Linux -> Why I use it...

I can't wait for more than 20 second for system to start. 

I can't format my system every 6 months hoping performance will improve.

I can't tolerate system hanging coz of opening more than 20 - 25 windows. 

I don't want to install separate packages for Office and other small applications which come by default in Linux.

As for gaming, most of the games already run on Linux. I don't find gaming on computers good, coz its meant for gaming consoles. 

I don't want to run into endless software compatability issues.

When I upgrade Linux i dont have to install office and all other third party applications all over again.

Windows is truly garbage, and by spreading Piracy and making you feel guilty for using pirated software is the strategy ultimate Microsoft has been all using......all these years..

-- Linus seems to get things backwards with the open source, if he really want Linux ever to be a contender with Windows, write a Linux version that is plug and play and can play games with drivers from Nvidia and ATI.
--

Linux already has plug and play maybe you used a very old version. About games, I guess you don't need a computer, buy a playstation instead if all you do is switch on a computer and start a game. 

---
Flexibility is the greatest option for Linux?
It cant play my games, so it isnt flexibility to be used for an average user, maybe geeks as Linus one day can get that the average computer user just use a few functions for a PC, one is games, the other is office and the third is surfing.
--

Openoffice works much better than the crappy Microsoft Office. Surfing, I am not sure what you mean. Web Browsing, Firefox and other open source stuff is far better. And if you want cool effects Beryl is far superior to Vista Aero crap. Windows eats up the ram and kills performance. Even in 2Gb RAM System, I see the system hangs quite a bit. I can't tolerate blue screens when I am working...


Why is Windows Around?

Coz of Microsoft advertising skills and pirating it's own software. Yes if Windows were not pirated by Microsoft nobody would buy it. As for me I don't pay for garbage. 


Were you trying Linux on your ass or on your computer?

Ubuntu 7.10 recognized everything in four of my computers when I put the disk in (aureal vortex 8830 sound, intel hd audio, 5 different network cards, 3 different sata controllers (two in ahci mode), three different scsi raid controllers, three different pata controllers, three different onboard graphics chips, and a GeForce 8600 GT). The Windows XP install disk just gives me an error. The Windows 2000 install disk insists I insert the Windows CD into the A drive. We installed XP Pro x64 SP2b on a computer in the office that was a year old, and it demanded we give it drivers on a floppy disk!

I can take an image of any of the Ubuntu installs, copy it to any other computer and everything will run perfectly fine with minimal change (one setup program). I can even just move the hard drive between most of them and Ubuntu won't mind. I don't even have to install it to run the OS, complete with a mostly functional web browser (firefox -- ie7 still screwes up a lot), and a complete, well designed office suite (I've wasted 12h of my life learing that you go to the file menu, not the format menu to change the page format). Windows, on the other hand, won't install unless I downgrade my hardware and won't run if I do upgrade it, and they want $200-$300/year ($200-$300 for the OS and around $600 for MS Office about every 3 years) for the to be able to write a simple book on it.

You want games? I got 100's of free ones with my OS (such as solitare, minesweeper, tetravex, which is all most people play anyway), there's the entire library of ID games, some other ones that have been ported, some decent open source games, and some commercial games will run just fine with an emulator like World of Warcraft. Sure there are lots of new games that I can't run on Linux, but windows won't run them either because all it will do is crash on the install CD.

I'm failing to see Windows come through on plug and play or driver support, unless by those you mean an ulcer or fistprints in the wall.

Mick Russom: Don't think of SSD's as just big thumb drives.

Yes, flash RAM has limited writes. Disk sectors fail too -- and get swapped out for spares. SSD's will do the same with failing blocks. With the ability to degrade gracefully, SSD's can easily last 3-5 years under heavy use and a lot longer with light use. 

But if Linus wants a big change for the kernel, he should encourage a standard for Flash storage on a PCI Express card. Then he could have lower latency, higher bandwidth, and random block access.

Let me guess, you are whining that Linux distributions can't play your windos based games, i.e. games created to run on a windos platform?

(and no, i consider Wine/Cedega/Crossover a huge colossal hack)

SSD's and the storage devices without moving parts have been a dream for years. They will remain so for some time. Mechanical disks are reasonably reliable (I don't like moving parts one bit, but these things fail a lot less than fans if they are from Seagate), are gigantic, and, get this, the media rate is ridiculously fast. SSDs will give order-of-magnitude better latency on random accesses for sure, but they have a read/write lifetime to boot!

SSDs are expensive, have slow media rates, can only endure a finite RW cycles, are too small right now and are not ready for primetime. They should have replaced mechanical storage already - they haven't - why? The question is not simply cost either.

I think that Ubuntu is getting close to what the desktop operating system should be.
Add a few optional thing in synaptics for DVD playback etc and you're laughing.

I don't think flexibility or reliability are key points. Linus is right, speed is the key point and especially the access latency. This will give the most benefit in usual performance scenarios which are disk-limited rather than CPU-limited.

SSD are the big thing that is clear, the question is only if they are the big thing already in 2008 or we have to wait longer (what I would expect, at least for the mass market). 

Wouldn't the real benefit be reliability rather than flexibility. The lack of moving parts is sure to beneficial to the storage mediums reliability.

What's the article have to do with flexibility? While I agree with you, I think you put those comments in the wrong place.

Sean - I also agree with you - but what type of system do you suggest? It would require a "ground up" approach. I think SSD, as they now stand, are a slightly better alternative to the mechanical drives, for the time being.

Without going into details, I've read that SSD is faster than the mechanicals, but I've also read that they are about the same - or no real significant difference in speed. 

I can't wait until the price drops so I can find out the truth for myself. I'm believing they are much faster, but I'll have to wait to find out for sure...

Actually not everybody plays games. Flexibility is very important. If Linux could play the games Microsoft would be out of business. 

Linux is getting better with every release. I had a nice surprise with Fedora 8 live. It can use the swap partition on the hdd by itself; also it detects the right settings for my Samsung syncmaster 920n. 

I managed to install everything except java support.

Linux is for the server and for the power users. Or at least people who are willing to learn a little. The rest of you I dont care you can stay with Microsoft.

"Grammar?

posted by : Adam Gritt"


You must be new here ;-)

Linus seems to get things backwards with the open source, if he really want Linux ever to be a contender with Windows, write a Linux version that is plug and play and can play games with drivers from Nvidia and ATI.

Flexibility is the greatest option for Linux?
It cant play my games, so it isnt flexibility to be used for an average user, maybe geeks as Linus one day can get that the average computer user just use a few functions for a PC, one is games, the other is office and the third is surfing.

If Linux or any other OS wants to be a contender which will not happen ever until one main criteria is met,
it got to be plug and play and support drivers for the stuff people use a machine PC for today.

Linux?
never gonna happen.
The flexibility of the OS is the main thing that stops it from being a viable option ever.
We dont want flexibility with the OS, we want stability and plug and play, simple as that.

The trouble is it is still disk. If it is SS then why can't we find another way of addressing it? it is (virtual) memory after all, rather than sticking to the "Disk" format.

Why not rewrite the whole "Dsik subsystem" and really make a difference rather than cobbling the same thing together again...

If linux want's to be different then make a difference and get rid of the Dkis thing once and for all...then I might consider moving to something that is not apple...

I Hate Fruit...