yes! This is a BIG problem.

Nobody makes pro-quality apps for audio production that run on Linux!!!

Sonic Foundry make some bad-ass apps, man...Sound Forge, ACID Pro, Vegas Audio, Vegas Video.

There is NOTHING like them on Linux yet. Write me something that works like ACID and I will happily remove one more machine of mine from the Redmond Collective.

Oh, the hypocrisy

[uradu]

Here are the great throngs screaming Open Source, Open Source, and then they ditch Windows for Mac OS X. I guess Apple in their minds must be a more benevolent dictator; he's giving them cake to eat instead of bread. Guys, this is Steve Jobs we're talking about, and while he certainly has charisma, he (and Larry and Scott) would like nothing more than to be Bill Gates in terms of marketshare. Apple will flirt with OS until it's served its purpose (to drag all the OS-praising sheep from Windows over to the Mac), and then it's back to the dungeons and the flogging. Kind of like the Mac clone days.

Nonsense

[spitzak]

If the problem was PhotoShop and fonts, then people would all be using Macs, or have no trouble going from Windows to Macs.

Also the "WM" is completely different than what does the fonts. Part of the problem with Linux is that too many things do the fonts, but the Window Manager is one of the things that does NOT do fonts. You probably mean the X server, though a plausable solution to fonts is to make most of the work (and all of the potential problems) in a user-level library and not in the server.

Still need HTTP-friendly GUI's

[Tablizer]

Microsoft lost the browser war...... Marc Andreesen's vision of web-enabled applications making the OS irrelevant has become a reality

I somewhat disagree. What is missing from browsers is a true GUI protocol. HTML+DOM+JavaScript is a tangled mess. HTML forms are usually fine for lite B-to-C, but B-to-B really want GUI's so that VB/PowerBuilder/Delphi-type custom biz apps can run GUI's through HTTP.

Contenders include the likes of XWT, XUL, and SCGUI, which use various levels of medium-to-thin client approaches (I hope I got those acronyms right).

When something like these finally gets accepted and perfected, then GUI browsers will be able to kill a lot more OS-specific stuff.

Crashability

[djkitsch]

I've been running XP for the past 6 months on my laptop, as it supports pretty much every design package I could possibly need, and if not there's a very close substitute. I've been running it now for about a month without rebooting, only going into standby during the night, and using it virtually solidly from 9am to 10pm, and it hasn't crashed once. When the odd app does crash (and I must be the only user in the Northern Hemesphere for whom CorelDraw *hasn't* crashed at least once a day), protected memory spaces keep everything running nice and smoothly. Last month I installed Mandrake (whatever the latest build is - I forget), and it took me 2 days to get the X server running, another 24 hours to get Apache Tomcat up, and then every time someone accessed the server pages, Tomcat crashed, taking any running X servers with it, and for some odd reason restarting the machine. I installed Win2k, Apache and Tomcat on my server in 35 minutes, configured them and left it running, and uptime's now going on 3 months with no problems. I understand that ISPs use Linux machines for stability, speed etc. on a large scale, but those are my reasons.

My Job

[theolein]

I too did time in a dotcom and now I'm a sysadmin in a small building company. I am a big Mac OSX fan, but although I would have loved to have bought a new PowerBook but although I managed to push one Linux server through for our CMS, but apart from that and our Novell file servers (thank God for NDS and NDPS. They prove that there are some really good alternatives to Windows server side) we are a complete Windows shop. I have a Dell Laptop with XP Pro and on the whole (apart from the ridiculously high native LCD resolution) I am very happy with it. Every single application runs on it. The Office stuff, the Novell admin stuff, the whole trip. This is why I use Windows.

But I miss Mac OSX a lot with it's cool mix of simple, well designed, good looking GUI and Unix core with a Terminal and shell a click away. My next laptop will agian be a Mac. I don't hate Windows, but Mac OSX is more fun and less pain.

This is my solution to the dilemma

[carlmenezes]

I want my PC to work and to work well. I want security to be good without constant security updates and REBOOTS most of all...and I want to be able to run as many apps as I can without noticing a slowdown. Windows cannot do that for me. Even XP...the moment you even try to open PhotoShop things start slowing down. I hate the file system getting fragmented and constant defrags...need something better...What I need is a more EFFICIENT operating system...hence I switched to Linux.

I'm now running Linux as the main OS. I do miss the great 3d Games on Windows, but I figure I'll just get me a PS2 or a GameCube (not an XBox :) ) and use that for the cool games till the market for linux games opens up enough so that developers release new games with Linux versions.

Hell, I don't even feel like playing games that much anymore...there's so much great stuff to learn in Linux...so much to customize...I'm like a kid in a tub of toys. I love the speed and stability of Linux and the fact that it is already more secure than Windows by default. So my major concerns are taken care of...but I can now run more applications simultaneously...the CPU usage is distributed more evenly....I can chop and change anything I like...most of the software I need comes pre-installed...I HAVE BEAUTIFIED THE LINUX DESKTOP TO MAKE IT EASIER ON THE EYE - very important that....and now, in my opinion, it looks, runs and FEELS better than Xp did, albeit after days of tweaking. So I love it.

So right now, as a former Windows power user, this is what I feel Linux is missing:
1) Great 3d Games
2) A Universal Partition tool that's the equivalent of something like Partition Magic.
3) Improvements in the menu structure and GUI - a user shouldn't have to hack for hours or days. it would be better if it looked great out of the box.

And since we're talking beautification, kudos to RedHat 8.0 - it's a step in the right direction.

I second the motion Re:X has kept me away from ..

[supabeast!]

I love X from a sysadmin perspective, but...

X is too much of a pain in the ass for desktop users. XF86Config files are way over most people's heads. Font configuration is a nightmare, and without some tweaking fonts look like shit in X. To really get Linux on the desktops of Lusers, X has to be replaced by something entirely intended for desktops.

Apps and Games, what else?

[drinkypoo]

Plus, there's no real reason to switch yet.

Holy shit, cries of outrage rise from the populace like the smell of mold from a locker room. There ARE reasons, but I'm talking about what the OS can do for me. I run Windows XP Pro with Service Pack 1, and all the updates. I use a combination of cygwin and X-Win32 to provide myself a fairly capable POSIX/X/Unixish environment.

Now I do use Linux for my network gateway, which is an athlon 700 (hey, they were cheap as hell) with 128mb SDRAM and a 9gb LVD disk (had it lying around). This runs gentoo, and iptables is the greatest thing ever, as long as you have a tool to configure it. Doing iptables at the command line is unbearably tedious. It has a shitload of options, though, so pretty much anything you want to do in the way of routing or firewalling is supported.

But look at what I can do on windows without crashing the system (often) :) or completely bogging down; I have a tabbed browser embedding IE (CrazyBrowser), I frequently run vmware, I have photoshop, pagemaker, lightwave 3d... Often many of them at the same time. I have three xterms open. I'm running Kazaa Lite nonstop. Sometimes I do all of that (well not photoshop, pagemaker, and lightwave) plus rip/encode a SVCD from DVD, and play Unreal Tournament. Anyone who says that Windows XP is a joke OS is just wrong, it's real. Get over it.

Now let's run down the line of things that it's nice to have on a desktop box that XP has that make it real; SMP, Journaling Filesystem, a flexible Volume Manager, Security including ACLs... It also comes with a bunch of crap that you expect to find on a linux box, like a web server (though I use Apache on Win32 with mod_php, not IIS with some ISAPI crap... I stay away from IIS but that's a whole other story) and a ntp client and so on. It really doesn't suck so very much, it's gotten much faster, it has really slick font antialiasing which works everywhere and antialiases based on font hints like it should. Now the only problem is that windows is not free as in beer or as in speech...

Follow Up...

[Psx29]

Let me Just reply to some of the responses I got:

First, I would like to say that I do not like Macs much to begin with, although the OS is fine in its own right it is not really an option I want to look into. Second, the main programs I was referring to as "file sharing" are "WinMX" and "Winny" which I use because of the Japanese user base. Both are only for Windows (As the names suggest). And Third, directed at idou more specifically, is that with Win2k and Windows XP you can switch the language with a simple reboot so you do not need multiple OS's anymore.

Re:Follow Up...

[Mongoose]

Hey, maybe you should try Debian... you can even install any any lanaguge you like. The 3.0preX installs prompt you to chose which language you want to install in in that native langauge. Also with KDE/Gnome the language keyboard support doesn't require rebooting at all. You click a little applet in your panel and select which one you want. In fact with newer releases you can mix language input using UTF-8 even in text entry dialogs.

If you use Knoppix it'll 'autodetect' all your hardware and allow you to run KDE/Gnome environment while you install it.

Maybe next time you should actually try a distro out before complaining it doesn't work.

Re:Follow Up...

[Psx29]

Also with KDE/Gnome the language keyboard support doesn't require rebooting at all.

Now that sounds really great actually! Your advice is very welcome, which is why comments like "Maybe next time you should actually try a distro out before complaining it doesn't work." are really not neccessary. I have indeed tried several distros and have gotten input working with just Japanese, or just Chinese and I never knew there was a utility like this. I'll have to look into it now

Don't forget Visual Basic

[duck_prime]

I know everybody *hates* VB, and sneers at the people who use it (the more thoughtful amongst the slashcrowd sneer at people who use *only* VB, but whatever).

I have never, ever understood this. When I graduated from college, I was still twitching and gibbering from writing Motif apps for assignments. The real reason Unix people prefer command-line tools is that Motif apps are just not worth it to develop. ;)

Then I spent a little time writing Windows apps against the good ol' C api. That sucked too. Remember those massive switch statements in your event handler?

Then they came out with VB 1.0. It was jaw-droppingly awesome. Don't any of you remember, ALL YOU HAD TO DO WAS DRAW YOUR @#$(*&(@*#& WINDOWS AND THE APP WAS THERE. Double-click on a button, and open an editor to write its callback function.

And you know what, it's still true! Sure, if you're writing a device driver it's not going to help much. Sure, sure, obey Joel's law and call out to C where appropriate, but if you need a good solid UI for your program, why the heck not?

People complain about how any moron can slap together a crappy VB program that kind of works. Isn't that kind of the point? Wouldn't Linux, or *BSD, or (ahem) GEOS have benefitted hugely from VB or something like it?

Debugging support

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Not Open Source, but there's always Borland Kylix, which now supports C++. Its debugger has all of the features you'd expect.

Does it? I haven't used anything else seriously for a while, but at the last count, Visual Studio's debugger was comfortably ahead of the opposition on useful features. Granted that in their quest to .NETify everything they've stuffed up a couple of the basics for vanilla C++ programmers like me, but still, the little things make all the difference. For example, in the VS debugger, you have the AUTOEXP.DAT file to customise how variables of user-defined types are displayed. Does the Kylix debugger have such things these days?

(This is a serious question, not a troll. I've always quite liked Borland's dev apps, but haven't used C++ Builder seriously for a good 3-4 years now, whereas I've had the latest and greatest(?) Visual Studio at work all the time. I'd like to know if Borland really have caught up.)

Re:What about PostgreSQL?

[cscx]

Than what? PostgreSQL is pretty good from what I've heard, I am just sick and tired of all these hoser zealots running their mouths about "M$ and Oracle suX0rs - use MySQL!" MySQL simply can't handle the load that these other databases can, and fraudlently claiming that it can perform equally or as well as other, more mature database software is just ridiculous.

Because I know Windows

[Guppy06]

Alright, so maybe Windows isn't the most stable operating system in the world. But, after too many years of using a Microsoft operating system of one form or another, I know how to fix 95% of the problems that come up.

And while it's not exactly MacOS, things have a tendancy to work on Windows. Half the times I've tried Linux I found myself sifting through half a dozen HOWTOs when all I want to do is set up a freakin' dial-up internet account. Which pretty much won't work anyway because almost nobody uses modems with on-board controllers any more.

As I saw someone else mention one time, I need an operating system, not a hobby. Mandrake is nice and all, but setting up my hardware still requires a lot more than just sticking in the driver CD and installing it. I'm not going to bug the one or two friends I have who know Linux because I know how annoyed I get when people expect me to fix their Windows problems for them ("Fdisk, format, reinstall and leave me the Q@$#^ alone!"). And I can't be bothered to try to learn how to write my own drivers when all I want to do is play Warcraft III, advocacy be damned.

I have an excuse

[Trinition]

So I can convert to a Mac for $999? How much does it cost me to not convert to a Mac? $0.

'nuff said.

Re:I have an excuse

[jpt.d]

It won't cost you anything not to switch now, but at upgrade time it will be re-evaluated much higher than $0. It might even be cheaper if you need to upgrade your entire computer. God created the apple not to touch, the Devil tempted you - nobody likes somebody that always plays by the rulez.

Re:I have an excuse

[jonnythan]

How much will it cost you to learn not to split infinitives?

Re:I have an excuse

[Dun Malg]

How much will it cost you to learn not to split infinitives?

Actually, according to the Chicago Manual of Style (the traditional keeper of such rules in the editing trade), splitting infinitives is now permitted. The prohibition originated with stuffy linguistic purists who valued syntactic ideals over clarity. Since clear communication is the real purpose of language, as of the 14th edition of the CMS the prohibition has been expunged.
(you think you know grammar nazis? I'm married to an editor!)

Exactly the problem: I want everything *now*

[Anonymous Brave Guy]

Most distros come with automout support, too, so you don't have to manually mount your removable media.

This is exactly the problem: you think it's impressive that most Linux distros have now reached the point of overcoming a problem that Windows never even had.

While I understand your perspective as someone who presumably likes Linux, a quick look down this thread shows how willing Linux enthusiasts are to overlook things that would put most potential converts off in a heartbeat:

• I do not want to run Neverwinter Nights in a few weeks, maybe. I wanted to run it six months ago, when it came out.
• I do not want to buy a new hardware modem and a PostScript printer. My Winmodem and GDI printer already work quite happily.
• I do not want to go through X Configuration Hell(TM) to get fonts that look almost as good as Windows. I want fonts that look as good as Windows, out of the box.
• I do not want to rely on an office suite that exports something 95% compatible with Word. I want a Word format document, because that's what's running at work. No, PDF will not do as an alternative.
• I do not want to run Mozilla all the time, and give up using several very helpful web sites that happen only to work in IE. On my Win98 box, which I'm using now, I run Moz as my primary browser, but IE is just a click away if a site doesn't work in it.

Do pro-Linux people see the common thread here? Linux is mostly good at doing most of what Windows can do within a few months of being able to do it on Windows, with mostly compatible results. To a hobbyist geek, like many of us, that might be good enough, and we're prepared to put up with some modest inconvenience in exchange for the benefits you get from using Linux. However, to most Windows, users, it just ain't good enough.

Simple....

[loconet]

The GUI. It does not crash as often as X, nor does it feel like everything is a swing app.

I've said it before, I'll say it again...

[m0nkyman]

ACCOUNTING!
Until there is a drop in replacement for the likes of Quickbooks or Simply Accounting for small and medium sized businesses, you will never, I repeat, never penetrate that huge market.
I managed to get my business moved to Macs, but come January, I'm hooped due to Accountedge for the Mac getting killed in Canada by Intuit.
There was no Linux alternative.

Re:Uh... Java?

[Trinition]

As for compiling, what exactly are you doing? Java now ships with JIT compilers that convert bytecode to native code on-the-fly. Of course you have little control over this process, so it's still not as optimal as hand-optimized C, but hey, what is.

Sure, you don't have control over the final native code produced by JIT, but neither do you have evidence that it isn't optimized. But beyond that, you have Hotspot which C/C++ just doesn't have.

my $0.02

[athlon02]

It does bug me that M$ has so much money and power. However, I've grown kind of numb to the arguments. I use WinXP Pro and MacOS X 10.1.5 mostly. I really like FreeBSD, but much of what I need to do is accomplished much faster and easier under WinXP Pro or Mac OS X. I know some tend to do it for the kewlness factor, as though the tougher the OS is to manuever and the more coding you have to do to make it work for you, the better you are, or some such thing. But I already know C, C++, x86 assembler, 6812 assembler, pascal (and Delphi), javascript, perl, mysql statements well enough to do almost anything I need for my computer engineering classes, for dynamic webpages, or whatever else. I don't see any reason for me to beat my chest and show how good I am. After installing about 6 OSes (and numerous versions and variations of some of those OSes) perhaps 50 times over the years, I don't care to show off. I just want the computer to do what I need when I need it to. So I suppose in summary, right tool for the right job...

When I want to play oggs, mpeg2 videos, DVDs, games, code in VC++, Delphi or perl, etc, etc. I can use my machine with WinXP.

When I want to do any of that with a nicer gui and unix underpinnings along with mobility, I use my iBook with OSX.

That's my $0.02, take it for what it's worth :)

Okay my situation

[dvNull]

I have 4 machines at home:

AMD XP 1800 with 512mb of ram running Windows XP Professional
Dual PIII 550 with 512mb of RAM running Linux ( currently RedHat 8 )
Dual PPro 200 with 256Mb of RAM running FreeBSD ( will be trying out Debian 3 , box serves as test web server/ cvs server )
G3 350 with 1Gb of RAM running OS 10.1

I use the Windows XP box solely for games. While i am a subscriber for WineX, the 1 game i play the most , Counter-Strike , doesnt support voicecom under WineX.

For all my serious work, ( I do image editing, web site design etc ) I use Linux. Quanta or vi as the editor. I use Gimp for image needs ( Gimp and photoshop both work great for me for my image editing needs ). OpenOffice also works great for what i need to do with it. Ogle plays my DVDs and I use xmms for mp3s and oggs.

In the end it all depends on what apps u need to use and if you are willing to learn a new app. I understand for DTP gimp may not be what photoshop could do but for most of my use Linux is perfect.

dvNuLL

Where do I start?

[OzJimbob]

Well to be honest, I use 50% windows, 50% linux. I really WANT to use Linux more, but there are just some basic reasons why I need to keep windows on my machine.

a) Applications - windows apps are easier to install, don't have major compatibility issues (you never have to download and compile three different shared libraries to get Windows software to run, do you? You don't have to download a specific .exe file to match a specific build version of windows!) and generally are of a higher quality. I have yet to find ANY decent, truly stable and useable music creation and audio editing software for Linux. Audacity is pityful compared to CoolEdit, and there's nothing even close to FruityLoops.

2. The construction of the OS makes software installation a pain - this point is touched on above. Yes, I know it's open source, and all that, but if Linux was constructed more intelligently, it should be possible for users to just download a single binary file and run it. There is too much dependancy on tiny little libraries all over the place, and too much dependancy on things like (a) Exact library version (b) C-compiler version (c) Kernel version (d) How the distribuion organises its file locations. You simply don't get ANY of these problems in Windows. Occasionally you'll have to download a newer version of a DLL to get software to work, but when you do, it doesn't break software that relied on the previous version of the DLL.

Why is this happening? I call on Linux developers to start programming for the USERS, not for themselves. Aim to design software that is easy to install, that is configurable from within the program, that relies on only MAJOR libraries, and MAJOR stable version numbers. It is possible, you know. "Big" software releases for Linux (OpenOffice, Mozilla, Opera, many games) just install themselves simply and easily, and work, so why don't the smaller software projects work the same way?

In the end, I use Linux when I just want to quickly boot up, get on the net, have a fiddle around. I boot Windows if I want to use actual specific, important pieces of software for which there is no equivalent available for Linux.

Why GIMP doesn't support color-matching

[yerricde]

Photoshop has good support for translation of the different color models and calibration to match colors as precisely as possible. Gimp sucks ass at that.

Photoshop Elements lacks those features as well, and guess what? The reason it's $500 cheaper than Photoshop is precisely the same reason that GIMP doesn't support accurate color space conversion: it's patented, and the patent holders are not willing to license the patents royalty-free.

Quality?

[Bodrius]

I wonder what quality you claim to be forsaking...

I'm a big fan of Linux, and of Unix in general, but why exactly do you use an Operating System?

Since I don't have a mainframe in my room serving thousands of users with scarce memory and CPU-time, efficient resource administration is less of a priority than it was for Unix's original goal.

Stability is important, but my workstation doesn't need as many magic 9s as my web server. Booting once per week is really not that bad.

Personally, I run an OS to make my life easier. In other words, the quality I expect from an OS is "requires less effort to do what I want to do".

Dreamweaver

[strredwolf]

Give me a good WYSIWYG HTML editor in Linux, that doesn't have Mozilla's bugginess.

Easy

[los furtive]

If I knew I would be able to get the video-out on my video card to work on the TV and play MAME, then I'm there in a flash!

Hittting the nail on the head.

[lommer]

Right there you've hit the nail on the head. My reasons are very simple:

1) Learning curve: it's just too damn steep, and the documentation sucks. While the online support from the community is decent, it's not very helpful if you can't even get on the 'net or figure out how to work the IRC client.

2) Other people: They don't use linux and they don't want to. They also don't have the time for the learning curve.

3) Maintenance Time: Let's face it; running linux means you have to spend a certain (large) amount of time with your computer on a regular basis to ensure that everything stays updated, and to install anything new or cool.

Those are the 3 top reasons that are keeping me from linux, and i'm sure they apply to many other people. No, its not games because I don't play tooo many of them and I do have 2 regular-use boxes, one of which definately has to stay windows for the family.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Guspaz]

Why indeed? Were you perhaps hoping to play UT2K3 in a window and do your taxes while capturing the enemy flag? I think not.

The GameCube is not a desktop computer. It may have similar physical hardware, but it is not a computer. This point has been argued before. My calculator has the same processor as my old computer, that doesn't make my calculator a desktop computer.

My reasons.

[mindstrm]

First, background.. I've been using linux since the wee versions.. .96 or so, 1992-ish. I was fluent in SunOS well before that. I've been through the whole zealotry phase, and used linux on just about every concievable machine I've touched.

I use windows on my laptop. Here is why.

- I like the way Windows XP looks. Cleartype rules on my laptop.
- All the flash readers, usb devices, and everything else I can get my hands on just WORKS most of the time.
- Games work better. All the games I play appear to be available on linux, but they just don't work as well.. this is most likely related to video drivers.
- Software compatability. Sorry, but in this modern world, I NEED MS Internet Explorer.
- Windows is NOT as bad as everyone makes it out to be; yes linux is far more open, but many, though not all, of the things that people whine about not being able to diagnose in windows are simply because they don't know how; they only know the unix way.
- Windows 2000 was a large improvement, I believe in a large way because of the pressure the Linux threat put on MS. Windows Xp even moreso from a personal workstation perspective.

Re:My reasons.

[Peyna]

Why do you NEED MSIE? While I run Windows XP as my primary OS; the only time I use MSIE is for Windows/Office Update. Apart fromt hat, I have no use for it at all. Mozilla has more than replaced IE for me.

So, if all I need is a browser I can use Linux?

[Shivetya]

and what does a browser have to do with this anyway?

I didn't see the requirement to bash.

Insigthful only because the current mods hate Ms as much as you and refused to grade you off topic as deserved.

Actually, your point is well taken. Most people are using Windows because the real arrogant assholes are on the other side chiding them for their choice. You aren't going to win converts by simply slamming the other side. You just as might as well concentrate all your hate against Jeb ... seems to work as well doesn't it.

Re:So, if all I need is a browser I can use Linux?

[Zorikin]

I've noticed that the petulant, whiny nonmovers always lecture open/free software users on how to "win converts". Parent is one of many such posts in this story.

As if (a) it were a popularity contest and (b) those people were actually to know something about persuasion. Neither of which is true. I mean, they're doing horribly at persuading me that they're not human wastelands, let alone that I should change my operating system.

On the other hand, the polite nonmovers simply tell us what work they have to do or games they want to play and manage to resist the urge to preach.

Oh come on!

[washirv]

- This whole thing is wildly inaccurate. Rounding errors, ballot stuffers, dynamic IPs, firewalls. If you're using these numbers to do anything important, you're insane.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[LordSah]

Yeah, I guess two. It seems like years...I guess life is like that :)

But Windows still hasn't blue screened on me. By and large, almost all blue screens are caused by bad hardware drivers. I'm sorry your particular configuration of hardware and drivers causes your machine to crash.

That's a danger when your operating system supports thousands and thousands of devices. Microsoft and/or hardware companies simply cannot test all configurations of hardware, OS versions and drivers. They do the best they can, but sometimes folks find something that was missed. The alternative is to limit the hardware: Apple does this. They know exactly what goes into every box, and can really test the hell out of those configs. I like windows supporting anything I stick in my box, and don't think MS should back down from that goal.

Patent evergreening

[yerricde]

Trademarks don't expire. They last as long as the name has not become generic.

Copyrights don't expire. Disney can usually get the EU Parliament and the US Congress to pass repeated blanket copyright term extension laws.

Patents, on the other hand...

Digital imaging and printing has been around for a long time. Hasn't the patent [on color matching] expired by now, or due to expire shortly?

...don't expire. There is a practice called "patent evergreening" where a patent holder makes minor additional disclosures, such as the process or an intermediate product. It's even worse in the drug world, where once a drug has fallen out of patent and the slightly improved replacement with fewer side effects is on the market, the pharmaceutical company lobbies to get the older drug ruled "unsafe" and pulled from the market before generics pop up. It happened with Seldane.

That's why GIMP won't support color matching for the foreseeable future.

Linux needs to learn from OS X and BEOS

[teamhasnoi]

I use windows at home for audio stuff (My Ardvark Q10, which rocks all over the digi001, BTW, only supports windows - mac soon to come.) and graphics (Photoshop). I will be using BeOS as an mp3 server and player.

I use OS X at work for layout (Pagemaker under Classic - must put a bullet in that) and graphics (Photoshop.

I would use BeOS for everything if I could get the apps for it. If wine worked, or if Virtual PC for BeOS was ever made, I would be done with booting windows forever. I can't expect that developers are going to write my apps for BeOS, so I guess I can deal with running Windows in a window.

Linux suffers from things that OS X, BeOS, and Windows figured out a long time ago. Make install, configuration, and USE easy.

When OpenBeos is ready - I am there. There is no OS that is as easy and FAST. Use a CL if you want - or don't. OS X and BeOS have that figured out.

I WANT TO GET OUT! I have tried installing Linux several times - Mandrake, RedHat (purchased) and Lindows. Sure, I get them running - but how to do things? To install something on OS X I double click on it, or drag it to a folder. To install something on Windows I double click on it, or drag it to a folder. To install something on BeOS I double click on it, or drag it to a folder. Why should Linux be different?

I want to hear sounds. Windows, OS X, and BeOS all work if there is a driver. Linux - I have to recompile a kernal??

I want to get on the net and get email. Easy 'till I get to Linux.

OpenBeos is going to be amazing. Just amazing. Incredibly fast, simple interface, customizable, uses old hardware to the max. Did I say fast? I can't wait.

I'm done rambling for now.

Judge Colleen Kollar-Kotelly's stupidity

[wfrp01]

I don't use Microsoft products because I want to; I use Microsoft products because I don't have a choice. Proprietary de-facto standards rule the roost.

Colleen was given the opportunity of a lifetime, and she blew it. She is clearly technologically and economically illiterate. She could have made the world a much better place. Instead she made it worse. Her actions can only be described as cowardly and ignorant.

I will continue to use Microsoft products because that the only way I can communicate with the vast majority of users who don't care that the world could be better. I will continue to use Microsoft products because Judge Colleen believes that what's best for Microsoft is best for all of us. I will continue to use Microsoft products because Judge Colleen is a coward. I will continue to use Microsoft products because this spineless ignorant judge failed to free the world from the grip of Microsoft's proprietary file formats and protocols.

That's why I use Microsoft products.

I'm NOT on Windows -- but I know why others are...

[constantnormal]

Humans have a powerful herd instinct. Even if you educate a clueless one as to the reasons why to avoid Microsoft products, all it takes is for them to look around and see everyone else using Windows. The insecurity of "being different" takes over, and they conform to the norm.

If a majority of people inhaled fumes from a chemical device known to be addictive and to eventually cause cancer in the majority of users, there would still be significant demand for the product. Even if only a minority of the population were users of such a product, demand could easily be stimulated by showing attractive role models using the product in magazine and TV ads. Same thing for ingested substances known to destroy brain cells.

Conditioning individuals to see the expected norms as manufacturers want them to see it is the basis for mass market advertising. People are highly susceptible to advertising, and notice how rarely ads emphasize a product's strengths -- almost never -- over associating a product with a desirable situation. All the logic and reason in the world will not prevent a clueless user from being attracted to Windows, when the majority of the world they see uses it.

This applies in spades to decisions made by management or committees, which is why Microsoft and corporate use are synonymous. Linux use in business will never be more than a slim fraction, because of this. If it were otherwise, every corporate desktop would already be a Linux desktop, due to the significant savings that goes right to the bottom line.

If you want someone to use an OS other than Windows, you have only a couple of winning strategies:
1) Make sure that the majority of other users they interact with use your chosen platform, be it Mac, Linux, OS/2, or whatever. They will come to see that as the expected norm and acclimate easily.
2) Have some feature of the non-Windows system you are pushing that either does not exist on Windows, or is so weakly presented that your alternative seems viable to them. This feature must be something your target user sees as a "must-have" capability.

The only reason that Macintosh has any presence in the home market is due to its past dominance in the educational markets carrying over into the home. An example of #2 is the persistence of Macs in the publishing industry due initially to the superior typography and image capabilities, which resulted in the publishing industry getting hooked on Applescript. Today, with similar typographical and image processing capabilities present in Windows, Apple retains the publishing business solely due to the widespread use of Applescript to automate processing. If Microsoft would come out with an Applescript clone, they would own the publishing business inside of 3 years.

People weren't made to think. They are built to follow, and crowd together in herds. Thinking and individualism are abnormal characteristics. Look at what a rousing success Apple's "Think Different" campaign was -- nobody wants to "think differently".

The nail that stands up gets hammered down.

It's how we're made.

Why Shouldn't I?

[__aadhrk6380]

Let's face it, Windows is easy. Web sites work, apps are compatible, and games run. Do I admit that MS makes a superior OS? No, I don't. I switched to an all Linux environment about 8 months ago. As an OS, I think Linux is superior. Still, I am switching back.

With Linux, I never had to reboot, never managed to mess up the OS to the point of total kludge, Samba worked like a charm, E-Mail happened on time (well, KMail hung on occasion, but kill the process and restart and it rocked). I just never had the full range of motion with linux that I do with Windows.

As an application platform, Windows owns the day. Games, office apps, and web content are all easier with MS. The OS locks up, spyware, adware, and plain assed vaporware abound, but the stuff that should work does.

I hate Microsoft's corporate philosophy as much as I love the concept of open source. But lets face it, they have the clout at the moment. I finally came to the conclusion that I am not willing to give up all the functionality that Windows gives me for an ideal.

Linux is so, so close. One or two more iterations and MS will have to either lead, follow, or get the hell out of the way. Until that time comes, Novell or Linux on the server side, and Windows on the desktop.

Re:Probably the flames I get from linux users most

[twitter]

The flames and insults I get for being a newbie are incredible.

I agree. You should see some of the flames I get posting here, except they are all from Microturds and others who have nothing better to do than troll slashdot. Those IRC twerps are nobodies. Copetent people ignore trolls and do their best to help out the ignorant. Don't let them make you run screaming into Bill Gates' waiting embrace.

I keep seeing Photoshop mentioned. I've yet to use all the features the GIMP has. Have you tried it? You might look into the win32 version of it the next time you feel compelled to buy an new photoshop. The authors don't claim it's a replacement for photoshop, but it does what I need.

Outlook is huge and I'm sorry that you have to use it. My little Handspring Visor showed me how many useful features Outlook is missing despite it's size.

MIDI on Mac is expensive because of Apple Records

[yerricde]

Need a good MIDI sequencer? There're four really really good ones for Windows under $100 but ZERO on Mac.

Apple Computer had to remove the MIDI Manager from Mac OS because of a trademark lawsuit from Apple Corps (the Beatles' record label) alleging that by including robust MIDI support in Mac OS, Apple Computer "had entered the recording industry", violating the agreement between the two companies. Thus, the publishers of each sequencing program for the Mac have to include separate drivers licensed from each MIDI adapter manufacturer, and that costs money.

Most slashdot readers use Windows

[Call Me Black Cloud]

I had a submission accepted (*once*, but I digress). I included a link to my website. As expected, traffic went up. A review of the logs showed the majority (like 80%) of those referred to the site from slashdot were using Windows, with the majority of those using XP (interesting, as usually most of my visitors are using Me).

This doesn't answer why, but I found the results amusing considering the anti-ms vitriol found here.

I've moved on

[_ZorKa_]

Nobody is probably going to read this since it is about the 2000th post on this thread but I have moved off of linux and windows to OS X. I have been using it now for about 3 weeks and I am happy that I moved on. OS X in my opinion is the best of both worlds. I've got unix underneath the hood, apps, stability and open source tools available like apache, mysql and php if I need them. For my needs and what I do it is the perfect combination.

I don't know if other people have noticed but I have started to notice more OS X postings on slashdot and other stories in the news around the net. I think OS X is catching on more and more (do I have proof no, that is why I said think). It would probably catch on more if apple would lower the prices on the hardware and open up OS X to the PC platform with those hidden AMD machines running OS X.

Home: Linux Work: win32 BSD

[PotatoHead]

At home, I have managed to convert to a Mandrake desktop. Been using Linux in some form or another since 95. (It took a while.)

What got me on Linux at home was web based applications, Evolution, Open Office. I do a lot of remote support and communication. Linux is very good for this. With VNC and SSH I make use of the home box all the time.

The other things for home Linux was DVD movie playback, screw the law, I like OGLE and buy my DVD media fair and square. Mp3 rip mix burn was important --I use ogg now for new stuff. Games. I do not purchase many and the kind I like are starting to show up in Linux. So by the time I want a new one, there are enough choices for Linux. The rest happen on a PS2. (I *like consoles.)

At work, we use BSD for a web server, IRIX for some MCAD application support, and win32 for everything else.

What will help at work?

Office connectivity for an exchange environment that really just works and is inexpensive. We are a small shop and have a Microsoft Partner relationship. This gives us a significant cost advantage.

More web based applications. Using a browser makes a lot of sense. Wonder why more companies are not using the real potential for Mozilla to be an interface. Microsoft does not see this because they are buried in the whole client server thing.

Funny thing, IRIX shines for administering and maintaining the win32 PC environment here. Open up a few VNC sessions, setup a couple of desktops and you can easily work with many machines. Linux, of course would do this as nicely, but I have a reason for IRIX.

One application needed is Sales contact information management sofware like goldmine or maximizer. Either good cilents, wine support, or web interfaces would go a long way toward getting Linux on my desktop.

Management is not opposed as long as I can do what I do well.

Mcad is coming. There is a Linux version of the PTC software. This is a big step! I do wonder about Solidworks and SolidEdge though. They are win32 to the core and have a lot of users. Looks like a lot of engineers will be on win32 for a while.

Re:Home: Linux Work: win32 BSD

[PotatoHead]

Guess it comes down to what you do with your desktop computer.

My main use for a home desktop computer is Internet communication. (Writing, programming, web development, remote support, e-mail, IM and other such things.) Linux can do this very well right now.

There are a million apps for win32, but I just don't need them all. So this does limit what I can do right now at home, but to me this is not important because I enjoy using Open Source and value the freedoms it provides.

Funny thing is I do have a win2K machine in the house. Win2K is a fine family desktop OS. It gets used a lot, but I find that I do not need to use it much at all lately. So win32 is there for the occasional task, but Linux really is the primary OS because it can now meet my needs. Over time I expect this to continue as the application scene improves. The foundation OS and tools are fine now --just need to continue to bring applications to the platform.

I can tell you that win2K will be the last Microsoft OS that I will pay for. It has been a fine OS and I am happy with it. There will come a point where maybe the latest greatest thing will not run under win2k. At that point, either a Linux solution will be avaliable, wine will do the job, or I simply will not be using it. Period.

Considering the general direction the win32 platform is headed, I am just not interested. Nobody should have the right to own my ability to perform basic computing tasks and force me to continue paying for that right.

This really is where Microsoft, in general, is a losing proposition for me.

Learning to make use of OSS software is a steady process. It takes a while, but is worth it. About 5 years ago, someone told me that if I could learn to compile software, I would be set for life. They were right.

It is damn nice to know that I can take almost any hardware out there and make good use of it with nothing more than a net connection and time.

I will never have this with Microsoft tools.

So really, I look hard at what I can do today and do it. --It only gets better. For those things I cannot do, I seriously consider if I actually need to do them and go forward from there. Said another way, I chose to start looking at what I can do, rather than all of the things I cannot yet do. This perspective matters.

One side benefit is that there is more time for family and other interests. Given my affinity for computing, this is a good thing!

At work, I try hard to get Linux involved, but have a tough time. It is not managment because they are open to new solutions because they are a big part of what we do. However the nature of our business demands win32 solutions at this time. We are a small firm that works with product development groups to improve their process. Many of them are win32, others are commercial UNIX. Cost is important, but apps are king. These groups use specialized tools that are just not avaliable on Linux. (Yet) Since our value to these groups is in our expertise, we have a win32 focus. Sucks, but that is the way it is. I believe this will change, just as it is changing right now for the sciences, movie studios, and infrastructure areas of our industry. Our niche is fickle and somewhat conservative.

I find your statement funny about web and office apps. If you mean making use of web apps, Linux can do the task for the most part. Business office type applications really are quite good now. There is not very far to go. Exchange / outlook functionality and illustration applications need some work, but the basics, e-mail, word processing and spreadsheets really are pretty solid. Again, it is about what you can do today -vs- all the things you know you cannot yet do.

We do like Linux, we also like FreeBSD. Where it makes sense internally, we make good use of it. Some of our customers do as well. Apps really are the killer for what we do. (Bummer)

Hey, at least you are looking. Keep looking, you will continue to see more of what you need. Remember, to consider what you can do today. Doing those things will keep you in the loop as others come on board.

Getting to your current comfort level will take time and development on the Linux side of things. It *is* happening, and enough of it has happened for me to begin growing with Linux and treading water with win32. If you keep one eye open, you are likely to find the same at some point in the near future.

This is good for all of us.

Not that anyone cares but...

[DigitalDad]

I'm not a fan of Windows at all. In fact if MS somehow fell flat on it's face and died I wouldn't shed a tear. However, since that's not a reality, unfortunetely I need to stick with Windows. Reasons? Well, there are quite a few...

1- Driver support. Yea, I know there's a ton of drivers available for Linux, but in the real world, they're limited. For instance, my USB scanner refuses to work with ANY form of Linux at all.

2- Software support. Specifically Macromedia software. I'm a Web Developer and use Dreamweaver exclusively with bits in Flash. Yea, I know there's a lot of Open Source / GPL / whatever software out there, but be honest, how much of it can compare with Dreamweaver? I won't go into specifics, but if you use Dreamweaver, you know what I'm talking about.

3- All the servers at work, unfortunetely, are Windows machines with both the Intranet and Internet sites using ASP. I have no real feasable choice in the matter, it was that way when I was hired. I would love to have the time to migrate everything over to Linux and use Cold Fusion, but that's not a reality. There's far too much to do this in any acceptable time frame.

There's more, but those are the top 3. IF Macromedia would release a *native* version of Flash & Dreamweaver, I would seriously consider switching over. Yea, I know, "use Wine / Open Office / XWine". That's not a reliable alternative. I have in fact tried to get Dreamweaver running on those with various levels of success. However, eventhough I got it installed and actually running, it's not stable enough for any serious work. I couldn't even get Flash running at all. VMWare? Too slow and I'm still running Windows eventhough it's in a virtual machine. Same with Win4Lin. Not stable or fast enough for my needs.

I have however begun teaching my kids how to run Linux and about the power of Open Source software and have a Linux box for them to play with. They won't adopt that machine very easilly though as it can't run 1/2 the games they have for their Windows box.

When software and hardware companies finally get with the program and start releasing stuff for Linux, THAT'S when Linux will start to dominate.

Forte Agent

[BoneFlower]

I haven't found a linux newsreader that even comes remotely close. Thats the biggest reason.

Why would a typical kid use a PC for gaming?

[yerricde]

My fiancee wants to use it for Quicken

Tried Gnucash? If that doesn't fit your needs, does Quicken work with WINE?

the kids for games.

Get the kids a GameCube. Most (not all, most) of the genres thought to be better on PCs than on consoles aren't well suited for minor children. PC first-person shooters are typically rated Mature (video game equivalent of MPAA R rating for movies) for gore, and multiplayer online role-playing games may cost more per month than some kids get for allowance. That is, unless your kids are like I was at that age, writing their own computer games.

Re:Windows? What's that?

[fferreres]

Watch out for .Net enabled sites. You might have to choose from a castrated Web interface of a real .Net interface in less time than you think. Yes, ASP Controls will be controled by Microsoft and will as incompatible as they see fit.

Why Windows?

[glh]

I use Windows. I have used Linux. Here is my story..

Back in my college days (94-98) I was big into Linux. After the prompting of a friend, I decided to see what this "Linux" was all about. I was always into computers and started programming in Turbo Pascal as a hobby back when that was considered geeky (heck, it still probably would be).

Anyway, I first installed Slackware back in 1994 and ran a server out of my dorm room once we got 10BT connections. As a student in Computer Science and Engineering, Linux was a good choice because many of my programming projects were to be written in C. I still recall compiling my first c program with gcc for a class. I was mesmerized by the power that Linux offered me with simple command line constructs. Granted, it took me a while to learn many of these commands, but there was always a sense of gratification that came along with it. Not only that, but figuring out how to master the files in rc.d. Messing with fstab and mounting a cdrom for the first time. Recompiling the kernal so my soundcard, ethernet card, and zip drive could work. These were all fun things for me, and I enjoyed helping others "buy into" Linux and the sheer power that it offered minus the bloat.

Anyway, several years passed by and I soon graduated. I had an internship at a company where I had to program "ASP" web pages. At the time, connecting a database to a web page was something new and exciting to me. Prior to my new development duties, I was happily using Emacs. However, with ASP I had to use Visual Interdev. This was my first experience with "Intellisense" and I really liked it.

I was still gung-ho Linux at this point (in 1998). However, my boss, a former unix guru (spent 15 years at BGSU setting up their Internet) was trying to tell me how Unix is far behind in terms of the real business world. He had met and fellowshipped in the "long hair" Unix conventions with the likes of RMS, Eric Allman, and other well knowns. His biggest argument was that it is just easier to get things done with Microsoft (at least from a development perspective).

Over the next 2 years I began developing database applications for company I worked for. I was truly excited by the ease of use in the development tools. Unfortunately, I had also seen many a web server crash due to memory leaks and other issues with MS. I still wasn't completely sold on MS but I knew I could deal with it.

Enter .NET . Somewhere in 2000, I began hearing about the new .NET initiative. At that time it was called something like "Next Generation". Not too much longer, the preview edition of .NET was released. I immediately downloaded it and I was quite excited. I must admit this new technology has sold me on Microsoft. I now use the .NET technology to develop applications, and although not perfect, it is a very productive framework for solving business problems.

I guess when I think about the Linux vs. Microsoft battle, I believe that it really does boil down to a few crucial points.

1. What are the best tools for the job? Depends on what job you are doing. For me it is developing software applications. Most computers out in the real world run Microsoft OS's and have IE browseres. Hence, it only makes SENSE to develop for that. In addition, the tools that developers have are really second to none. There may be some technically superior languages that only run on Linux, more powerful things you can do, more security, etc. But honestly, those things aren't as important as building applications for the majority of people, which are on MS platforms.

That leads me to my next point:
2. The MS platform is what is out there. Linux is difficult to set up for the average joe blow user on the desk top. There is no authority on what windowing system / manager to use. In a sense, Linux's strong point is also a weakness- free/open source means everyone is equal. Anyone can develop something for it. Not everyone wants to develop the same thing, so Linux has factions. Will Linux ever be able to unite and compete? I think Redhat has a good shot at it, but honestly the concept of free and open is inheritenly never going to make Redhat the beast that MS is. Which again brings me to the next point:

3. We live in a capitalist society. Business are largely the entities who drive the marketplace. Linux doesn't stand for capitalism (going back to the previous point) because it wants to be "free". Microsoft is just the opposite- it wants to charge as much as possible for it's OS as the market will accept. But Microsoft is also very unified and looking out to continually make money which means, at least to some degree, giving the customer what it wants. If Windows ever got "that bad", people really would switch to something else. But why would Bill Gates, probably the wisest business man EVER, let windows get "that bad"? Of course that is possible, that is how America works. But I don't see that happening for a long time. Microsoft must change with technology, the economy and the times in general lest it fall to the same fate of IBM back in the 80's.

On slashdot there are many zealots for the Linux cause. Part of me is still one of those zealots at heart, because I do fancy breaking away from the "borg". I enjoy being part of a subculture that can poke fun at corporate America. I still have a longing to be a "geek" that goes against the grain and hence I will always have Linux installed SOMEWHERE on one of my pc's. I think Linux certainly has proven itself as decent server software but I honestly don't think it will grow too much beyond that unless there is a major change, or even a revolution. The .COM era was a catalyst to this sort of change, but unfortunately that didn't go very far. Even if it did, my guess is that there would be a new Linux for the geeks inside us that want to go against the grain. Even with the advent of Redhat we've seen a lot of flames because of the business actions and dealings the company has made.

I guess to sum up all this stuff- I would put it like this. There is a reality and an ideal. Microsoft is the reality. Linux is the ideal. We strive to meet the ideal utopia of free software, open source, and everyone happy. Linux is technically superior and more appealing in many ways. But in reality, we live in corporate America where everyone needs to make money and stay competitive. Microsoft has ushered in the information economy we now live in and will be here to stay for some time. I look forward to the upcoming years to see how this will pan out and continue.

May the Penguin live in all of us while the Borg is all around us.

Device drivers and documentation quality

[Phronesis]

Three things primarily keep me on Windows.

• The quality of the documentation. Nothing have used under Linux has the quality of documentation that I get with MSDN. Sure there is a much larger quantity of Linux documentation, but very little is of the professional quality that I get from MS. In particular, the quality of integration between the Visual Studio IDE and the MSDN documentation makes me cringe every time I need to fire up Emacs and info (or man).
• The quality of the tools. Last time I checked, Visual C++ still blew the doors off gcc for numerically intensive calculations. Even my Linux-using colleagues have given up on gcc and use closed-source compilers for their numerically intensive work.
• last, but most important, is device-driver support. Sure, Linux r0x0rs with a small subset of mass-market hardware, but try getting esoteric DAQ hardware to run efficiently with Linux...

All this is very frustrating because many of my projects could benefit from something closer to an RTOS than Windows will ever be, and for that I could live with the primitive state of Linux development tools to play with the RT Linux variants, but the absence of hardware device drivers prevents me from even thinking in those terms.

Xbox Live costs $300 per year

[yerricde]

I beleive the Xbox has multiplayer internet option.

Xbox Live costs $300 per year: $50/year for the Xbox Live subscription, and $250/year for the upgrade from dial-up Internet access to cable or DSL Internet access, provided that you even have a good cable or DSL provider in your area. If not, you'll have to fork over even more for a fractional T1.

Tell that to your power company

[yerricde]

If they won't do business on MY terms, they won't do business with me.

Try telling that to the company that provides your electric power, or to any other regulated municipal monopoly. If they require IE for Windows, then you had better buy a computer that can run IE for Windows, or you can't run any computer because you don't have any power.

Re:Tell that to your power company

[RealAlaskan]

Here's a dirty little secret: one doesn't need a computer to do business with the regulated monopolies.

They may WANT you to use a computer, but you can refuse. When they try to sell you on the advantages of using their website for whatever (to save them money, though they rarely emphasize that), politely reply that you will do so when their website works with your computer.

I don't use the web for this sort of thing, regardless of the company's policy on which browsers they'll support. The savings never seem to be passed along to me, and the terms on which you make payments (unless via credit card) seem unfavorable.

Typical uses

[m0i]

Nothing beats unices at servers tasks. Go figure what's wrong with a NT/2000 box! For the userland GUI, Windows is the thing since it's been designed for users, and PCs are build with MS in mind.
I know nobody will get to read this post, but I thought I could add to up this story in the hall of fame =)

VB Competitor?

[dbrutus]

Hmmm... VB competitor?

Try Realsoftware. Their realbasic product is shaping up pretty well.

Mac OS/OS X and Windows.

It's inhabiting the VB space on cross platform.

Btw: they're currently considering adding other platform targets.

Well, games and...

[TaliesinWI]

Until Symantec makes PCAnywhere for Linux, I'll have to run Windows at work and on my work computer at home. Dual booting is out of the question - imagine explaning to my boss that I had to close my six SSH windows, my web browser, and my E-mail program so I can reboot to Windows to use PCA to fix a two minute problem, then switch back to Linux to continue doing my work.
And running PCAnywhere under VMWare for Linux is...problematic. Certainly not reliable enough (last time I tried it) to rely on it working when I'm going to need it.
Yes, I know about VNC, et al. I don't need something _like_ PCAnywhere. I need _PCAnywhere_.
I don't need it to be free. I just need it to exist.

Re:Games and Work Apps

[dbrutus]

There is an exchange client for Mac. Microsoft doesn't advertise it very often but it comes with Exchange and costs exactly the same as a Windows license.

Re:GBA games run fine on Linux

[nege]

Sorry, I wasnt refering to old super nintendo games. Cool that linux can handle it though.

Mono Development

[adamjone]

I work in a Microsoft only shop. We are an integrator that develops systems for manufacturers. The single most important technology we deal with are OPC (OLE for Process Control) servers, which are a Windows only technology. With .NET, I can create a client to connect to the OPC server, get the status of the machine, and relay that information to our MES and ERP systems.

Once Mono reaches a full, stable release, I'll be able to switch over to developing under Linux. Mono will allow me to interoperate with the components on a Windows application server, which we will still need to run the OPC server, but the client will now be able to run on any machine.

Until Mono is ready, I'll continue to use Ant, Vim, and Visual Studio.

Re:MIDI on Mac is expensive because of Apple Recor

[woggo]

Your statement that sequencer manufacturers have to "include separate drivers from each MIDI adapter manufacturer" is FUD, and wrong. Even in pre-OS X versions of MacOS, there was robust MIDI support in the form of OMS. So, the lack of MIDI Manager didn't really affect Mac MIDI stuff.

In OS X, there is the CoreMIDI API, which is the best MIDI API available on any platform (and I've written MIDI apps for most platforms that matter).

I think that there is a paucity of cheap sequencers for the Mac (as the original poster laments) because people who use the Mac for audio are typically doing professional work and need something like Logic, not Cakewalk or some other toy. It's also possible (and floated around the rumor mills) that Apple will come out with a music iApp soon, given their acquisition of emagic, which would take care of the low end of the market.

In any case, the CoreMIDI API includes a great sequencing engine, and it's just a matter of tacking a good GUI on to get a functional sequencer. As I state in another post, this has been done.

Paper

[quantaman]

I still don't know how to set up my printer :)

Re:Ack! It's not "Applications"

[Loundry]

GNU/Linux probably has more; it definitely comes with more on the CD. Yet, I still wouldn't use the language "I use GNU/Linux because it has more applications", I'd say "...because it comes with powerful, familiar applications for programming and graphics"

When people write, "It doesn't have enough applications," what they mean is, "It doesn't have the applications I want." "Familiar" and "Powerful" are not good enough. An app may be both familiar and powerful, but if it's isn't Aftereffects (and if Aftereffects is what people want, for the sake of argument), then [non-Windows OS] won't suffice. I'm talking about people on a grand scale, not on a small scale.

NOT "EndNote's fault"

[Loundry]

So far though XP hasn't been bad, VERY few crashes (like 5 in about four months, three of which were EndNote's fault).

This is XP's fault, not EndNote's fault. A user-space program should never cause the OS to crash. Hardware? Yes, possibly. Programs? Never. Anything less is a flaw in the OS design. People are still way, way, way too forgiving of Microsoft for their lackluster design.

At least, this is my opinion. Am I being to hard on Microsoft?

To answer the question

[Sivar]

Microsoft knows that if they can dominate in one specific area which a user needs, they can ultimately dominate the user. For me, that specific area is games. While I use Linux quite often, I find myself not bothering to boot to it after playing a game in Windows. Linux is simply not an OS for gamers, and I am a gamer.
That aside, there also exist a great many annoyances with the various Linux GUIs, the most significant of which (for me) is the lack of comparable integration among pieces of software, even in KDE (the king of integration in Unix). Further, often applications will "work just fine" and "look just fine", but only after significant configuration. Mozilla's fonts, for example, look absolutely terrible until I tweak the hell out of it (which I needn't do with Mozilla in Windows).

Further, Linux still lacks Photoshop, which the GIMP is simply not a replacement for.

That said, Linux allows me to get much of my work done faster than I can do it in Windows because of its modular design (pipe output from this to that, filtered through foo and sorted by bar), but the fact that I can do all of my work in Windows and game is probably the biggest item holding me from pure Linux.

And no, WineX is not a worthwhile option. I don't play brainless games that it supports well like Diablo 2 and Quake, and I finished Deus Ex and others it supports well a long time ago.

GIMP bashers

[cascadingstylesheet]

Those of you bashing the GIMP ... what, exactly, do you think that it is missing? Do you really know that what you need is missing, or have you just not bothered to look in the menus?

I can't help but wonder if this is one of those "it doesn't look exactly like my old stuff, so I hate it" syndrome. I *love* the GIMP interface. Get the damn menus out of my way unless I want them.

Personally, I think this is a loaded question....

[King_TJ]

Haven't we all discussed this question to death already? It's only the single most common question the Unix/Linux crowd asks themselves just about every day, while trying to justify their use of their OS over Windows, or while trying to make improvements to it.

I think the answers are pretty obvious, really, and there's a laundry list of them (which varies by individual).

If you want to know my *personal* list, this is basically it:

1. Games (I love "Age of Mythology", most of the EA Sports games, and many others that don't run natively, or at all, in a Linux/X environment - or at least require lots of extra work to get them going.)

2. MIDI/Music I like to compose electronic music with software synthesizers (usually VST plug-ins), looping software like Sonic Foundry's ACID Pro, software samplers like Native Instruments Kontakt (that read Akai format sample CDs) and occasional hard disk recording. None of this really gets done very well in Linux.

3. Overall convenience I'm not the only one who ever uses my PC. Friends and relatives occasionally sit down to use my PC. I like not having to walk them through everything when they see an unfamiliar interface, or hassle with small headaches caused by Samba networking support and needing to access resources shared by other PCs in the house running Windows.

Nothing

[White Roses]

I have an iMac at home, Solaris and Linux at work. The only thing I've had to use Windows for in the past 18 months is updating the firmware on my Linksys router (did it from Virtual PC and W95). I think any future ones can be done from my browser now.

How did I get out from under? Well, job-wise, I work as a technical instructor for a company that teaches Solaris, HP-UX and Java. Occasionally, I'll have to teach an onsite where they are using NT or 98 or something (I teach Java), but for the most part, I'm on Solaris. We have company laptops which are supposed to be NT/2000. Mine's Linux. Sorry, not using my laptop as a server at an onsite class for Java under Windows. I don't care what flavor of Windows it is, I'm standing in front of students who evaluate my performance. I'm not using anything that may crash in the middle of something important. So it's a credibility issue for me. Maybe if Microsoft supported Java better (at all), I'd use NT.

Other than that? My choice. I don't have to use Windows for anything. There are alternatives. Can I play games on my iMac? Hell yeah. The top games are all available: The Sims, Warcraft III, Harry Potter (it's number 6 or soemthing like that), I can play them all. Sure, I just got Jedi Knight II, what, 8 months after the PC release? So what? I was playing Sims, Warcraft, Alice and Diablo for all that time. How many games do you need? More than that? Buy a console, they've got even more games than Windows. Can I run business software? Certainly. Word, Excel, whatever. Server applications? Check. Apache, SSH, name a service. Java? Roger that, too. Some Java gurus think Apple's JVM is one of the best ever. There isn't anything that I can do on Windows that I can't do on something else. Well, okay, VB. Why would I want to do VB, anyway? I don't program for Windows only.

Sure, there's loads more software for PCs. The top sellers are Windows licences, virus scanning software and utilities packages to fix your system. Joy!

I read a lot of stuff from both sides: Windows is better for business, Linux is better for stability. OS X is equal to both in both arenas (unfortunately, we're sometimes equal to Linux in driver support and Windows in eye candy that can bog down the system as well, but we're getting better - hey, our current OS is, what, coming up on 2, 3 years old?). Hardware's more expensive, maybe it's not worth the cost from the parts perspective, but the whole . . . ah, so much greater than the sum.

Plus, we get ants in our laptops. And sometimes they catch fire. Clearly, we think they are pants (which means we may be lying).

If your company forces Windows on you, erase the hard drive and install Linux if you can. Or even if you can't. Just do something. Take a stand! Have some reasons, and try to have some way to do everything they want you to do with Windows. It's not that hard for a lot of people. Take away the IT department's power. You might even be amazed at how much more work you can get done when you can ignore most of their e-mails and don't have to reboot as much. REVOLT! STEAL THIS OS!

The only thing keeping most people on Windows is plain laziness. Plain laziness.

And then

[The Pi-Guy]

like... my Linux box, it like went beep beep beep, and half of my... like... pr0n was gone. I like switched to Apple so like they don't like let you view pr0n without like viewing adverts so like it convinced me that I don't like need to view it.

No, not THAT app!

[Loundry]

One App: Adobe Photoshop

Oh screw that artsy-fartsy worthless pile-of-puke photoshop! The app that I give a shit about is Quickbooks! As a small business owner, I have to worry about keeping track of bills, invoices, depreciation, sales tax, income tax withholdings, unemployment, payroll, etc., etc., etc. What app in Linux can handle all of this that does not involve a significant amount of time investment? And, trust me, time fucking with software for an ideological purpose is time that I'm not spending with my customers or time I'm not spending finding out how to cut costs or time I'm not spending how to more effectively advertise or time I'm not spending how to keep my employees happy. In short, it's time I'm not spending making my business successful and worthwhile.

And yes, I know that the Quickbooks UI is terrible. It doesn't matter.

And yes, I'm joking about Photoshop being a pile of puke.

And yes, I adore Linux and abhor Microsoft. I'm writing this post in Konqueror on Linux, but I know that I'll have to reboot to Windows come Monday when it's time to pay bills again. Y'all have no idea how bad it hurts. Rebooting into Windows significantly less pleasant than shoving a rusty, red-hot blowfish up my urethra. (Don't ask me how I know or how a blowfish could be either rusty or red-hot; I'm just giving y'all a taste of my ultra-sophisticated sense of humor.)

Unix remote access

[lpontiac]

I use both Windows and *nix. I'm a software developer. I also use computers for recreational web browsing and communications (email, IRC, various IMs etc).

Generally I'll sit at a Windows desktop, and access a FreeBSD box remotely. Why? Because it's easy to do. Sitting on the FreeBSD box and accessing Windows would be painful.

• Most of the Unix-specific stuff is accessed via a shell. There's no real difference to me between an X display full of aterms, and a Windows display full of PuTTYs.
• Exporting graphical applications works better this way. X applications are swift remotely, and can be displayed rootlessly given the right X server on the Windows machine. The same doesn't apply in reverse.
• Windows command line barely works remotely. For some reason, it's always slow and jittery. It's also far too prone to breakage. I telnetted into a work Windows machine from home the other day (ssh'd through the firewall first :), tried to run an application and it appeared to hang. Got into work the next morning and there's a standard Windows error message about a missing dynamic library. In a dialog box, waiting for an "OK" click, whilst the app waiting on it was in a telnet session.

The actual applications that I use don't differ much between platforms; I spend most of my time in OpenOffice, gvim, Xircon/xchat and IE/Galeon. Neither Galeon or IE are notably worse than the other.

So funnily enough, it's one of *nix's strengths (easy and powerful remote access) that puts Windows on my actual desktop.

Photoshop, Word, various other items

[Angst Badger]

Photoshop and Word are the biggest reasons. While the GIMP is -- once you get past its poorly designed interface -- almost the equal of Photoshop for preparing web graphics, it's almost useless for prepress. Nothing in the Unix world comes close to the full functionality of MS Word, and yes, I do use all those "worthless" features.

Then there are a slew of lesser programs that are Windows-only (or even DOS only, in the case of the Apple II emulator I love dearly), some but not most of which are games, that either do not run under WINE and DOSemu or do so too slowly or unreliably to be worth it.

It's definitely not the relative strengths of the operating systems. It's the availability of certain software packages. Otherwise, Windows itself has nothing to recommend it over Linux, with the sole minor exception that it is a royal pain in the ass to set up a printer under Linux.

Re:Ack! It's not "Applications"

[Loundry]

Agreed! I think I was taking exception to what I perceived as your blaming the user for having their preferred applications. I think, in this regard, it's anyone's fault but the user's. A user's preferences for applications is not a matter of debate. Then again, I may have mis-read you, which is entirely possible.

Hardware and software.

[Sj0]

On the hardware side, I havent' been able to get my Geforce 4 (msi G4MX460-VTP)video-in to work yet under Mandrake 9, and my two USB gamepads don't work(at least, not as /dev/joystick). I haven't figured out how to get my MIDI keyboard to work on my SB16 yet either.

On the software side, I have thousands of dollars of software I can't just throw out the window. I still haven't found a MIDI editor which works well(rosegarden is the only one I could even get to run, and it is best described as "ass"(with all due respect to it's authors, it's not nearly as good as something like midisoft's product))

I still have a lot of faith in linux and it's non-MS kin on both the commercial and non-commercial sides of the coin. I have set aside a significant of hard drive space to Mandrake 9(which I can finally use on the internet, thanks to connexants softmodem drivers for linux), and I use Mandrake 9 on my laptop exclusively. Depending on the applications I use, this changes; for instance, when all I did was java programming, I used Linux because it was better for a dev OS than anything else which would run under 32MBs of RAM. When all I did was play simcity 2000 and civ 2(recently -- I only found a copy a few months ago), I had windows on there exclusively. Right now I'm using Linux on my laptop because it has so many apps for it.

On another note, has anybody else tried installing Mandrake 9 on a 32MB machine, and if so, did you find out how to get the other two disks to install? Linux is badly crippled without the rest of the dev stuff, and I'd really like to try blackbox and play some games on the default install(yes, I know how to install programs, but I'd rather not if I can help it)

My reasons are succinct...

[ZiZ]

Windows (yes, that's what I'm typing with right now) has three things that keep me there:

• Photoshop and Painter - and yes, I use the GIMP too, but they're not the same.
• FruityLoops - best damn drum machine I've ever seen.
• Games - particularly MMORPGs. Windows does game graphics better. Now, there are a lot of games I play on *inx (I'm a FreeBSD man myself), but Anarchy Online isn't one of them.

• That's all I've got to say. I don't like Microsoft as a company, but one or two of their products are pretty decent. Office isn't one of them, and I use VIM and CodeWarrior for development on Windows and Unix both.

I've stuck by Linux for development

[Fastball]

I'm not a C/C++ hack, so my experience is somewhat different from yours. I have made a tidy little living coding with Perl and Java, and I've always felt more at home with those things that are common to a Linux distro. The VI editor, the ability to custom build an Apache web server, CVS, a shell, diff, grep, patch. Here's a little but important one: a native cron daemon. Seriously, how can you call a server a server if it doesn't have a cron daemon?

For me, a web app developer, there's no better platform than the one the Internet grew up on.

X is what *brings* me to Linux!

[PotatoHead]

I hear a lot about X being bad, X being hard, X is this and X is that. All of it is bullshit plain and simple.

The X window environment is likely the best feature of any UNIX and Linux is starting to do it really well.

X is what gives Linux its true multi-user environment. Sure you can run command line stuff without an X server, but why bother?

You don't have to be a CLI geek to make good use of X. Just know ssh, xhost, rlogin and how to set your DISPLAY variable for UNIXes that are not crafted to be display friendly and you are set. That is very little to learn really.

X window setup is getting easier every day. When I started with Linux, X was hard. Now it is a whole lot easier. Give it another year and it will be no harder than dealing with win32 display issues.

X is what brought me to UNIX. I was headed down the MSCE path until I landed in a situation where I needed to work with a few UNIX machines. The users there used all of the machines as if they were their own. To someone used to non X display systems, this was amazing, not to mention very productive from both a user and administrative standpoint. Client server is not the only computing model. Think about all the web applications out there. They work remotely and you just display and input. Lots of people seem to think this is great. Guess what, X is that and more and it is here today, working nicely.

Before we had the networks we have now, X would have been a waste on most desktop machines because they were not connected enough to matter. Not to mention that if they were the OS was clearly not up to the task. So today we have a bunch of people who don't know what it is. This does not make it hard, just different.

Today we live in a networked environment. X was designed years ago with this in mind, we are just now getting there. Why continue an old mindset just because it is comfortable?

Take a little time to learn just a little about X, it is worth your time.

Re:X is what *brings* me to Linux!

[IamTheRealMike]

You don't have to be a CLI geek to make good use of X

Right on! X is fantastic for tech support too, because it lets you temporarily take control of somebodies machine without interrupting their work, and without needing to setup any passwords. Several times now on IRC somebody has had a problem but hasn't been proficient enough with Linux to solve it. OK, I say, open up a terminal window and type this:

$ export DISPLAY=xxxxx.kicks-ass.net:0
$ xterm &

(that isn't my real dyndns address btw). Within a second or two an xterm appears, and even when traversing the planet xterms have very low latency. I can proceed to use the CLI or launch any graphical apps I need with no further work. When I've solved the problem, just close the xterm.

Tech support on Windows on the other hand is awful. I've actually seen my father just sit on his ass in the office because his machine was being remotely controlled (having some software installed on it) by IT, and he couldn't do anything while they were at it (single desktop system). X is fantastic, and we should market it as such, instead of always being on the defensive.

Re:X is what *brings* me to Linux!

[PotatoHead]

I agree totally with the tech support. Your little example rocks. Any win32 guru that sees this knows what it means. They will be walking around while we are getting work done.

Win32 is *not* multi user. It is multi-tasking, but they broke it for good when they moved the display into ring 0 starting with NT4.0.

Interestingly enough, I work with a few win32 admins that have some UNIX apps to work with. Showed them how they can build and application server with UNIX, then remote display to PC workstations and share data with SAMBA. Bang! One big complex application and its data all in one nice fast place. --They liked it.

I agree, we should be shouting about X because there really is nothing else like it, and almost nobody knows that. ( Compared to the percentage who understand the currently broken win32 and OS X display scheme! )

Re:Probably the flames I get from linux users most

[abe ferlman]

Just offer to pay your irc buddies whatever microsoft support costs you, and I'm sure you'll no longer be flamed or insulted, but thanked and perhaps even worshipped a little.

Comment removed

[account_deleted]

Comment removed based on user account deletion

Why I Use Microsoft Windows

[Pooua]

: 1) Is it just the 'vocal minority' that favors alternate OSes over Linux

Probably only a minority of people favor alternate OSes over Linux. I am one of that number, but I am highly aware of the those other people. My observation of them leads me to believe that they favor Microsoft Windows either out of ignorance (maybe they don't know what an OS is) or job security (administering a Windows box requires specialized skill, which means the Windows-certified professional has a secure job in the Windows world), with most people having little concern beyond not having to buy and learn a whole new way of doing things.

2) if not, what's keeping you from 'putting your money where your mouth is' - why are you using Windows?

I have always been a fan of alternate systems. I ran my old computer on Novell's DR-DOS for several years, before finally breaking down and buying Windows 95. The processors that run my computers have been either Cyrix or AMD. About two years ago, I became so disgusted with Windows crashes that I vowed I would move to another OS, no matter what it took. Yet, I just bought a copy of Windows XP. Why?

The main reason I still use Microsoft Windows is that I am highly familiar with both the product and the design philosophy of the product. I have been using PC-compatible computers since 1988, and it is difficult for me to get used to Linux. I have tried. I own over a half-dozen distributions of Linux, starting with RedHat 5.1 and going up to SuSE 7.2 Pro. I also have a copy of BeOS... for that matter, I have a copy of OS/2 Warp 3. I have never been able to get any alternate OS to function as it is supposed to function. I have spent several evenings trying to get simple things (like connection to the Internet) working, knowing the entire time that I could get it to work in a half-hour with Windows. It's not that Windows is that much better; it's just that I know it that much better.

Recently, I decided to back up all of my pictures and home movies to a bootable hard drive. I tried using a few distributions of Linux, besides BeOS (and OS/2 Warp), but I could not get them to work correctly. SuSE installed OK, but I am not comfortable partitioning drives under it, and it does not correctly play most of the movies I've collected. If it has anything as functional as ACDSee, I don't know about it (no, The Gimp is not it). Meanwhile, I have about 2 Gig of photographs that I took that are waiting on a portable drive, with another Meg or 2 added each week. After a few weeks of experimenting, I finally broke down and ordered the cheapest copy of Windows XP Home I could find.

I am required to use Windows in my workplace. I recently asked the head of the IT Department which version of Windows they planned to use for the near future, as I am considering certification (or, at least, training). He told me to get Windows XP, as the company would be moving to that in the near future.

Many of my friends at work have Windows XP on their home machine. Only a few try alternate OSes. One is a Linux guru; another is an Amiga fan. Both also use Windows.

Ennui

[h0mi]

Actually Ennui is just one reason.

I have 2 computers... 1 devoted to games and the other... essentially everything else. I browse, read email, read usenet, respond in kind. I use office products. I download videos/pictures from the net.

The areas where I'd have some difficulty replacing windows with, say, Linux would be:

1> Email. I'm not sure what linux client would work as "nicely" as outlook express does.
2> Synchronization with my palm pilot. This is becoming less important at home, since most of my syncs and entry of data is done at work. But apps like Avantgo and the like are things I use every day at home.
3> USENET. I started out reading usenet on trn, but I'm not sure I can move from Forte Agent & Xnews to TRN.
4> Irc. Sure I can use Epic or BitchX, but mirc works fine for me and I'm very comfortable with it. I'm not comfortable with using BitchX to chat on multiple channels, or msg people as well.
5> Office apps.
6> "MultiMedia". From Winamp to Divx to every other codec under the sun used to encode avis, mpgs and the like. Much of that goes away when you abandon windows.
7> Yahoo/AIM/ICQ messengers & chat rooms.
8> Digital camera and CF reader

While most of these things are doable in Linux, they're certainly not doiable with the ease I have in windows. Of these, I think email is the easiest to get over but the hardest to transition- I can deal with using pine for email, but how do I convert 60 megs of emails in OE into something usable in linux?

Re:Ennui

[CJ Hooknose]

Email. I'm not sure what linux client would work as "nicely" as outlook express does

First, define what you mean by "nicely". No one can help you unless you can explicitly enumerate your requirements. That said, look at Evolution?. It's similar to Outhouse Express. Tools exist to convert .PST files into standard mbox or mdir formats, so you can use any mail client you want.

Synchronization with my palm pilot

JPilot? Dunno, I have a Zaurus and use Qtopia Desktop, which works fine.

USENET. I started out reading usenet on trn, but I'm not sure I can move from Forte Agent & Xnews to TRN.

trn? Where have you been for the last 10 years? There are plenty of other Usenet clients for Unix-like systems available. Pan and Knode for the GUI, slrn and emacs for the console. Pan is similar to Agent.

IRC.

Never been too involved in IRC, so can't offer any suggestions.

Office apps.

OpenOffice has worked fine for me so far, but very little that I do requires "office" functionality. If I want to write text, I use a text editor.

"MultiMedia". From Winamp to Divx to every other codec under the sun used to encode avis, mpgs and the like. Much of that goes away when you abandon windows.

Really? mplayer has played every movie I've thrown at it, except for Sorenson V3-encoded stuff, and they've managed to get that working partially now. Also, a friend of mine gave me a movie that was encoded in something that the default version of 'Doze Media Player that came with Doze2K couldn't play, but mplayer figured it out immediately (and reported the encoding was MS DirectShow 2.0, of all things! Sigh.)

Yahoo/AIM/ICQ messengers & chat rooms

I hear good things about GAIM, but I don't care much for instant messaging. Chat rooms? Yuck.

Digital camera and CF reader

Difficult to answer without details. Most digital cameras with USB cables act like USB Mass Storage devices; you plug it in and do "mount /dev/sda1 /mnt/camera" and that's it. CF readers are similar if they're USB, if they're PCMCIA, you replace /dev/sda1 with /dev/hde1. You want real advice, post the details to comp.os.linux.hardware.

I can deal with using pine for email, but how do I convert 60 megs of emails in OE into something usable in linux?

You don't have to deal with Pine if you prefer something else--I know it's hard for you to believe, but great advances have been made since 1995. Try LibPST to convert PST into mbox, then you can use any mail client that understands mbox (every sane mail client understands mbox.) HTH, use your Usenet-posting knowledge if you need help since Slashdot sucks as a tech-support forum.

Will any of these posts be moderated?

[teamhasnoi]

God, I just want to browse at +6. So far I see Games, Work, Audio, Configuration, UI, and about 10,000 other reasons why people are still on Windows.

The only reason I see why people run Linux on here is to get chicks.

What do you consider your computer?

[OmniVector]

I'm not using windows anymore.

Linux:
More complicated
Worse overall for games
Requires more time and effort to figure out simple things
Has a huge learning curve

And after those things i still switched from windows to linux. why? am i nuts? No. i enjoy using my computer. i enjoy knowing that all the software i have on my system is free. i haven't pirated some company to get it. i like knowing that there are other people like me who think that software shouldn't have to cost money and that computer science is an art form. i don't care if i can't play the most up to date games: that's what john carmack and nvidia are for. i don't care if i can't watch the newest movie trailers, that's what divx is for.

I want a computer that i truely own, and control. not the defacto standard given to me with no choices, no options, and no freedom.

It's a chicken and egg problem. If all games and software were written for linux instead of windows, and windows was trying to gain popularity it would find a hard time trying to do so. it's an uphill battle. but linux is gaining ground. it's showing up in the news more and more. it's coming to walmart pcs. it's reaching new levels of usability with mandrake and redhat. for those who truely believe in the OSS movement, we are the future. we are the people who make a difference in a company: who push our bosses to realize the benefits of supporting this platform, etc.

to say that not enough software is released for the platform is only fueling the issue. do what i did. drop windows. just switch, and make due with what you can. think of windows software as non existant, and if it *must* be run, use vmware or winex.

That's why i don't use windows.

My Story

[Etriaph]

I was a Windows user back in 1997. I didn't know that there was an alternative, didn't know that Linux even existed. I touted Windows to people who ran the Mac, letting them know that Microsoft's OS was superior to the Mac's, and that hey, the hardware was much cheaper. That was about all I could say. I had no other reason to not use another OS.

Then one fine day, a friend of mine let me back up all my files on his server, he installed Linux on my box (with KDE 0.98 I believe) and my trip began. I spent two months confused, wondering what I was going to do with the box, then lo and behold, as I used it regularily, I realized that it wasn't complicated, it's just another OS. Once you learn where to configure what, the rest of the OS reveals itself to you.

You start to learn how to compile software from tarballs, you learn that RPMs are scary (RedHat 5.1 at the time I believe) and you get used to the community. Yes, there were people who were less than helpful to a new user, almost rude at times, but don't let the people get you. If you don't use Linux because someone's being an ass, that's your fault, not theirs.

I went through KDE, GNOME, stuck with WindowMaker for quite a while, then hit Enlightenment up until KDE 2.0 came out and I figured I'd give it a try again. I was as pleased as peaches. I've been running KDE again since 2.0, I'm a huge fan, and there's nothing I don't do with Linux except play games (and yes, I have a Windows partition for that, I'm not fearful of admitting it). To be honest, I like Windows, I like what it offers, but I just don't know what to do with it except play games. It just seems kinda useless to me unless I want to buy $300.00 worth of shareware to get good apps running.

I've recently used a copy of my friend's Mac OS X and I applaud them on their new OS, but it has nothing on Linux with KDE for me. Nothing kept me from using Linux except me not knowing it existed. I guess sometimes you just have to have an open mind.

Because I am part of the borg

[mattle]

Well, not really, but I was. The voices are fading since I left the Borg in 1999. I worked for Microsoft for 12 years and over those years had Windows everything pumped into my blood. I started as an intern in 1987 supporting DOS and Windows 1.0. I worked my way from support, to testing, to developer support, into IT applications development, and finally as a web developer for Microsoft.com.

I started to get interested in Linux during the Internet boom. At the time, Microsoft was doomed because Linux was free and was going to take away all of Microsoft's revenue stream. I figured I'd get a head start learning skills that would keep me gainfully employed in the post-Microsoft apocalypse. Hmmmm....

Now, before you think that I am a hard-core Microsoft fan, let me convince you otherwise. When I worked at the company, I ate blibit burgers, religiously attended the company meeting, and faithfully spread the word that Microsoft was good. While I still have an enormous amount of respect for the company, I too am nervous about the massive market power that the company wields. That power needs some sort of check and balance. People need to have choices, otherwise there is little incentive for Microsoft to improve their products. That's now why I'm interested in Linux.

Now to the original question: What's keeping me on Windows? Here are some answers:

• Drivers, Drivers, Drivers
• Copy and Paste (CTRL+C and CTRL+V) works virtually EVERYWHERE - I have apps in Linux that SAY they support CTRL+C and CTRL+V but don't.
• Two words: Keyboard interface (Well, in KDE and Gnome at least)
• Microsoft Money (Quicken would cut it as a replacement - GNUCash doesn't for my purposes)
• Microsoft Office
• Windows 2000 and XP are stable, fast, easy to use, and secure (as long as you keep it up to date and firewall it properly - just like Linux)

Despite all of that, I am typing this message in KWord and will (hopefully) copy and paste into Mozilla to answer this post. I'm just about to throw out my commercial editor ($300 a copy) and replace it with VIM. The only thing holding me back is learning the VI keyboard interface - Still getting used to that. I'm learning Perl, Apache, MySQL, PHP, PostgreSQL, and a ton of other COOL stuff. I might even have a reason to get back into C++ programming, which I haven't done for years. And best of all??? I've spent only $24.95 to enjoy all of this. (Well, not counting the hundreds I've spent on Oreilly books)

But I'll probably always have Windows on my machine. For the foreseeable future, it is just easier to use as a desktop OS.

NOTE: When I say "Windows" I mean Windows 2000 or Windows XP. I'd be the first to admit that Windows 95/98/ME is a POS.

I run a UNIX server and Windows laptop

[Istealmymusic]

I suggest everyone do the same. As well as a Windows desktop. This way, you get Windows-software compatibility with the laptop, desktop-hardware-compatibility with server, and both hardware and software compatability with the Windows desktop. It all works out, and you can use less or more of each system to suit your specific needs.

Audio

[chrysalis]

I'm a big fan of Linux, OpenBSD, MicroBSD and free software in general.

But I have to work on Windows or MacOS daily for one thing : audio. Although there are some free audio software, there's no drop-in replacement for Logic Audio, T-Racks, Stylus, Pro-Tools, etc. and it's unlikely that there will be.

A single high quality effect plug-in means a lot of work (both for research and implementation), and as this is a niche market, free software developpers won't focus on this.

Another thing is that interoperability is important, in order to have several people work on the same audio project. But the file formats aren't documented at all as far as I know. Reverse engineering takes a lot of time.

Another thing is the lack of hardware support : midi interfaces, professionnal audio cards, samplers, etc. Even on Windows and MacOS, this is sometimes tricky (not everything works with XP and very few hardware actually work with MacOS X, you have to stick with MacOS 9) . And once again, manufacturers don't help by releasing the specifications. There are not interested at all, because they don't see any potential market. And after all, there are right. Music makers are not computer geeks, they would be scared by Linux.

After 6 years of experience: Do NOT use VB

[robinjo]

I've been a VB developer for 6 years. I was good at it. I knew how to make good quality software with it. Yes, it was a piece of cake until you have to do something more advanced. Well, you can buy components to do more advanced stuff. So I bought a few and solved the problem.

Then comes the kicker. Microsoft released a VB update. I tried to use it but it broke a lot of things. Those 3rd party components also changed and they weren't compatible any more. I decided to write a C DLL to solve the problems. While doing that I noticed how utterly horrible VB really is when you try to do anything more advanced.

Because of all the problems, I decided to not upgrade VB and continue with an older version. Then came the real kicker. Windows 2000 and XP don't supprt it that well any more. There are systematic crashes that do not make any sense whatsoever.

At this point I noticed what a big mess I was in. I had lots of source code that only worked in VB. I couln't upgrade VB without lots of work. At this moment I decided to try Borland Delphi. I rewrote a small part of my software to test what it'd be like to work in it. It was difficult first as I wasn't familiar with Pascal but the results blew me away. My Delphi version was about 20 times faster than VB. I took a long look at my codebase and made a tough decision - I'll rewrite it in Delphi.

That was 4 years ago. I now write everything with Delphi. The quality of our products have skyrocketed. They are smaller and a lot faster. Thanks to Delphi, I can write multithreaded, object-oriented software without any 3rd party components. Since then I've updated Delphi4->Delphi5->Delphi7 and only needed to recompile. With Borland Kylix I've been able to recompile some to even Linux.

I'm a happy man now. I do most development on Windows as my clients use Windows. But I can port all my codebase to Linux easily any time I want. My work doesn't depend on Microsoft any more.

Believe me. There's nothing worse than depend on Microsoft Visual Basic. If I had continued to work with VB, I'd now have to deal with all the changes moving to VB.NET.

Windows for Games

[roffe]

I use an IT-mandated PC at work - but run the IT-mandated stuff under vmware over Debian, so there :) I've talked our boss into violating all the guidelines we have and purchased a Mac for video editing and, er, stuff (my boss is not of the pointy-haired variety).

At home, we've got a PC because Sierra dropped development of Pharaoh for the Mac. It's actually that simple. However, I don't fancy ever buying a new PC - we'll keep the PC for games and upgrade its interiors every now and then, but the next machine we buy for home use will be a Mac.

its an illusion

[Tom]

For many people, there is nothing really keeping them on windos, except the fact that everyone, even the Linux fans, is telling you how painful the switch is and that you still need windos for many things.

I kept a dual-boot system for many years, telling me the same stuff - need windows for games, need windows for this, need windows for that.
Like some nicotin or other drug addicts, one day I just decided to do it. I removed windows from lilo and never looked back. Yeah, there is software that doesn't run under Linux and there isn't an equivalent, but as with smoking, you gotta get away from it before you know if you really need it or not.

So, what's keeping people on windows? Habit, of course, and the Fear, Uncertainty and doubt tripplet.
My estimate is that maybe 10% of the windows users really need windows. Everyone else could switch if they only wanted to. That they don't means that billy hasn't pissed off his users enough, yet. Smart guy, I give him that, knows his limits.

Off-topic

[SoupIsGoodFood_42]

I think the question is. Why isn't Slashdot using CSS, standards compliant XHTML, and using basic design principals to make the site not only look better, but easier to use, faster to download, and more compatible in different devices?

GIFs instead of PNGs are the least of Slashdots worries.

I'm Linux 99%

[JThaddeus]

I run Linux at work and home. I use Linux for everything--development, office stuff, recrecation, etc.--except (1) product testing on Windows; (2) playing QuickTime/*.mov files; and (3) for surfing at home when the kids left the machine booted in Windows & I don't have time to reboot (like now).

Actually, the only good reason I have seen for Windows is Microsoft's Combat Flight Simulator games. Wow! Neat stuff!

Mass Market

[Dun Malg]

I'm working on a project destined for the general public (in a specific industry not known for its computer saavy), and that means "Windows". Not only does it mean Windows as in XP, 2000, and ME; but it also means 98, 95 and (the latest request from On High), the Great Satan Win 3.1 itself. My boss knows of two customers running 3.1, so we're building a damn front end for 3.1. (shudder)

Also, I'm cowriting a script with a friend using Movie Magic Screenwriter, which is the only decent product in that niche that has a Windows and a Mac version. Trapped again!

Five things keep me to windows.

[joto]

Internet Explorer, Windows Media Player, Microsoft Office, music software and some games.

But if I didn't have a choice (I have a KVM attached to two computers, one running debian, and one running w2k), I would have used linux only. However, the convenience of the two running concurrently is great.

What keeps me on Windows?

[jonr]

Here is what keeps me on Windows:

• IMatch, simply the best Image Database I have found, nothing comes close to this in the Open world.
• Strategy Games, do you really think we will see Age of Mythology or Warcraft on Linux?

Get me these two, or at least IMatch clone, and I'll try again to switch. Windows XP is annoying.
(Gawd, how I miss BeOS)
J.

Re:What keeps me on windows

[GreyWolf3000]

I don't use menu transparency, so I wouldn't know. In fact, I'd venture to say that the real issue is that no one really tests them out much because no one else uses them. They look fine in screenshots, but even correctly done transparent menus look and behave silly.

That being said, Mosfet tends to shift focus from many projects at a time, so it's not uncommon that a few quirks can stick around for a few releases.

Still, since transparency is an "extra" feature built on top of an "extra" ui engine, I don't think this needs to be criticized too heavily.

Debian uber alles ;)

[stevey]

I'm a Debian developer, and I run Debian at home and work, as I have done for ~3 years. (I don't use kde/gnome though, I don't have the horsepower for it - just icewm).

I'm quite rare though. In our company there are three people who use Linux upon their desktop, Me (a sysadmin), a web developer/perl coder, and an Oracle guy.

So far I've not had any major problems, I can view PDF's/Java/DOC files etc, and generally operate on a par with other people within the office

I used to have a dual boot setup so that I could run things like the Microsoft policy editor, but not any more - if I want to run something like that I'll walk to somebody else's PC and borrow it for a few minutes.

Sometimes I wish I were running Windows - because it can be very hard to help one of our home works over the phone when I can't look to my machine and talk them through what options to select, etc. But apart from that life is peachy :)

MS Free for years

[lemkebeth]

I don't use Windows. I have more taste in my pinky finger than most Windows users seem to have.

The only time I will use Windows is at work if it is mandated. Even then, I'll try to use a different office package if possible.

Mind you, this is a UNIX and Mac geek talking.

Actually, that's one of the things...

[EnglishTim]

I've recently moved over to largely using Linux at work, and it is rather fustrating the way that the Linux Desktop is fragmented. The thing is, I imagine that many people use a mix of KDE and Gnome apps. I find it irritating that I have to set up file associations twice and things like that. I wish it could just be unified like Windows. And don't get me started on applications that are still using Motif...

Several Reasons

[crashnbur]

(1) Windows is compatible with the software that most of my classes require me to use.

(2) Windows is compatible with the software that I enjoy using.

(3) I've seen no compelling reasons to switch or even to adapt to anything else. Windows does what I need it to do -- Mac, Linux, and others can probably do a lot of it, but there is no way that any of them can do it all with all the software available for Windows.

(4) I know Windows tricks. I've used it for years and I have a very particular method of getting around a logical system using a combination of (mostly) keyboard shortcuts and (fewer) mouse clicks. I don't feel like trying to learn a new system, and again, I have not been compelled to.

(5) And finally, and to some lesser extent than all the other reasons, but it's still a factor -- I like to defy the arrogant, pseudo-intelligent, elitist know-it-alls who wish simply to force Linux, Macs, or [insert OS here] upon Windows users simply because "Bill Gates bl0ws g0ats" or "Windows sux0rs". I don't want to hear your shitty reasons for switching over -- I'm not you. I want strong evidence that suggests why everyone should switch. Only then, I'm guessing, will I be even slightly persuaded.

(6) I am a diehard American capitalist Liberarian who thinks indepedently, votes Republican, and would like nothing more than to destroy the ideas of an American welfare state, the "thought police" (socialist/christian left) and the "morality police" (christian right), and that any majority or minority opinion may ever suppress the opinion of any other when it is universally regarded as something that doesn't matter much (such as abortion, sex between/among consenting adults, choosing an operating system, etc.).

Please note: this does not mean that I believe Windows is the greatest operating system on earth. It does mean, though, that it does everything I need it to do, and I'm content enough with it that I do not require change. (Besides, if people actually took the time to learn how to use it, it's actually quite manageable.)

It's what you're used to that counts

[Simon Brooke]

Note: I am a software engineer and have done enough Windows and Linux cross platform GUI and non GUI coding to not be considered a Linux idiot.

Caution: Well thought-out and knowledgeable opinions ahead. If these disturb you , read no further.

I will not be switching from Windows to Linux as my main platform any time soon because:

You know, I found your post extremely interesting because I'm just the same... except exactly the opposite way around. I've used UN*X for the past fifteen years as my desktop operating system, and tof the last eight of those the UN*X in question has been Linux. I've seen Windows and the problems people have had with it and have had absolutely no motivation to switch. As a software engineer and as a businessman, all the tools I need work well on UN*X and the Windows equivalents don't have any compelling benefits to offset against the learning curve involved.

However, Windows has been getting better. Nowadays Windows (2k and XP) seem to have adequate stability and are at last the sort of operating system which is robust enough for commercial use. But there still isn't any compelling reason to switch.

What it boils down to is familiarity with applications. All those people wh are saying 'I can't switch because I use application X and it doesn't run on operating system Y' are essentially in the same position I'm in- we're using a toolkit that works for us and there's no compelling reason to change it. Those people who, in this discussion, are saying 'I'm using functionality X and it doesn't exist on platform Y' are, in 90% of the cases, just wrong. Those people who are saying 'operating system X is easier to set up than operating system Y' are these days definitely just plain wrong (I know, I've installed them all).

For me, whether I'm writing code, doing my accounts, designing bits for my boat, sorting and manipulating my photographs, keeping up with the news and so on, the tools on Linux are just there and are completely familiar; on Windows I wouldn't know where to start.

Except for a few very highly specialised jobs, the tools have been there on UN*X for longer than Windows has existed, and just as on Windows, they've been getting better all the time. If you can't find what you need, it's because you're not looking. Not that there is any moral imperative on you to look - if what you've got is good enough, why change?

As you say, the best tool for the job wins and in 99% of the cases we're discussing the best tool for the job is the one you're familiar with. For me, it's interesting to see that Windows is at last becoming as good as UN*X, but until it's considerably better I have no incentive to switch.

But to go back to the beginning of this discussion, for Linux to become the operating system of choice for the majority doesn't require any changes to the operating system, the user interface, the installers or anything else. It simply has to become the operating system used in schools and colleges. People will stick to what they're used to, and if they're used to Linux, Linux is what it will be.

Ooooo! Four games!

[EnglishTim]

Whoopee doo!

Thanks!

[Mustang Matt]

Looks really promising! I'll check it out.

It's not that bad...

[Mustang Matt]

If you secure your system it's really not that bad, I've never had a virus.

You can also get this $20 plugin from baxbex to disable HTML which I really like. Too bad they didn't come out with it a year ago as I'm getting ready to switch.

Outlook express is still to date the fastest startup of any GUI email client that I know of.

It's very flexible too. It doesn't have as much feature bloat as Outlook/Evolution but for email I don't need all those features.

Re:In a word Quicken

[mccalli]

Snap. Quicken is the reason I'm still on Windows as well. I have nine years' worth data in it, and I'm not migrating onto something that's worth.

Crossover supports it in 'Silver' mode, but I'd need not only Gold support but a guaranteed upgrade path for future versions. Of course Crossover cannot give such a guarantee, so Windows remains the only practical option.

Can't use a Mac either - it's the UK version I use, and there's no Mac UK version of Quicken.

Cheers,
Ian

Best place to get Linux help

[aussersterne]

Skip IRC and chat rooms. These people are not only unhelpful when it comes to Linux, they are unhelpful and full of four letter words in general. That's why parents hate their kids hanging out there.

If you want to learn to use Linux, the best thing you can do for yourself is consult http://groups.google.com early and often. Every question you can think to ask has already been answered there any number of times. You can plug in your problem and get your answer instantly from one of the developers, rather than from some chump in a chat room.

It's an incredible tool that too few users know about.

Re:Best place to get Linux help

[gatekeep]

Thanks, I'll give that a shot.

Wasted Effort

[Beautyon]

Getting Linux and its apps to do what I want (work) takes up alot of my time; I then have to switch between it and Windoze to do work, which wastes more of my time. Thats why I run windoze most of the time; to simply get things done in one place.

OSX is what Linux should be; with it, we can run all the apps we need (professional sound apps, graphics, publishing), it has painless font support, a shell, and all the related command line tools on one machine at one time.

Linux can still become attractive in the future, if the developers of the main distros spend more time on the things people want. If they dont, everyone is going to end up switching to OSX, since its "here now", painless and powerful. After that, no one will ever need to switch to Linux, because everyones demands will be satisfied, from developers down to the lowest common denominator user.

Re:Nothing

[White Roses]

Do you want a car that needs to be in the shop once a month? Or once a year? Your mechanic wants you to have one that's in once a month. It keeps him in business.

I've got the once a year variety, and I'm pretty pleased with it. Next analogy, please . . .

perhaps

[dollargonzo]

you can call me of a dual voice. this is because i run windows through vmware. there are some things i simply cant do on *nix: some uni software only runs on windows! anywho...i use linux all the time, for just about everything, including games (i don't play too much, so there are enough for me) and use windows through vmware. so...why can't everyone be getting the best of both worlds??

Re:Probably the flames I get from linux users most

[ukyoCE]

I've had quite the opposite experience, being amazed at how welcoming and helpful the linux irc channels are. Of course there's the occasional asshole or even channel full of assholes, but it's no more common than it is for Windows software. Just look at how much Mplayer got/gets bashed for being assholes to newbies...

Hall of fame

[Sivar]

This article has become the most active story ever on Slashdot. Click the "hof" link on the left.

Re:I second the motion Re:X has kept me away from

[aallan]

X is too much of a pain in the ass for desktop users. XF86Config files are way over most people's heads. Font configuration is a nightmare, and without some tweaking fonts look like shit in X.

Which is why is should all be done by the system admin, none of it should be touched by individual users. Thats sort of why you have to login as root to play with any of this stuff...

To really get Linux on the desktops of Lusers, X has to be replaced by something entirely intended for desktops.

The success, or not, of Linux in the "desktop" marketplace holds absolutely no interest for me and a whole bunch of other people. Why do people persist in saying it has to?

Al.

Nonsense

[error0x100]

PNGs are almost always smaller than the same GIF, and usually significantly so, if converted directly. I recommend ImageMagick.

A few notes to be aware of:

- USE 8-BIT PNG. GIF images are 8-bit. Loading them into an image editor and then trying to resave them as 24-bit PNGs will make them bigger.

- Adobe Photoshop adds useless "comment" information into a PNG file that makes all their GIFs slightly larger (something like "created with Adobe").

- Earlier versions of Adobe Photoshop (e.g. 5) did not export PNG correctly, and created overly large PNGs.

ImageMagick consistently produces the smallest PNGs of anything I've tried.

NOTE: If it seems strange to anyone that a PNG file size can differ depending on the program used to create it, but still be a valid PNG, its because of the way PNG compression works. PNG has a number of built-in compressors. It compresses each SCANLINE (row) of an image using the compressor that happens to work best for that particular scanline. So if a scanline compresses best with compressor number 3, the scanline will begin with a value indicating that it uses compressor 3 for that scanline. A PNG file reader then knows how to uncompress that scanline. However, some earlier software did not correctly choose the BEST compressors to use for each scanline, and used unoptimal compressors, but still valid.

Its more complicated than this, but that is the general idea.

Re:PERFECT QUESTION!

[ellem]

<i>or it has to become userfriendly more like windows</i>

Crashing often and wildly arcane BSODs are NOT user friendly! And even when Windows is stable (2K, XP) it's still not all that user friendly -- what with emergency updates and such. The fact that the command line is basically removed doesn't make it more friendly.

You problem, everyone's problem with Linux is with the window managers.

KDE & Gnome lead the pack and they are both wildly inconsistent and very different.

Linux on the command line is fine.

The real reason I use Windows

[deblau]

Entertainment. Linux sucks at giving me entertainment. Windows is great for it.

X is the enemy.

[Forkenhoppen]

It's not that they don't look and feel the same. I personally think there's a more fundamental problem, and that problem is X.

X was designed, from the start, to be a low-level API to allow different types of UNIX windowing systems to interoperate. It was designed to be quick on the hardware of that day, which was monochrome or paletted, and speedy across network connections like 300 baud. It was designed with the intention of people writing cheap toolkits for it, toolkits like Motif, that were low-bandwidth.

Now why did they go with the client-side toolkit idea? There are a few reasons. One is because the target machine wasn't always of the same architecture, and porting the library to another architecture could be a pain. Another is that it took more bandwidth to transfer the library to the user's side than it did to just send the basic drawing instructions.

Nowadays, we have two solutions to the first problem; we can either use a VM to run our libraries, or we can just compile it for them. (This is where Autoconf, Automake and libtool come in handy.) Worse comes to worst, we can have a fallback that uses an X remeniscient remote painting facility, if they don't have the tk installed.

The second problem is obsolete. Toolkits are now being themed, which means that we have huge numbers of image files being used to "paint" interfaces. If the machine that's the X server isn't the same as the X client, then these images are painted on the client and sent over the network to the server. Eek. Also, these are typically images that aren't natively supported by X (X only supports paletted images) so we need to use an extension, so programmers have some cruft to worry about, here, too. (ie; What if the extension's supported, but poorly, and it fails halfway through the call?)

Now don't tell me that we need to do things this way, because we don't. In the latest release of Windows, XP now has that level of network transparency. If you want to access your home computer's apps from work, it's as simple as logging into it from work. Instantly, your home drives appear in your explorer, and you can access windows on the screen of your home box.

Now why am I making such a big deal about this, you ask? Well, it's because they're not just taking a screenshot of the desktop and sending it. They've taken a page from X's book, and they send the higher-level commands over the network. Essentially, GDI calls. And, from what I understand, you end up with a consistant interface on the accessing end, because it uses the accessor's theme set.

Now this is just my rant about X's networking components. If you want to get into XFree86, I can tell you that I'm not at all pleased with the way they've set it up. X should not be the video driver. When I start my machine, I should not have to load X in order for my graphics card driver to be loaded. It should be loaded, waiting and ready to be accessed, by any application.

The way I see it, the system should come up by loading the graphics driver. It should be a process that's always running. Then there should be a standard library through which anyone can access the graphics driver. The card's state should be in the driver, not X! The driver should be in charge of the card, not X! X should be just another application that people can run to get a windowing environment.

The closest I can find to this idea, right now, is the libGGI/libGII/kgi people. They've got a basic framework for their API down, but it only works with a limited number of cards, and only one of those uses acceleration features so far. If that API were expanded for full 3D support, and a few more recent cards could be added to that list, or bumped up to full acceleration, I think we'd all be a lot better off. Heck, they've already got an Xggi server written--they've had it for years.

As for X on the desktop, GNOME had to hack a CORBA ORB to get the functionality that Windows provides for free. For X, the lack of standardization in the 3rd party object components department has been a huge pain in the ass for anyone interested in combining a KDE part with a GNOME widget in the same program. You end up having to port one of them the other way. If X could be made to have it's own object tracking extension, that would help bandaid the solution, but I think it's just a symptom of a much bigger problem.

X is old. It shows. We need something new; I say make X a plugin for whatever new windowing system we use tomorrow, and that we get started on making that new one soon.

If we want to put a GNU system on every desktop, X as the windowing system just isn't the right solution anymore.

And with that, I think I'm done. :)

Still using Win2k for...

[mirabilos]

Counter-Strike, and nothing else.

GNU/Linux is not an option because it
a) does crash more often than Win2k
b) has a lower fps than the 30fps I can
achieve on Win2k (S3 Twister-K)

OpenBSD, which I use for everything else,
does support the S3 quite well, too, but
unluckily, WINE does not run on it since 1999.

I use Windows XP because I like it

[forgoil]

Simple as that. I code for Linux (servers) every day at work, so I have a pretty good knowledge of the Linux platform, and it's horrible as far as I am concerned. Very primitive.

Simple as that. If free software had been better (and properly supported and quality assured) I would use it myself. And MacOS X would be WAY to expensive for me to get (the useless hardware is WAY to expensive).

There's this dandy little program...

[HiThere]

There's this dandy little program called Encore. It only runs on Win95 (not even Win98). It's closed source with proprietary file formats. And there are all these files my wife has created...

Perhaps I'll get it to run under VMWare... though it didn't run under version 1.0.

Re:Probably the flames I get from linux users most

[IamTheRealMike]

If you use the #linuxhelp and #linpeople chat rooms on freenode and get flamed, let me know, my email address is in my user profile. I give support there regularly and only rarely see people get flamed, and when there is flamage it's invariably because those people were themselves being assholes. Note: a few of the more experienced people are happy to help newbies, BUT you have to appreciate that they can be busy so you might receive terse answers, ie

"Er, hi, I'm a newbiew, and I was wondering if anybody knew the answer to my question"

is a bad way to start... but

"How do I extract a .tar.gz file?"
"tar xzvf foo.tar.gz"

is clearly what you're looking for.

mozilla

[jacobb]

sorry, you're utterly wrong on that point: since a _long_ time ago (0.9?), you've been able to tie multiple POPs to a single identity, each of which will have its own "from" address. Of course, you only ever really need one smtp server.

Cheers

Micro review

[Walles]

IMO, their C(++) plugin currently looks very promising but isn't quite there yet. You have a rather nice source browser, and you can compile programs (using your old Makefiles) and have errors turned into clickable tasks. The debugging UI is more or less identical to their Java debugging UI, but as I haven't been able to try it on a large project yet I can't say how well it works in practice.

But if the CDT gets anywhere near their Java Development Environment, I'll be in heaven :-).

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Guspaz]

Can't you stick some arctic silver under the heatsink when you replace it?

2976th comment

[doc_traig]

I think /. has a goldmine here. Anytime the editors want a mad rush of attention to a topic, post OS vs. OS material (I know, duh). Anyone know what the record number of comments posted to a single item are?

Thanks to schnell, the user who started all this.

- DDT

Re:2976th comment

[Bishop923]

Check the Slashdot Hall Of Fame This story is now #1

Re:What keeps me on windows

[Guspaz]

If Q3A would have crashed the whole computer, I think it likely that it would have crashed under Linux too. Hard lockups in games are not usually due to the OS, but drivers. Blame nVidia or ATI, not Microsoft.

As for tetris, I should have said full-screen 3D games. Tetris would run in a window and probably if it did crash just produce an error dialog.

The application suite / application that's missing

[NitroWolf]

I use Macromedia's Studio MX. There is simply nothing better than Dreamweaver for HTML editing... at least nothing I've found. Everything I've tried, and believe me, I've tried a lot, pales in comparison to the Studio. I'm not a big fan of Macromedia, but the MX products are absolutely top notch.

The one other application I have trouble leaving behind on Windows is UltraEdit. There is not a better text editor out there, and I am a big VIM fan/die hard. Never did get into Emacs, but I very seriously doubt it has the ease of use and power that UltraEdit has.

If studio MX and Ultraedit were available natively on Linux, I'd switch. The last remaining applications tying me to all my machines being Linux would be games.

As it stands right now, however, my only "main" Linux machine is my secondary work laptop (the one I use the most), with my primary being forced onto 2000 because of our Exchange server.

In fact, Apple desktops are easy to justify...

[ZxCv]

As pretty as OSX is the Apple desktop is hard to justify.

Personally, I don't think the desktops are any harder to justify than the laptops...

A friend of mine, who is the IT director for a warehouse here in town, just bought 24 new iMac G4-700's for $1200/each. He said given the requirements (all-in-one form factor, LCD monitor, CD-RW), the iMac G4 was easily the most cost effective solution. The cheapest overall machine that fit the requirements was one from Gateway that was $200 less, but the increased stability of OS X over XP and the fact that setting up the database client software would require about half the hassle made him go with the iMac G4.

I have another friend who bought a new Dell desktop about 8 or 10 months ago. It is a P4, I believe 1.4 or 1.5GHz with 256MB RAM and a CD-RW. At the time, I believe he paid around $900 for the system plus 17" CRT. He originally asked my advice on what to get, and, although I suggested the base model iMac G4 to him, he ended up getting the Dell. And since then, I've had at least one call a week from him because his system just magically rebooted itself or some drivers are blowing up or the printer wont print or any of a thousand different things. And each time, I would make sure to remind him, "Hey man, if you had spent the extra couple hundred dollars, you wouldn't be having these problems." Well, a week and a half ago, he sold his Dell and monitor to some guy on his street and ordered himself a brand new iMac G4.

Perhaps the value of the Apple desktops isn't quite as apparent as their notebooks, but as the two stories above show, I've personally seen two different people realize for themselves just how much value the Apple desktops do have.

But..

[Mustang Matt]

Does it create a set of mail folders for each email address?

I don't want four hundred sets of folders, I want all my email addresses to share the same inbox, outbox, sent, drafts, trash, etc.

my experience

[benjaminchoate]

I currently use Windows XP for nearly everything. I use Linux (RedHat 7.3?) in my Java class at a private technical school that I'm currently attending. I have tried several times in the past to install Linux (usually RedHat but also Mandrake 8.0) on my computers and have *always* run into something that really prevented me from using it efficiently - or even at all.

I like to think of myself as someone who knows their way around a computer fairly well. My first computer was a 286 with 1 MB of RAM (I think?) and ran DOS. I have been very interested in computers my whole life and have worked as a technician building and troubleshooting windows/hardware as well as worked as a SysAdmin for a small network of Windows NT/2000 computers for a little while and now I'm learning to program. My point, I don't claim to be an expert but I'm certainly not granny. I'm usually the one that friends and neighbors call when they can't figure something out.

I first installed Linux about 4 years ago. I was irritated by Windows 98 always crashing and had heard about the stability and speed that Linux offered as well as it being free. I was about 18 at the time, had no experience with Linux and really noone around me who did, but I thought that I would be able to work it out with the documentation available online. I installed RedHat (5.x I think?) and could not for the LIFE of me get my hardware ISA 56k modem working. It's pretty hard to get help online when your modem isn't working. I ran to another computer and looked and looked and poked and read. I could not get it to work. Maybe I'm stupid, but this isn't really about that is it... it's about why I'm not using Linux.

Soon after I left the country and didn't even have my own computer for a while. Later, when I finally got my own computer again (I was in Moscow at the time) I decided I was fed up with Windows 98 (again :)) and wanted to give Linux a shot. I picked up a copy of Mandrake 8.0 and ran home like a giddy school girl. The installation was smooth, most of my hardware auto-detected and installed and I was on my way! I set up my internet account and tried to configure my modem. What's this? My modem doesn't work. I looked at my modem (which had worked fine on Windows 98) closely for the first time. Oh no! A winmodem!!! It was a lucent chipset and I was actually able to find a driver for it (though it did take about 2 days). Talk about amazing! After downloading it (I forgot to mention that I was dual-booting to 98) and putting it where I could get to it, I went back to Mandrake. And began following the instructions that came with the driver. It asked me to remove the current driver if there was one present. My modem's enumerator apparently had been detected and installed and so I looked for ways to uninstall it. I looked... and looked and looked and looked - you get the point. I could not find a way to do it, I don't know if I need to recompile the kernel or what, but remember, I am a newbie here, I don't know how to recompile the freaking kernel! I'm just installing Linux so that I can LEARN how to use it! Eventually I gave up on that and hoped that it wouldn't matter. Using whatever RPM program came with Mandrake I installed the driver. Nothing happened, no new hardware detected no nothing. I dinked around with it for several weeks (all the while still using Windows 98), I sent emails, I posted questions in various Linux-help forums. The replies I got were brief and not helpful, many of them pointed me back to the sigh where I downloaded the driver originally (which I had practically memorized). I was frustrated. While Linux would run on my machine, I had no internet access, which limited 80% of what I did on my computer at the time. Finally I backed up my needed files and installed Windows 2000. It ran well and was much more stable than Linux.

I would much rather have used Linux. I like the idea of Linux, I like the idea of a community of computer-savvy users banding together to topple the monopoly of Microsoft ... and so on a so forth. Unfortunately I just couldn't get past these elementary things to even find out if I LIKED using it as a permanant solution to MS. I am not a complete idiot (my tested IQ is around 135), I am not grandma, I work in the IT industry for pete's sake! For me, Linux needs either better documentation or easier configuration/setup. Please feel free to disagree with me or call me stupid. I don't care... it still won't get my modem working.

That's my experience to take as you wish.

- Benjamin Choate

P.S. - I'm back in the States now and have a "new" (to me) computer. I have XP on it right now, but, due to a faulty mothergboard, I could not install Linux, but for some reason could install XP. I don't hold that against Linxu, I just need a new MB.

Whats keeping me on Windows.

[Ziviyr]

3D driver install hassle. (nVidia, should be fairly easy right?)

E-Mail is not easy to move cross platform. (What is a good flexible YAM/PocoMail type mailer for Linux anyways?)

X configuration is confusing. (Oh how I miss Picasso 96 style screenmode editing...)

Hardware support for my video capture card (ATI TV Wonder VE) and my Intel "webcam" are unknown to me.

Various other little excuses to boot Windows and a 24/7 poweron tendancy. (I only have one non-Amiga PC, so I'm kinda stuck in the mud. And my DSL plan doesn't allow for much dialup time, so net is locked into the AMD box for now.)

Two things, sort of ...

[genesplicer]

Games is one thing ... I've gotten Q3A to run better under with X and Linux (Mandrake 9.0 currently) than it does under Windows ... But, the newest bestest coolest games always come out for Windows first and then, if the developers feel like it, are available for Linux ... Aggravating ...

But by far the biggest thing keeping on Windows is one app - EndNote ... My work is all scientific writing (journal articles and manuscripts, research correspondence, grants, etc.), all of which require significant quantities of references ... EndNote absolutely rawks for this stuff (if you've never used it, it functions kind of like a plug-in for Word and is for managing all references and citations within a document) but it doesn't work properly under WINE yet (I've tried) and I haven't found anything for Linux/BSD that's even similar let alone remotely comparable ... If I could code, I'd work on something that would do the job, but I only know DNA and amino acid code - not software ;) ...

Re:Fiddling

[Twirlip of the Mists]

I moved to Linux because I was tired of constantly "fiddling" with Windows through the barriers that M$ puts up to "protect" the user from himself.

I often find that the people who hold this opinion are simply people that didn't know how to do it the right way, and so got frustrated with what they perceived as Windows's difficulty and obtuseness.

Macs supposedly work perfectly all the time, but when something does go wrong nobody can fix them.

No, not really. In fact, anybody who knows how to fix a Mac can fix it quite easily; in this way, it's just like Windows. But this takes knowing how to do it, which is another one of those things that frustrates people who lack the knowledge.

Linux, Windows, and the Mac are all quite complex, and difficult to understand at a low level. The difference is that both Windows and the Mac are thoroughly documented, feature-complete, and exhaustively tested. Linux is none of those things.

Linux is best described by that old saying about the singing dog. The remarkable thing is not so much that the dog sings well, but rather that it can sing at all. However, as remarkable as a singing dog is, one would not reasonably expect to replace the lead mezzo soprano with one. Likewise, as much novelty value as Linux carries with it, one would be quite foolish to expect it to do the work of Windows or a Mac.

Re:Probably the flames I get from linux users most

[gatekeep]

Well, that's the thing. I don't have to call Microsoft support. It's easy enough to browse around the GUI, and sooner or later I'll stumble across the setting I'm looking for even if I've no idea where it is.

In linux, this is impossible. Even once I know what file in what directory a setting exists in, it may not be there. It seems routine to have to create a new file or add a line with a new setting. It's a lot more difficult to come at this without prior knowledge and experience of what settings are valid and where. Browsing through a GUI to find a checkbox or drop down is much easier.

Note I said easier, and not better.

Re:Fiddling

[Twirlip of the Mists]

Linux documentation at http://www.tldp.org

Anybody who's used the so-called documentation on that and similar sites knows that it consists of exhaustive treatments of such critical topics as how to install Linux on a laptop with less than 4 MB of RAM, making Linux work with the ever-popular "K7S5A," how to run Quake on Linux, and installing the Caudium web server. Documents like the Open Office User's Guide, however, are conspicuously absent. Instead, the developers of Open Office expect their users to make do with a collection of poorly written and woefully incomplete "how to" pamphlets.

For all intents and purposes, Linux and non-commercial Linux applications are effectively undocumented, and that's simply not okay.

Windows crash gallery http://www.scorpioncity.com/mscrash.shtml

That's a collection of screen-shots of error conditions encountered in Winodws. Some of them are quite funny. But I fail to see the relevance of them. Any person so inclined could very easily assemble a comparable "hall of shame" comprised of Linux screen shots. Since practically no one uses Linux as a desktop operating system, however, there would be little point in it.

Hell, from my passing experience with Mozilla alone I feel quite sure I could build a complete "hall of shame" that would compare nicely with the one you linked.

Direction Microsoft is taking: http://www.hevanet.com/peace/microsoft.htm

I fail to see the point of linking to this article. Even a cursory examination of this author's other writings will reveal his history of bias and misrepresentation. This is basically just a somewhat longer version of "M$ sUx0rs, d00d!"

I have yet to be able to find EQUIVALENT information on windows.

Information equivalent to what? I don't understand your comparison. Have you tried the "Help" item under the Start menu? Windows comes with thorough and complete on-line help. This and a great deal more information is also available on the MSDN web site. It's very easy to find.

Where can I find information on making a network boot disk so I can reload windows from another machine that does have a cdrom?

Not being a Windows expert, I'm sure I have no idea, but I would start with bootdisk.com, then Google, then MSDN, then calling Microsoft's technical support hotline.

The wonderful thing about Windows-- and yeah, it's a wonderful thing compared to the anarchy of Linux-- is that there's always somebody you can call. With Linux and related "open source" software, you're limited to trying to track down the author of the original software-- who no longer supports it, naturally-- and hoping that he's nice enough to give you the help you need. In most cases, of course, you are simply ignored, or even verbally abused, rather than receiving any assistance.

With both Microsoft and the Linux whatever-it-is, you get what you pay for. With Microsoft, you pay for and receive help. With the Linux "community," or whatever, you pay for nothing, and you receive nothing in return.

2 things

[TheDarkRogue]

Games and mIRC
I use mIRC for so much it's not funny. It's almost like the backbone of everything I do. If there would be a linux port of mIRC that had full script support and could use the various DLLs (Recompiled with Kylix) I would have no problem there. Then there are the games. Wine just doens't cut it with them all. Also, you can't just have game support, you need a working server browser. I use ASE, so that also needs to work with WINE.

Re:Windows? What's that?

[IGnatius T Foobar]

I wouldn't worry about .Net "smart clients" too much... the API is very well-defined, and the good folks at the Mono project are making sure the Free world will be on board.

Re:Windows? What's that?

[fferreres]

But are they doing clean room implementations? It doesn't look like that to me. I suspect they will that pass for now, but in the future when everyone has embraced the API, they may (will?) follow another trend.

I know about Mono, it looks very promising.

w00t! Last post!

[teamhasnoi]

Who cares? No one can read this at anything under 4 anyhow.