Slashdot Mirror
Linux Users Try FreeBSD 5, Windows
uninet writes "Most people know what GNU/Linux is, but fewer know about BSD and fewer still have actually used one of the major BSD variants (other than the highly customized Mac OS X). Ed Hurst, a writer and a long time GNU/Linux user, decided to give FreeBSD a try. Will Ed join the ranks of happy FreeBSD users? Find out at OfB.biz." And our own Roblimo, Windows-free for five years, has spent a week learning Windows XP.
Don't get me wrong, I love Linux as well, but I've always used BSD on my servers and on a couple of my home desktops as well. The ergonomic design of the BSD kernel makes it more efficient at many tasks than Linux and (especially) Windows. BSD supports other features, such as RAM-level RAID that allows you to stripe memory across DIMMs to offer complete fault-tolerance in case of memory failure. Things like this are obviously not going to be needed by your average home user, but in a production server environment it's great to have.
First, a question: What's up with all this "Ctrl C" and Ctrl V" copy/paste stuff? In almost all Linux programs, when I want to copy a block of text (or a graphic or whatever) I just highlight the original, then click both mouse buttons (or the middle button if I have a 3-button mouse) where I want to paste it. This is fast, easy, and takes little hand motion on my laptop keyboard. All this Ctrl key action slows me down. I don't know about the rest of the world, but I need to work quickly if I want to earn a living, and I don't see why Windows wants me to go through all those extra hand motions just to paste a URL into a story. Geh.
You do realize that in Windows you can highlight the text, then right click on it to bring up a menu with Undo, Cut, Copy, Paste, Delete, and Select All, right?
-- Dr. Eldarion --
oh I know you *can* do the same things with Linux and I spent countless hours doing just that.
It was just far easier to click on a movie and have IE open it (including downloading the codec) rather than having to compile mplayer (with GUI options), make sure it worked fullscreen with X options, and make sure I had the codecs.
Or how about opening a Word document and making sure it looks identical to the one that was saved elsewhere?
It's Windows. Millions of AOL users can figure it out. If you say you can't, you're either lazy or lying. It's not rocket science; it's not even model rocket science.
That's interesting that you say you like IE over Moz.. while I do use Windows most of the time (FreeBSD the rest of the time; I never got into Linux much), I can't stand IE. It's to the point where I keep a copy of Firebird on my USB drive so I can quickly copy it to another computer I happen to be using, because IE is just so clunky and horrible to use. IMNSHO, of course. :)
As for Office being better than WP, have you tried OpenOffice? Recently? It's been good for awhile, and still getting better. I haven't used WP since 5.1 for DOS, so I can't really comment on how well it works. But I had some bad experiences with MS Office a couple years ago, switched to OpenOffice, and haven't had any problems since then, with interoperability or anything else.
Upgrading Windows is definitely easy (when it works and doesn't break stuff, that is). It took me a long time to figure out how to upgrade FreeBSD successfully, and I never really did figure it out for Linux.
Basically, I rather like Windows 2000 and XP, they're very stable, and when you turn off all the extra flashy GUI shit, they're pretty nice to use. The main thing that keeps me from using FreeBSD as my main desktop system is hardware compatibility... I tried it for awhile, but everything always felt like it *sort of* worked, but not as well as it should be.
However, Windows is the only MS product I use. I can't stand IE, like I said before, and I have no problems with not using MS Office. I don't even have MS hardware (I've always liked Logitech's stuff better).
My $0.02.
Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum sonatur.
You're right. I'm not against linux or anything because I believe linux has a lot of potential, but from a usability standpoint, windows is far superior. Linux can be changed all the way down to the kernel to do anything imaginable. It's more stable etc..can go on for a long time. But if you're a home user or a company in the market right now, you want to be able to exchange information and use the newest hardware/software(games and such) easily without having to do much. And thats exactly what windows does, gives you a consistent interface with a huge hardware support database. Again I dont agree with the price of windows and obviously windows has a ton of problems but people use it everyday to get what they need done.
Now there are a lot of linux zealots out there that want to change over simply for the fact that we shouldn't use windows. And no matter what you say about windows, they come back and say things like "Linux has tons hardware support!" or "KDE/GNOME/XFCE(whatever) is better than the windows interface" and stuff like that. Which is true but again, a significant amount of users are people like your parents(who may be OS savvy) and just the general public who want things done and have it done quick and painless. Basically they want things handed to them. Thats why AOL is as big as it is. It provides the needed functionality without having to do anything yourself.
Personally, I'm writing this post on a winxp machine because it much easier to browse the web with it. And I use VC++/Codewarrior for windows and palm developement because those were the tools that were given to me(and palm has better support for windows). Switching development to linux is just not worth it because i would have to train some people with new software and the linux iface.
I personally have this machine dual booted to redhat 9 (for testing, rh9 isnt so hot). I use freebsd for our firewall at work and home. So, until linux gets something like apple did with osX( a consistent, usable (semi-stable) interface where users can do push button computing), windows will continue to be #1.
More problems with the review.
My copy of Windows XP Pro seems to have a program included with it called 'Windows Messenger' that, as far as I can tell, is some sort of ad delivery mechanism. I haven't figured out how to turn it off. It is very annoying. Linux doesn't have anything like this program, or if it does I've never installed or used it. In any case, I lived for many years without being bombarded by 'Windows Messenger' ads that pop up in the middle of whatever I'm trying to do, and I won't miss them when I go back to Linux.
Okay... Windows Messenger is a horrible, horrible feature and I hate how it's enabled by default. Still, Control Panel-->Admin Tools-->Services-->Windows Messnger. Then pick "disable". Not terribly intuitive, but incredibly easy to do... and if you type "disable Windows Messenger" in Google there are ZILLIONS of results telling you how to do this.
If he wants to bash Windows for including this feature, fine. Agreed. But to say he couldn't figure out how to do it is complete nonsense. Has he heard of Google?
Not only that, I found the program much harder to use and less intuitive than XChat. Even after a week, I still haven't figured out how to add a new network to it easily, a function that is simple as pie in XChat. Given a choice, I'd rather pay for XChat than for mIRC. It's better software.
Is he joking? You can add new networks to mIRC right from the dialog box you use to connect to a server, unless they've radically changed it in the last year or so. It also has a nice online help file. Saying "he couldn't figure it out in a week" makes me wonder how he learned how to *breathe*, much less *run an operating system*.
As for XChat simply being "better" than mIRC, that's highly subjective and I won't come down on one side or the other from lack of experience with XChat. However, mIRC has some incredibly deep features such as an extremely powerful built-in programming language. To say "XChat>mIRC" right off the bat, when you haven't even figured out how to add a server, is ridiculous.
One of the worst articles I've read from the Slashdot crew, and that's saying a lot. He makes a lot of good points (bashing IE/Outlook) but they're lost in the din of his obnoxious cluelessness.
OtakuBooty.com: Smart, funny, sexy nerds.
I've never used Free or NetBSD. In fact, I'd not used the BSDs at all (apart from SunOS 4.x which is BSD-derived) until recently. I've been using Linux since January 1992.
/proc filesystem and 'killall '. Also, the ability to run User Mode Linux (or in this case, it'd be User Mode OpenBSD).
What I felt about OpenBSD? Having heard of OpenBSD's security reputation, and the goodness of 'pf', I wanted to evaluate it to replace a CheckPoint FireWall 1 system (expensive software rental that MS can only dream of). I had already determined that OpenBSD will do all the things we currently do with CheckPoint.
Installation - it felt like installing SLS or Slackware back in 1994. Now that's not all negative - I had OpenBSD installed and ready in minutes and all off a single CD. Deciding to investigate further features of OpenBSD, I started doing a desktop install - put X on first (and got X and fvwm95 - I'd forgotten how fast X is with a simple UI). I then decided to install KDE from ports as I was missing Konqueror too much.
Evaluation: Ports is nice, but apt-get is better.
KDE works pretty much like it does under Linux.
Compiling stuff from source seems to all work the same way. Mostly you can find it in ports, but I've built a few other things too.
Things I miss: Other than Debian's apt, I really miss the
However, for the real eval, I was mostly looking at pf and altq.
I think OpenBSD shines here. The syntax of pf rules in pf.conf is far clearer than Linux iptables. Also, altq (for queuing and traffic control) has much easier syntax than the Linux equivalent. I don't have to go diving for the FAQ - the manual page for pf.conf is clear, concise and understandable and makes constructing the pf.conf rules file a piece of cake.
Generally, I'm impressed with OpenBSD, particularly having a compact default install which is very useful if you want something as a firewall or a server. Although I will stick with Linux (Debian for servers, RedHat for desktops), for firewalling, my future installations will be OpenBSD due to the ease of use and power of pf and altq.
Oolite: Elite-like game. For Mac, Linux and Windows
Why? Plain text is not going to make you look good and people may not be able to read WP. I always send documents like that as PDFs. I sent out dozens of CVs (resumes) last and only one person had trouble reading it (and most people replied so they had read it).
IE from Mozilla (not a problem, Mozilla is slow, clunky, and doesn't support anything as easily as IE on Windows)
This one is a matter of teast, I use both daily and prefer Moz to IE. I prefer Opera or Galeon to either.
Office was MUCH better than WP for Linux.
Ever had an interoperability problem with OPen Office? I never have: not for .docs, powerpoint presentations or spreadsheets.
I didn't have to worry about dependencies breaking, problems with "stable", "unstable", or "seriously broken and use at your own risk".
But you do need to worry about viruses, the main reason I switched to Windows. If you use IE and Outlook you should be really worried.
It sounds as though you are comparing obsolete Linux software (WP for Linux is no longer supported AFAIK) with the latest Windows software, and I suspect you are running Linux on older hardware. Try comparing like with like and you may feel different. Also do not just compare on Windows strengths but Linux's as well.
IE is only faster because it's pre-loaded and never seems to get completely swapped out. I've seen a situation where coming back from Quake3 at a lan party Notepad swapped to come up, but IE was there instantly. They can't possibly make a browser with less footprint than notepad so I assume they simply tweak swapping to keep IE available. Once IE and Mozilla are both up and fully out of cache the performance is only noticable when rendering test pages (tables in tables in tables, etc). I find that IE is faster at loading large pictures 2500x1800 or so, but that's the only noticable speed difference for me in general usage.
btw, if you're an IE user, perhaps you can tell me how to make IE create new windows full-screened. I always full-screen my browsers and it's a pain that all new IE windows open using like a ninth of my screen. No matter if I close it while full-screened or anything.
The author of the article referred to was obviously a Linux fanboy/zealot. And, I wonder if he has problems using a computer under ANY operating system.
1- He complains that Windows Update doesn't tell him what it is doing. This is absolute crap- a lie. You have the option to see information about every patch it is applying, you can remove patches, there are direct links to very informative security bulletins telling you what the patch is all about. If the author considers himself technically minded, but didn't actually READ what was on the screen, that was his problem. But- he succeeded in installing the patches- and that is what is important. See- it's set up so even morons like him can do it.
2- He couldn't figure out how to add icons in the 'bottom panel' (Taskbar) in Windows. Well, if he had tried to drag and drop, wonderful things would have happened. But, instead he sat there like a slack-jawed idiot, looking for problems. It takes about 2 seconds to add something to the taskbar, or the start menu.
3- Once again, feigning (or proving) total ignorance, he didn't understand what these 'pop-up' ads are all about- and why can't IE get rid of them? True- IE out of the box will display pop-ups, but when you add the Google Toolbar (free) not only will it block pop-ups, but it will give you some awesome IE/Windows only tools right in your browser. The Google Toolbar is better than any similar thing I have seen in other browsers. The answer is out there. And it's free, and it's good.
There were a lot of other problems I saw with his article. But because he was already preaching to the choir, most of it will just be greeted with silly smiles, and lots of head shaking. It must make him feel good to be surrounded by people who think the same way he does, and only make his half-hearted attempts at looking at other options.
No reason to lie.
This is why people hate linux users. It's not that it's too much to ask it's that it's another step and a pain in the ass to have to remember or to have to learn 400 work arounds for each program. I use linux almost exclusively (games and pdf creation I still do on win2k mainly because I'm comfortable with acrobat and because games have a very different "feel" on different platforms). That said, this attitude of "you're an idiot because you take the user friendly way out rather than finding a kludge or work around" is a plague among us. Why not just fix the softwre to do what people want rather than berating them for not adapting to what the software can do. We have great engineers and devlopers (hell I'm one of them...if an ego-centric one of them) but we suck at design and user satisfaction with regards to features and compatibility and we need to change that. It's time that we started innovating and developing stuff that Windows doesn't do well from a user stand point, it's time that we start supporting hardware within months not years of it's arrival on the scene, and it's time we quit berrating all those Windows users who use it because it's easier and suits their daily needs better.