Slashdot Mirror
A Continued Look at Linux vs Windows
Rogier van Vlissingen writes to tell us Paul Murphy has an interesting writeup on his blog about the continued Linux versus Windows debate with regards to some of the recent insights provided by various groups. From the article: "Disinformation comes in three major forms: innocent mistakes, intentional disinformation (aka FUD), and (self) delusion. Delusions are easily the most dangerous of these. In the IT context the most common delusion is simply that what we know is right in general or applicable to some specific issue when, in reality, it isn't. We know, and we act accordingly - with frequently catastrophic results."
When I read the SI study, I was *horrified.* The paper was uninformative, the methodology was flawed, and the analysis was unsupported.
My favorite quote though from the article is this:
This is absolutely correct. Treat Linux as if it were Windows, or vice versa, and you are asking for real pain.
LedgerSMB: Open source Accounting/ERP
Next you'll be telling me that taking medical advice from LiveJournal communities is a bad idea . . .
Pretty Pictures!
Out of curiosity, have you ever used Up2date? Red Hat has, for quite a long time now, included a tool that works rather like Windows Update -- notifying you via a tray icon (or email, if you prefer) when there are new patches to apply.
The difference is that Up2date will upgrade a lot more components -- any applications you've installed, other than manual builds and unofficial RPMS -- compared to WU, which tends to be only useful for the core OS, IE, and WMP.
Debian-based distributions have Synaptic and the other APT front ends, which, honestly, outstrip Windows Update in practically every way -- even including graphical tools for managing configuration changes needed when updates are applied.
Well, you could read it and realize that it was a very well reasoned article heavy on original thought and not just the usual link-fest. Or you could actually do some research, and find that he is...
Do you just blindly look at a source and assume it's valid? Tons of crap journalism gets published in NYT, WP, WSJ, etc. This article was far better than most of those. Use your own brain and don't assume credibility based on the masthead and byline.
I am a paid Linux consultand/admin. If I would have read what they wanted me to do... I would have said no. Methodology in supporting a linux server is all wrong. Still one admin mangaged to pull it off. He probably didnt fully follow there rules.
I've mangaged to live update a server with Fedora core 1 all the way through each core release till 4 and kept it live and running.
security updates? 'yum check-update' 'yum upgrade $X'
If you run Linux like Windows, expect Linux to have the problems of Windows too.
...Goofus and Gallant!
Goofus would rather turn on his computer and be a corporate tool for Microsoft without giving a second thought to how much richer the world would be, intellectually speaking, if everyone spent a little more time actually learning how computers worked instead of learning MS specific pointy clickety stuff.
Gallant spends time learning about how to utilize the resources in his PC as efficiently as possible, sharing his knowledge with anyone who will listen and helping people to help themselved by using Linux as the primary operating system and open source applications for true productivity.
Goofus doesn't care how much bandwidth he uses while downloading internet pr0n with his insecure P2P client that has trojaned his system and turned his system into a spam bot while at the same time complaining about how slow his system is because it's over six months old.
Gallant is a polite internet citizen. "Wow. This ISO download of Fedora Core 5 is going to take me good long time to download. I've got 25 meg down available right now, but my neighbors on the cable system might need to download some things too. So I'll lower my downstream during daytime hours to half a meg and only go up to 2 megs between 2:00AM and 4:00AM".
Goofus thinks that pirating software is cool because it saves him money that he can use to fill the tank on his gas hog SUV. "Haw haw!! Adobe thinks that we're all suckers who will pay them what they ask for their crap program! I'll show them! I'm gonna fire up Kazaa and get it for free! I'm a revolutionary who's stickin' it to the man"!
Gallant respects software licensing: "No Jim Bob. You see, even though I no longer use Windows, I am well aware of Microsoft's licensing requirements and you can't just take that copy of Windows and install it again on your cousin's PC because it's a license violation. If your cousin wants Windows XP Pro, he's going to have to buy the legitimate upgrade copy from a valid retailer".
Goofus doesn't care about other people's property or privacy: "Hey... looks like that hot neighbor Jolene's PC is accessible in Network Neighborhood. Well, well, well... Let's have a looksee at what's ono her hard drive. Oooohhh... C:\Private\JPEGs\XXX\Me, Branden and Rand Partying. That looks like a keeper"!
Gallant warns his neighbors that their machines might be insecure: "Sorry to bother you Jenna, but I noticed that your computer is readily accesible to anyone else in the apartment complex. If you want I can show you how to make it secure". Jenna: "Why thanks Gallant! I'd like that. By the way, if you'd like I could make us something for dinner when you come over. It's the least I could do". Gallant scores.
-"...bad old ideas look confusingly fresh when they are packaged as technology" - Jaron Lanier (Digital Maoism on Edge.o
Since when do blogs represent news?
The Sony rootkit story came from a blog...
I've been an IT administrator in a company that was funded by Microsoft. We were actualy given briefings quarterly showing 'studies' that prooved that Windows was better. Kind of like what McDonald's restaurants started doing after the movie 'Supersize me' blew their cover. They 'proved' to their employees that the company is doing the 'right' thing. Pretty much what Microsoft does even for mere end-product affiliates.
.NET framework (or other development technologies built to target Windows Developers). Lovely Idea. However, The amount we 'can' know about .NET framework without referring to a hacker's manual, is basicaly the amount Microsoft want's us to know 'safely'. So that someday when we need a better solution, We need to go back to microsoft and pay more. It would be silly for such a big corporation to PROVIDE a versatile solution if it wants to make money. Why wont Intel overclock their CPU's and send them off with a bigger heat sink before marketing? The cost? (it would be a mere 5 dollars over the original). Would you pay 5 dollars extra (over a 3.4 Ghz) for a 3.8 Ghz machine?. I definately would. (Do not say it is unstable, almost all of my home pc's run on P4 3.4 Ghz overclocked systems at 4.01 Ghz safely, and I do most of my office work on them). Same reason, why would Bill Gates unlock all the possibilities of Windows all at once for the hackers and programmers to explore?. Why not keep them coming back for more.
I was the person in my IT department who suggested the team move to Linux, because I was sick of having to 'read' Microsoft manuals of their software when they 'launched' something new. It is true, Microsoft basicaly assumes that its 'end-user' even if its a Software engineer by training, is basicaly stupid. Explaining to the person who said 'Windows any one can run, linux is for specialists'. It does not end there.
Let's say (like in my case) I have a particular e-commerce solution to handle and I want my application and (OS) to be tailored to that solution. Let's also assume Windows DOES provide such a solution and it works great. Patches are seemless, updates are a breeze, I could deploy it with my eyes closed. Everything great so far. Let's say now though, my company starts dealing with another company that has a different e-commerce application working for them. Or my companies demands change. It wont be then a simple matter of 'upgrade' or 'download a patch to fix'. It would be a matter of making the program work for me, without having to pay thousands of dollars and relicensing new software?. Microsoft is basicaly a strictly 'product based business' NOT a solutions provider. There are alot of people who claim 'Microsoft has developed several seemless integration options' Such as the
If you are going to have a 'technical' debate on Windows vs. Linux, i'd pose this question: When you have a dual processor Xeon system for your main file servers, and you want to use all that processor power and high pipeline bandwidth 'only' to ensure data security and smooth retrieval. If there is any one who has worked on powerful machines and used both Linux and Windows would understand when I say that 'a trimmed linux distribution' can deal alot better with raw hardware pottential than Windows OS can.
Bottom line is, I switched to linux to 'free' my company from the Microsoft bond.
It is TRUE, given the 'right' set of solutions, Microsoft OS and Linux distributions BOTH perform well. In some situations Microsoft has a clear victory, in others Linux rules the day. There never can be ONE study of ONE solution to proove LINUX is better or WINDOWS is better. There can be common sense that says on the long run, I'd rather know what i'm doing so that I can build upon it. Rather than having to call teacher Bill Gates for help.