LINUX PRO and CONS?

What makes Linux better? or worse? Then windows

Better: no crashes, freezes, BSODs, viruses!, adware, spyware or other hacker BS. The software is free and of much higher quality than I was expecting. Things make sense in the new software and improve on some of the programs you're used to in Windows. I use Linux for 95% of my writing and coding and FTPing and browsing.

Worse: configuring easy things can be a huge PITA. I still can't get my sound card to work with Linux. Though, I have two installed - both PCI (one a lowly SoundBlaster for system sounds and a pro RME DIGI96/8 PAD for my pro recording). Internet gave me two minutes of trouble but after calling a friend and having him run a google search - it was taken care of.

I have a dual-boot system and I still use Windows for Dreamweaver, I'm too used to it to learn something new. And whenever I need iTunes, but then I just burn to CD-R and reboot to Linux. (there are iTunes hacks available for Linux, but I'm too lazy)

I really like my experience with Linux (I am using Mandriva 10, installed it alittle over a month ago) and if I could just get iTunes and Dreamweaver to run in that OS I'd NEVER boot XP again.

Better, everything that Alan said.

Worse... never had a problem getting a sound card to work, so I can't say I agree with that one.

The only real drawback to Linux is that not many games companies support it (the popular statement/belief that "linux doesn't support a lot of games" is wrong, it's the games companies that don't support linux, and don't write executables for it).

I did away with dual-booting after trying it for about 6 months. It's easier and less hassle just to have two separate systems. One dedicated to Windows, and one dedicated to Linux. That way you can buy hardware specifically intended for each system's use.

If your Linux box is just going to be a webserver for your LAN so you can work on sites, etc. You don't need a 256Meg PCI-e graphics card, heh. But if you do a lot of gaming on your Windows machine, you don't want to be stuck with a 4Meg PCI card.

So you can mix and match the hardware in each machine to better suit your needs for each system.

Right now, I have 2 desktops (one runs Win2K Pro, one runs XP Pro), 2 laptops (both running XP Pro), and 2 other desktops running Linux. The respective operating systems in each machines support all the hardware that's in them, because the desktops were built specifically with the OS in mind, so compatibility was accounted for on build.

gaming in linux: http://www.transgaming.com
support for gaming in linux: http://linux-gamers.net/

M$ Office / Photoshop / Dreamweaver running in linux: http://www.codeweavers.com

you can get a trial version of Crossover Office but thats for 30 days, then to buy i think is $40.


so the cons are more taking extra time to set everything up, rather than being able to click on something and have it do stuff. lol and installing software isn't just clicking on something. it actually takes a portion of your brain to make your fingers do a little typing unless theres a premade package for your distro, then you can just click and have it installed. lol also you can install software with system software update utilities such as Apt and Yum. also, if you change hardware, such as your video card, then your going to have to do some driver preparation and things can get sticky...anyways. theres not really "cons" IMHO, theres just some aspects which aren't as mindlessuser-friendly

The main CON is the software supported.
But compare that to the CONS of windows and its a little problem hardly worth worying about.

If you want to use big brand sofware dont use linux, if you want to use equally good open source applications get linux.

If you think of Operating syatems like dogs i would say linux is like having your own dog that you can play with, but you also need to pick up its crap and feed it.
Windows is like your friends dog who you only have to play with.

In short, linux needs more looking after, but is more satisfying in the long run.

If a host says they run Linux, does that mean I have have it as my OS too? Sorry for the dumb question. Imhosted.com was the host company I was looking at. I noiced that Linux hosting seems to be a lot cheaper. WHY?

Thats the main reason I've been thinking about switching from windows to linux. Thanks

so are you thinking about switching your desktop OS to linux? or your webserver host to linux??

linux servers and desktop distro's are generally more secure than any windoze OS. also, with server companys they'll usually offer php scripting with linux servers and asp scripting with windows hosting as asp scripts can only be run from windows servers (its M$'s scripting language) as far as i know. i dont use linux for a server so there may be some plugin or something to make it work, but i'm pretty sure asp is windows specific.
and personally, i like scripting in php better than asp. lol

CONS: Time till full use capibility
PROS:Everything but time and compatibility

afew are i have spent 0 Hrs REinstalling linux on anything that it is on.

my windows system i couldnt even fathom how much time i have spent REinstalling windows

Check this out, an excellent comparison between Linux and windows:

Click Here

http://www.apache-asp.org/


Personally, I'm of the firm belief that *nix was designed to be used as a server OS, and that Windows was designed to be a desktop OS. When you apply each of those OS's to that role, everything runs smoothly.

The fact of the matter is that everything that's been done to windows to create systems like SBS, win2k, win2k3 and so on all started out with someone at M$ saying something like "What can we do to this desktop operating system to make it a competitor in the server market?"

The same sort of thinking (reversed) applies to linux as a desktop.

A point of fact: for those of you who don't know what happened to Hotmail's servers when M$ bought them and tried to convert the servers to NT - http://www.vnunet.com/networkitweek/new ... -microsoft

The point of fact for Linux as a desktop would the fact that you actually have to do something other than stick in a CD to do most things - the average user wants things to be as simple as possible and, since most of the big software people develop for windows, that means a windows system.

I found linux (Fedora1) is slower than WinXp on my pc.

thats why you dont use an outdated OS ;]
check out Fedora Core 4.

I having slow internet connection. Looking for Fedora 4 cds (Don't have DVD Drive).

Fedora Core 4 cd's; 4 cd's : $8.95 http://www.osdisc.com/cgi-bin/view.cgi/ ... istrowatch

Browsing the net I would say Linux is much faster, at least for me...