Windows v Linux
Discussion
Can anyone explain in as simple terms as possible, the benefits of Linux over Windows (or vice versa).
I am having enough trouble with windows. I don't envisage swapping yet, and I know that Linux has grown up from good meaning computer techs over the years and is non-profit making etc.
But is it any good, and what are its limitations?
Eg if I want to keep all my current software, Office etc, can I?
Is it stability, versatility or just one in the eye for Gates?
As a IT teacher I know its an OS not a program, unlike most of the kids, who like the logo but haven't a clue what it is. But I can't get a simple explanation of why I might want it.
Any comments, thoughts etc?
I am having enough trouble with windows. I don't envisage swapping yet, and I know that Linux has grown up from good meaning computer techs over the years and is non-profit making etc.
But is it any good, and what are its limitations?
Eg if I want to keep all my current software, Office etc, can I?
Is it stability, versatility or just one in the eye for Gates?
As a IT teacher I know its an OS not a program, unlike most of the kids, who like the logo but haven't a clue what it is. But I can't get a simple explanation of why I might want it.
Any comments, thoughts etc?
Windows - Hear/See an App you want/need, download, click on install, click next, click next, click finished, reboot, use App.
Linux - You need something but you are not sure what it is called or where to find it, search google, find App/package, try and download, fails, find another site, download package, try and find package on hdd, work out how to unpack and install using gunzip, tar, configure, make and make install etc, learn the term "failed dependencies", find the other 20 packages that are required by your App and install them with the same painfull process, realise "configure" should have been "configure --with-mysql --with-php etc etc etc", go back 12 stages and start again, PATH now rears it's ugly head, PATH=$PATH:* , realise you hdd is now a mess and you are not sure what you have or what you need. Re-insert Redhat/SuSE/Mandrake CD and reboot box.
Linux - You need something but you are not sure what it is called or where to find it, search google, find App/package, try and download, fails, find another site, download package, try and find package on hdd, work out how to unpack and install using gunzip, tar, configure, make and make install etc, learn the term "failed dependencies", find the other 20 packages that are required by your App and install them with the same painfull process, realise "configure" should have been "configure --with-mysql --with-php etc etc etc", go back 12 stages and start again, PATH now rears it's ugly head, PATH=$PATH:* , realise you hdd is now a mess and you are not sure what you have or what you need. Re-insert Redhat/SuSE/Mandrake CD and reboot box.
But is it any good, and what are its limitations?The limiations of Linux is that apps are generally made by you and I, they are buggy and often not as "nice" as Windows apps. This is due to hardware as well as the kernel's.
Then of course you have the need to be techy to do anything, to find a setting or to change the clock.
Personally I think it is a major drawback having so much stuff, and so many things you can configure.
Eg if I want to keep all my current software, Office etc, can I?
No, Linux runs a completely different kernel and you will need to either get something like Lindows (buggy) or some sort of mapper which runs slowly.
Is it stability, versatility or just one in the eye for Gates?
The kernel may be stable, the apps that run on the top of it certainly aren't (until you get into the big-budget realms of Apace and the like)
...I can't get a simple explanation of why I might want it.
This is a very important one. You as a home user don't want it. It's slow, takes for-ever to fiddle to get the optimum set up, needs a lot of patience and skill to set it up the way you want it. Has 6 different applications that all do the same thing slightly differently and is a right awkark SOB.
Linux however is a cheap or free (or was) alternative to Windows that provides stiff competition to Windows and MS. This means that MS is constantly improving it's products to meet the challenge and provide us, the home user with an increasingly stable and compatible OS.
Don't get me wrong, I use Linux at Uni and have grown to like it (more the environment of the room rather than the OS) but I won't be replacing my copy of XP at home in any hurry.
Any comments, thoughts etc?
Um, this is really a bitchy comment, but how are you doing teaching ICT if you don't know what Linux "is". I appreciate you don't need to know it generally, but the information I know about it (pretty much what is typed above) should have been with you already. This of course is assuming you are teaching 11-18year olds and are a full time IT teacher... Primary school/ < GCSE is a different matter
I was lucky in that my teacher at AS was a superb, and very intelligent bloke who not only got me a job at the school but also made me interested in computing. I fear however other teachers there couldn't teach "ICT" and don't know the advanced topics that should be passed on IMO.
This is no-way a judgement on yourself however, I haven't been taught/seen you teach... Just a comment on teaching in general. Please, please please don't take it personally!!!!!!
>> Edited by docevi1 on Tuesday 20th April 23:37
Then of course you have the need to be techy to do anything, to find a setting or to change the clock.
Personally I think it is a major drawback having so much stuff, and so many things you can configure.
Eg if I want to keep all my current software, Office etc, can I?
No, Linux runs a completely different kernel and you will need to either get something like Lindows (buggy) or some sort of mapper which runs slowly.
Is it stability, versatility or just one in the eye for Gates?
The kernel may be stable, the apps that run on the top of it certainly aren't (until you get into the big-budget realms of Apace and the like)
...I can't get a simple explanation of why I might want it.
This is a very important one. You as a home user don't want it. It's slow, takes for-ever to fiddle to get the optimum set up, needs a lot of patience and skill to set it up the way you want it. Has 6 different applications that all do the same thing slightly differently and is a right awkark SOB.
Linux however is a cheap or free (or was) alternative to Windows that provides stiff competition to Windows and MS. This means that MS is constantly improving it's products to meet the challenge and provide us, the home user with an increasingly stable and compatible OS.
Don't get me wrong, I use Linux at Uni and have grown to like it (more the environment of the room rather than the OS) but I won't be replacing my copy of XP at home in any hurry.
Any comments, thoughts etc?
Um, this is really a bitchy comment, but how are you doing teaching ICT if you don't know what Linux "is". I appreciate you don't need to know it generally, but the information I know about it (pretty much what is typed above) should have been with you already. This of course is assuming you are teaching 11-18year olds and are a full time IT teacher... Primary school/ < GCSE is a different matter
I was lucky in that my teacher at AS was a superb, and very intelligent bloke who not only got me a job at the school but also made me interested in computing. I fear however other teachers there couldn't teach "ICT" and don't know the advanced topics that should be passed on IMO.
This is no-way a judgement on yourself however, I haven't been taught/seen you teach... Just a comment on teaching in general. Please, please please don't take it personally!!!!!!
>> Edited by docevi1 on Tuesday 20th April 23:37
Stefan, you might want to boot to runlevel 5 the next time, so you get a graphical desktop 
Tuffer, have a look in the table of contents of your distribution CD. It comes with everything desktop-users might need. The default installation is already a complete office desktop. If you need a paket sniffer or video editing software, you simply search for these terms. Once found, you check the boxes and hit the 'Accept'-button, and the software installs (without rebooting
). That's faster a safer than searching and downloading unapproved stuff from the net.
Additionally, this software comes with extensive documentation in most cases, and not just 'contact your system administrator' in case you want to know more that the GUI self-explaines anyway.
The benefits of a Linux distribution
Using Linux on the desktop is well possible for non-IT people.
IMHO it's better than everything, but it probably isn't for every sort of user:
If you're just surfing the web and do office stuff on your pc, you'll be comfortable with Linux after one week.
Somebody who knows what a partition is, won't have any problems to install a Linux-distribution* by himself.
Once installed and set up (email, dial-up, etc.), it will only need very little maintenance compared to Windows.
There are no known adware-, spyware- or other malware- virus/worm threats to Linux. Viruses do indeed exist, but only as a proof-of-concept yet.
* I've tested a lot of software for desktop Linux machines, and commented about them on another thread earlier.
See here:
>> Edited by Bodo on Tuesday 20th April 23:39
Tuffer, have a look in the table of contents of your distribution CD. It comes with everything desktop-users might need. The default installation is already a complete office desktop. If you need a paket sniffer or video editing software, you simply search for these terms. Once found, you check the boxes and hit the 'Accept'-button, and the software installs (without rebooting
). That's faster a safer than searching and downloading unapproved stuff from the net. Additionally, this software comes with extensive documentation in most cases, and not just 'contact your system administrator' in case you want to know more that the GUI self-explaines anyway.
The benefits of a Linux distribution
Using Linux on the desktop is well possible for non-IT people.
IMHO it's better than everything
, but it probably isn't for every sort of user: If you're just surfing the web and do office stuff on your pc, you'll be comfortable with Linux after one week.
Somebody who knows what a partition is, won't have any problems to install a Linux-distribution* by himself.
Once installed and set up (email, dial-up, etc.), it will only need very little maintenance compared to Windows.
There are no known adware-, spyware- or other malware- virus/worm threats to Linux. Viruses do indeed exist, but only as a proof-of-concept yet.
* I've tested a lot of software for desktop Linux machines, and commented about them on another thread earlier.
See here:
Bodo said:
sb-1 said:
Should I use it instead of MS XP for business purposes?Is it compatable.
Cheers
Steve
Depends on what applications you will be using!
I've dropped my Windows desktop some years ago for Linux.
When, I started, things weren't easy everytime, but today, many institutional users use Linux on the desktop and usability improved much since.
Installation takes a few mouse clicks, and allows Linux to coexist beside Windows on one computer (you choose which one you like to use at booting time).
What we call Linux here, is actually a 'Linux-Distribution', a compilation of many applications that make a full useable system with graphical interface, window-manager, office-, multimedia-, graphics-, network-, utility-, etc. programs.
A Linux-distribution comes on one or more CDs/DVD, and includes an automatic installation routine.
You are allowed to copy a distribution from one of your mates (there are no licence costs), or you may buy a complete set of CDs, DVD, handbook and some weeks support from a distributor like www.suse.co.uk , www.redhat.co.uk etc.
There are two ways to evaluate Linux before you install it on your computer:
1.) Some of the applications that are popular on Linux systems are as well available for Windows. Check if you like them by installing them on your current desktop. A few examples:
Firefox browser
OpenOffice www.openoffice.org/
The Gimp image editing www.gimp.org/
(detailed instructions here: www.nidelven-it.no/articles/introduction_to_gimp )
2.) You get hold of a Linux demo CD; www.knoppix.org/ for example (these CDs sometimes come with computer magazines for free). You can boot Linux from a demo CD, and play around with it a bit, see if all your hardware is recognized, etc., but nothing from Linux will be left when you shut down your computer and remove the CD. It won't do anything harmful to your current Windows installation.
Typical applications available for Linux are the popular and most used Office/Home programs (the ones mentioned, and others like financial software with HBCI online banking interface, ...) or professional developing and network tools, or high-end applications that were originally developed for Unix systems, like Alias Maya www.alias.com|www.alias.com or Pro/Engineer www.ptc.com|www.ptc.com . The choice of the latest 3D-games for Linux is bad though.
Compatibility with common file formats is good: you can read and write MS Office files, PDF, and lots more out of the box.
>> Edited by Bodo on Tuesday 20th April 23:39
We had this debate at work recently. "We are a technology company, we need to have an opinion on Linux"
Th general opinion was that it still has a long way to go until it will get the same acceptance as a MS OS. There are too many unknowns in a large user/Enterprise situation.
it is interesting to see that several goverments are investigating for use in public services and until that time where there is a huge (1 million+ userbase)supporter then it would be a brave CIO who would choose it over MS
Th general opinion was that it still has a long way to go until it will get the same acceptance as a MS OS. There are too many unknowns in a large user/Enterprise situation.
it is interesting to see that several goverments are investigating for use in public services and until that time where there is a huge (1 million+ userbase)supporter then it would be a brave CIO who would choose it over MS
Bodo said:
Stefan, you might want to boot to runlevel 5 the next time, so you get a graphical desktop
we run RedHat 8 at Uni I think. It's graphical but the suite we are in is used as a huge server for remote logins. The PC's are ageing rapidly and I don't personally think they can cope with the load of both a user in front of the screen and a remote user. We often have crashes and it all goes pear-shaped regulary
. Linux is important in the development world, it is important for the likes of you and me and indeed I plan to learn how to use it as it is much more powerful than Windows, but I'm struggling. I used to be a technician (don't know if that says much
) can fix PC's, problems with Windows... but am struggling to understand Linux...tuffer said:
Windows - Hear/See an App you want/need, download, click on install, click next, click next, click finished, reboot, use App.
Linux - You need something but you are not sure what it is called or where to find it, search google, find App/package, try and download, fails, find another site, download package, try and find package on hdd, work out how to unpack and install using gunzip, tar, configure, make and make install etc, learn the term "failed dependencies", find the other 20 packages that are required by your App and install them with the same painfull process, realise "configure" should have been "configure --with-mysql --with-php etc etc etc", go back 12 stages and start again, PATH now rears it's ugly head, PATH=$PATH:* , realise you hdd is now a mess and you are not sure what you have or what you need. Re-insert Redhat/SuSE/Mandrake CD and reboot box.
Debian Linux: type "sudo apt-get install <name-of-app>". Enjoy.
Fluffy. One thing you might want to do is get a copy of Virtual PC. That way, you can install Linux on your PC, and have it running with Windows at the same time.
You can then compare & contrast with the kids as to what the benifits are.
Not sure how much Virtual PC is, I get it as part of my MSDN subscription.
Oh, and you'll need a fair bit of RAM in the machine you want to run it on.
HTH
You can then compare & contrast with the kids as to what the benifits are.
Not sure how much Virtual PC is, I get it as part of my MSDN subscription.
Oh, and you'll need a fair bit of RAM in the machine you want to run it on.
HTH
Run it at home. It's bombproof.
Run it at work, and an aging PII is running with 10+ users all doing important stuff for the last 450 days without a boot.
However, I'm a bit of a sad case.
You can download and burn a bootable linux image on a CDROM. Give it a go without installing it...
Run it at work, and an aging PII is running with 10+ users all doing important stuff for the last 450 days without a boot.
However, I'm a bit of a sad case.
You can download and burn a bootable linux image on a CDROM. Give it a go without installing it...
I appreciate the comment that as an IT teacher I should know all about it. But I've only been teaching IT for the last 3 years, I'm trained as a Maths teacher. We only had 1 BBC Micro when I was at school.
Teaching IT is really boring up to GCSE level these days. It's all essays and then a practical exam, piece of cake, and creating one database, with a user manual. Dead exciting.
A' level is much more challenging, Computer Studies that is. But it's all theory with a little VB thrown in. Very dry, I've got a good class and we often talk about what's going on in the real world. But as comparisoms of OSs aren't on the syllabus, it's not something that has really come up. I know a lot of people love Linux and its many derivatives, but was unsure whether these were generally people who were 'techy' or was it really an improvement.
Much of what I have learnt over the last few years, has been trial and error, but have never needed to look at Linux, I like the logo, as do a lot of my students, and with them I just wonder how much of their interest in Linux is the 'cool' factor, and how much is genuine interest.
I think a lot of your comments have pointed me in the right direction, and perhaps something I can include in further lessons, at A' level at any rate.
Many thanks for all your comments.
Teaching IT is really boring up to GCSE level these days. It's all essays and then a practical exam, piece of cake, and creating one database, with a user manual. Dead exciting.
A' level is much more challenging, Computer Studies that is. But it's all theory with a little VB thrown in. Very dry, I've got a good class and we often talk about what's going on in the real world. But as comparisoms of OSs aren't on the syllabus, it's not something that has really come up. I know a lot of people love Linux and its many derivatives, but was unsure whether these were generally people who were 'techy' or was it really an improvement.
Much of what I have learnt over the last few years, has been trial and error, but have never needed to look at Linux, I like the logo, as do a lot of my students, and with them I just wonder how much of their interest in Linux is the 'cool' factor, and how much is genuine interest.
I think a lot of your comments have pointed me in the right direction, and perhaps something I can include in further lessons, at A' level at any rate.
Many thanks for all your comments.
bengie said:
Fluffy. One thing you might want to do is get a copy of Virtual PC. That way, you can install Linux on your PC, and have it running with Windows at the same time.
You can then compare & contrast with the kids as to what the benifits are.
Oh, and you'll need a fair bit of RAM in the machine you want to run it on.
HTH
Nice idea, and would love to try it at school.
Except:
We are a technology college, sounds great!
Running Windows 98 , but it is second edition.
Office 97.
Some fairly new machines, came with XP, and then rebuilt with 98SE. Over 300 machines on about 7 servers. Crashes daily, I have enough trouble getting office to work for a whole lesson without crashing. Unfortunately this is not seen as a major problem by the system manager, who as long things look nice she's happy. More bothered that my classroom displays are getting a little old, than the fact that the computers are getting wrecked. Not that I'm getting bitter and twisted, but our techinicians are trying their best to keep the titanic afloat. Apparently we might upgrading to 2000 next month, woo hoo!
But I do appreciate the idea and will look into it, as soon as we get the network working reasonably well.
fluffy said:
I appreciate the comment that as an IT teacher I should know all about it. But I've only been teaching IT for the last 3 years, I'm trained as a Maths teacher. We only had 1 BBC Micro when I was at school.
Teaching IT is really boring up to GCSE level these days. It's all essays and then a practical exam, piece of cake, and creating one database, with a user manual. Dead exciting.
A' level is much more challenging, Computer Studies that is. But it's all theory with a little VB thrown in. Very dry, I've got a good class and we often talk about what's going on in the real world. But as comparisoms of OSs aren't on the syllabus, it's not something that has really come up. I know a lot of people love Linux and its many derivatives, but was unsure whether these were generally people who were 'techy' or was it really an improvement.
Much of what I have learnt over the last few years, has been trial and error, but have never needed to look at Linux, I like the logo, as do a lot of my students, and with them I just wonder how much of their interest in Linux is the 'cool' factor, and how much is genuine interest.
It's changed since my day then
we had a much more practical course... As I say, don't take my comments personally, I wasn't aware that the syllabus had changed to such an extent (GCSE saw me developing a full excel spreadsheet with macros, automation and all sorts, AS' had me developing Access Db's, websites...).
It's hard been a technician btw, your hands are tied
Luckily the boss I had was the other way round in that if it worked he was happy, couldn't give 2 hoots if it looked pretty tho.
fluffy said:
Nice idea, and would love to try it at school.
Except:
We are a technology college, sounds great!
Running Windows 98 , but it is second edition.
Office 97.
Some fairly new machines, came with XP, and then rebuilt with 98SE. Over 300 machines on about 7 servers. Crashes daily, I have enough trouble getting office to work for a whole lesson without crashing. Unfortunately this is not seen as a major problem by the system manager, who as long things look nice she's happy. More bothered that my classroom displays are getting a little old, than the fact that the computers are getting wrecked. Not that I'm getting bitter and twisted, but our techinicians are trying their best to keep the titanic afloat. Apparently we might upgrading to 2000 next month, woo hoo!
But I do appreciate the idea and will look into it, as soon as we get the network working reasonably well.
I've just looked at the specs, and whilst you can run almost anything on Virtual PC as a client, you do need Win2k Pro or upwards.
However, when it is up and running, you can download a trial version that runs for 45 days. This could be plenty of time to look at an 'aside' to the curriculum.
Anyhoo, here's a link: Virtual PC
Cheers
There's a CD bootable distro called "Knoppix". Try that...
Most of what's been said about Linux in the preceding postings is basically nonsense. A modern Linux distro is no harder to install than Windows and is arguably easier to configure (most of the comments to the contrary are more based on familiarity with MS than anything real. FWIW, I find Windows profoundly frustrating when anything goes wrong or something slightly out of the ordinary needs doing.)
As for "Why?", try a Google for "Linux versus Windows" and read half a dozen of the articles.
Most of what's been said about Linux in the preceding postings is basically nonsense. A modern Linux distro is no harder to install than Windows and is arguably easier to configure (most of the comments to the contrary are more based on familiarity with MS than anything real. FWIW, I find Windows profoundly frustrating when anything goes wrong or something slightly out of the ordinary needs doing.)
As for "Why?", try a Google for "Linux versus Windows" and read half a dozen of the articles.
fluffy, the thing to learn about Linux is that it inspires religion.
Advocates (disciples?) cannot bear bad things being said about it. the issue to bear in mind is that no-one in business (and few outside) buys or runs a computer on the basis of which operating system is running, but because of the applications that can be run on top of the OS.
If you can find apps that only run on Linux, than that's what you need. Most don't and, for ordinary end users, Windows is plenty good enough and pretty easy to use these days.
That said, over the next year or three, Linux will start to make a major push onto desktops mainly because it's free but in part because it's not a Microsoft product. Right now though, it's to be found in most large organisations running applications on servers in the background.
>> Edited by manek on Wednesday 21st April 14:11
Advocates (disciples?) cannot bear bad things being said about it. the issue to bear in mind is that no-one in business (and few outside) buys or runs a computer on the basis of which operating system is running, but because of the applications that can be run on top of the OS.
If you can find apps that only run on Linux, than that's what you need. Most don't and, for ordinary end users, Windows is plenty good enough and pretty easy to use these days.
That said, over the next year or three, Linux will start to make a major push onto desktops mainly because it's free but in part because it's not a Microsoft product. Right now though, it's to be found in most large organisations running applications on servers in the background.
>> Edited by manek on Wednesday 21st April 14:11
You can almost never get a rational answer to this question, because the linux apologists are so absurd sometimes in their fixed point of view that it alienates even the neutrals.
The truth of the matter is that linux is an excellent server platform for file sharing, web server, mysql/oracle databases etc. In many ways it is faster than the Windows server operating systems, and it is cheap (or free). However, as a desktop/client system, it is crap. There are various clunky, 90% finished GUI front ends that are supposed to offer an alternative to Windows, but they just don't. Plug and play hardware support is patchy, when things go wrong it's a thankless task trying to sort it out, and you can never get useful answers from the linux community. The standard response to a question is 'RTFM'.
The only viable alternative to a Windows desktop comes from Apple, if you don't mind relatively limited software availability, and proprietary prices. But why is an alternative needed? XP Pro is a good platform, especially for multimedia. If unix-like tools are needed, there's cygwin for win32 platforms which provides X, ssh etc. It's a powerful combination.
Linux is only actually free if your time is worthless, because inevitably it is more time consuming to install, configure and maintain. I should mention that as a software developer with currently 6 linux servers in operation, I do have quite a bit of experience with linux (and unix). These servers are all very effective, and I wouldn't swap any of them for a Windows server operating system (of which I also have 2 servers). On the other hand, I wouldn't swap my 3 XP Pro desktops for linux, either.
The truth of the matter is that linux is an excellent server platform for file sharing, web server, mysql/oracle databases etc. In many ways it is faster than the Windows server operating systems, and it is cheap (or free). However, as a desktop/client system, it is crap. There are various clunky, 90% finished GUI front ends that are supposed to offer an alternative to Windows, but they just don't. Plug and play hardware support is patchy, when things go wrong it's a thankless task trying to sort it out, and you can never get useful answers from the linux community. The standard response to a question is 'RTFM'.
The only viable alternative to a Windows desktop comes from Apple, if you don't mind relatively limited software availability, and proprietary prices. But why is an alternative needed? XP Pro is a good platform, especially for multimedia. If unix-like tools are needed, there's cygwin for win32 platforms which provides X, ssh etc. It's a powerful combination.
Linux is only actually free if your time is worthless, because inevitably it is more time consuming to install, configure and maintain. I should mention that as a software developer with currently 6 linux servers in operation, I do have quite a bit of experience with linux (and unix). These servers are all very effective, and I wouldn't swap any of them for a Windows server operating system (of which I also have 2 servers). On the other hand, I wouldn't swap my 3 XP Pro desktops for linux, either.
steve-p said:
You can almost never get a rational answer to this question, because the linux apologists are so absurd sometimes in their fixed point of view that it alienates even the neutrals.
The truth of the matter is that linux is an excellent server platform for file sharing, web server, mysql/oracle databases etc. In many ways it is faster than the Windows server operating systems, and it is cheap (or free). However, as a desktop/client system, it is crap.
Pot. Kettle. Black.
Gassing Station | Computers, Gadgets & Stuff | Top of Page | What's New | My Stuff