- Forum
- Lounge
- iTunes... is bad
- Page 2
iTunes... is bad
It's not for nothing that the past ten years have been "the year of the Linux desktop".
| It's not for nothing that the past ten years have been "the year of the Linux desktop". |
Suggest to almost anyone I know that there's an operating system other than windows and OSX and they'll laugh at you. Ignorance is why. The same ignorance that says Linux will ever be big on the desktop -- it won't. By the time people are ready to switch, something better will have come along. Maybe GNU Hurd. I also think its ignorant to say that Linux should be big on the desktop. That's not what it's good at; it's good as a server OS.
Edit: Actually, no, probably not HURD.
Last edited on
I have reason to believe that anyone who uses Windows is either a gamer, businessman/woman, or a computer novice.
Anyone who uses mac is the kind of person who enjoys shaving with a bowling pin. You'll never cut your self doing it, but at the same time, you wont actually make any progress.
And lastly anyone who uses linux/BSD as their main OS is some form of new age tech masochist.
Anyone who uses mac is the kind of person who enjoys shaving with a bowling pin. You'll never cut your self doing it, but at the same time, you wont actually make any progress.
And lastly anyone who uses linux/BSD as their main OS is some form of new age tech masochist.
@Seraphimsan
I disagree with blanket statements in general, but I definitely disagree more with the Mac OS X and Linux/BSD statements than usual. They're all very good operating systems once you figure out how to use them, each in its own way.
-Albatross
I disagree with blanket statements in general, but I definitely disagree more with the Mac OS X and Linux/BSD statements than usual. They're all very good operating systems once you figure out how to use them, each in its own way.
-Albatross
Last edited on
Aha.. So that's how it's gonna be.. Turning the hate onto windows, eh?!
Well, I proudly consider myself; a gamer, a bussinessman/woman*, and last but not least, a computer novice.
:)
Well, I proudly consider myself; a gamer, a bussinessman/woman*, and last but not least, a computer novice.
:)
closed account (z05DSL3A)
Well, that would make me some kind of masochistic, beardy, computer novice. I feel so unclean.
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
Linux can do everything Windows can do if it gets just as much support and possibly more. I enjoy Linux because its potential and current status is, in my opinion, much larger than Windows in many aspects.
And being a computer novice is seriously not an excuse to use Windows. My parents are novices and are stupid enough to struggle with using a very outdated (v6) version of Internet Explorer which they refuse to allow me to update since they don't like the new version, its ugly and they don't like the extra buttons since they're not used to it (you should have seen me try and get them to use Firefox so they can stop bitching about their internet being so slow (which is actually a result of IE taking nearly 15 seconds to start up despite me organizing and cleaning the module startup list)).
It is mentioned in many places that if Linux ever recieved more support for games, it would become a much more popular desktop OS. As its growing in the game community, you can see some exponential growth in the Linux community from time to time because of it. Steam is coming out with a native Linux release which has already hyped up some popularity.
And business isn't restricted to Windows. Windows is no more a business OS than Linux or MacOS. It simply recieves more support from everyone as they all make their usually crappy and way overpriced applications as Windows specific which nobody can help since Windows has the biggest advertisement department in the OS market where Linux has none (since it isn't funded at all) and MacOS is in second place.
And being a computer novice is seriously not an excuse to use Windows. My parents are novices and are stupid enough to struggle with using a very outdated (v6) version of Internet Explorer which they refuse to allow me to update since they don't like the new version, its ugly and they don't like the extra buttons since they're not used to it (you should have seen me try and get them to use Firefox so they can stop bitching about their internet being so slow (which is actually a result of IE taking nearly 15 seconds to start up despite me organizing and cleaning the module startup list)).
It is mentioned in many places that if Linux ever recieved more support for games, it would become a much more popular desktop OS. As its growing in the game community, you can see some exponential growth in the Linux community from time to time because of it. Steam is coming out with a native Linux release which has already hyped up some popularity.
And business isn't restricted to Windows. Windows is no more a business OS than Linux or MacOS. It simply recieves more support from everyone as they all make their usually crappy and way overpriced applications as Windows specific which nobody can help since Windows has the biggest advertisement department in the OS market where Linux has none (since it isn't funded at all) and MacOS is in second place.
Last edited on
| It is mentioned in many places that if Linux ever recieved more support for games, it would become a much more popular desktop OS. |
| Linux has [no advertisement department] |
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
Yes, because last time I saw Linux pop up on my television, in a newspaper ad, or on the radio was... oh wait, I haven't. Unless you meant to say that those distros are funded. In that case, you are correct but they are nowhere the size of MacOS ( in the client area ) or Windows.
Last edited on
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
I just noticed that I'm leaning towards Linux again. I'm a Linux fan, yes, but its not just Linux that I want to succeed more. OSes like Haiku (beOS based) and Minix and Open Solaris are all great candidates. We have the time, the money, and the skill to build the OS that everyone loves for free but instead, we choose to market a advertisement monster which 3/4 of the time pisses people off with there bullshit mistakes and costs an infinite amount more than other OSes.
Linux does have problems which Windows has supposedly solved, for instance, audio on Linux is iffy and non-absolute. There is OSS and ALSA, both having their own ways to treating sound. Then there's the windowing system which is complete crap although I will say that it has improved since I originally remember it. Then there's the primitive video drivers which fails to take full advantage of most hardware.
Anyways, the reason I'm explaining this is that it really doesn't matter. Each Linux distro defines its own standards in likes and dislikes and choose what they think is the right path for you and in the end, it all comes together with quality programming that works just as good as Windows if not better in certain occasions, taking advantage of the POSIX compliant system as its base for everyone's convenience, providing more choices than normally (and reasonably) possible with a proprietary software. Mac is currently in the same category as Windows in this aspect.
Linux does have problems which Windows has supposedly solved, for instance, audio on Linux is iffy and non-absolute. There is OSS and ALSA, both having their own ways to treating sound. Then there's the windowing system which is complete crap although I will say that it has improved since I originally remember it. Then there's the primitive video drivers which fails to take full advantage of most hardware.
Anyways, the reason I'm explaining this is that it really doesn't matter. Each Linux distro defines its own standards in likes and dislikes and choose what they think is the right path for you and in the end, it all comes together with quality programming that works just as good as Windows if not better in certain occasions, taking advantage of the POSIX compliant system as its base for everyone's convenience, providing more choices than normally (and reasonably) possible with a proprietary software. Mac is currently in the same category as Windows in this aspect.
Last edited on
| Each Linux distro defines its own standards |
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
Why is that a problem? It doesn't change the essence of Linux, just the software affiliated with Linux, i.e. OSS instead of ALSA because that distro prefers it. However its the users choice on using that distro and even if he doesn't like something, he can often change it or just make his own if he wants to.
Last edited on
I think:
Linux for programming (because it's just such a rich opensource environment)
Mac for entertainment (as far as movies, music, etc)
Windows for gaming/work.
Linux for programming (because it's just such a rich opensource environment)
Mac for entertainment (as far as movies, music, etc)
Windows for gaming/work.
| Why is that a problem? |
http://www.cplusplus.com/forum/lounge/21773/page3.html#msg117159
closed account (S6k9GNh0)
Oh come on! For the most part and in a well-coded application, you can take the source of a program, compile it, install it using whatever method it provides or manually, and boom. ur done.
I think the best description of what makes a Linux OS is what you make of it. The distro is just their to give you a good stepping stone. Libraries more often than not, work without extra work on all distros. Some libraries do give binaries and some programs do give binaries, SFML being one, Skype being another, respectively. It's more convenient to optimize your binary at compile time though with little backlash other than time.
You will, however, find libraries that are used by distros like Fedora, slightly modified to help fix problems with SELinux and other security or features that they have specificly. However, on the basic LFS, most projects that provide a binary will work out of the box. Try it yourself.
I think the best description of what makes a Linux OS is what you make of it. The distro is just their to give you a good stepping stone. Libraries more often than not, work without extra work on all distros. Some libraries do give binaries and some programs do give binaries, SFML being one, Skype being another, respectively. It's more convenient to optimize your binary at compile time though with little backlash other than time.
You will, however, find libraries that are used by distros like Fedora, slightly modified to help fix problems with SELinux and other security or features that they have specificly. However, on the basic LFS, most projects that provide a binary will work out of the box. Try it yourself.
I don't see why we're arguing. There is no one superior OS and there never will be. All of them have different ideologies and therefore are different in various aspects, have differing strengths and differing weaknesses, and some on average have more strengths and fewer weaknesses than others, but in the end it all comes down to personal preference. Windows has millions of applications, Mac OS X has a gorgeous UI, and (GNU/Linux)/FreeBSD are open source and therefore extremely customizable. Why are we arguing?
-Albatross
-Albatross
Last edited on
| For the most part and in a well-coded application, you can take the source of a program, compile it, install it using whatever method it provides or manually, and boom. ur done. |
What you're describing is already a chore (an unnecessary one, at that) if you happen to have all the required dependencies. If you don't, well... I don't even want to talk about it.