Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu
it's just as an end user you don't see much of it.
|
Isnt that what matters at the end? The question, at least in the form as was stated originally by OP, implied why "people" (not developers, programmers) use windows.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Chu
These sorts of things are handeled differently in the linux world. I can talk directly to developers, so at the very least I know where the issues stand. If it's critical to get working correctly, I can even fix it myself because Linux is an 'open' system as opposed to Windows which is 'closed'.
|
it is definitely good to have an option to DIY if possible, but in general I was under impression that some of the most popular hardware takes hoops and hoops to get up and running in linux variants. Not that windows drivers are perfect, but the chances are you are likely to do a decent amount of looking around just to get things working well unless it is really archaic stuff. In other words, since the companys consider the linux market not as high of the priority, the effort put into supporting them suffers, and users have to make up for that for the most part. History tells us that voluntary effort most always lags behind a more systematic approach; it is only natural that the newest piece of hardware are last to be funtional in linux. What that means to me at the end of the day is, I can expect windows to have higher chance of being more in tune with the cutting-edge stuff.
Sorry you had issues with the tablet. But as we speak, there are people having trouble to get their ATi cards to agree with linux (myself included), soundcards, TV cards - some of more commonplace and widespread items with more practical value to the masses.
Quote:
I agree that for your average PC user Linux vs. Windows is sort of a moot point. |
That was my whole point really. I did not counter the OPs jab at windows into something like "linux is useless, why anyone ever uses it?" Rather, I am saying it isnt for everyone for a very good reason.
Quote:
As DRM becomes more and more prevalent though, these philosophical differences might start to matter quite a bit to the end user. Some of the DRM built into Windows Vista is flat out scarry. |
Regretfully I am not well informed on this topic. Could you be more specific about things I should be aware of as a windows user? Havnt noticed anything out of ordinary with two of my vista machines thusfar. But it would be good to get a heads up so to say
Quote:
There are parts of the DX10 standard that are dedicated to the best way to corrupt your a/v streams if the OS deems it necessary! Without your consent! |
That too, I would like to have more information on. I thought one of the highly touted features of vista was improvements in audio (for head-fi'ers its mostly about not havint to deal with the grievances of kmixer resampling)
Quote:
That being said, the technological advantages of Linux in a server envrionment are monumental. Windows flat out was not designed to be a server OS or a multi-user OS and short of a code rewrite it simply will not be able to touch linux in many areas because of architecural flaws. This is certainly not a "minor niche". |
Corporate workplace != Desktop for personal use. Again, I was responding to the op and some of the posts pointing at the desktop usage. I do not claim to have enough knowledge to discuss server issues. Putting up a server and maintaining it is more than a niche for any foreseeable feature as far as the general public is concerned. What feeds them on the internet is a whole different story, which I spoke nothing of. You are probably right on that I suppose, there is gotta be a reason why the developer dudes love linux.
Quote:
Originally Posted by Ech0
Hardware is not a problem as long as you know, going into your purchase, that it's going to be used in or with a linux box. Do a little research first and all is well. Secondly, a linux savvy user solves his problems the same way as a windows savvy person does google. I spend very little time "tweaking" or tinkering w/my box(s) anymore.
|
So you are implying and admitting that linux does not have as good of coverage, so the buyer beware and be selective. I never intended linux to replace my windows as the primary OS, I know I can do everything linux can do equally well on windows, not vice versa. I figure this is most certainly true for many people if they are in a capricious mood to just try it out. Most of us would not go out building machines just for the sake of running an OS we dont even have experience with. The premise here is that to claim that it has an adequate hardware support, these should work with what I already have, not the other way around as you suggest.
Linux is free, free is good. But I need to buy a whole new set of hardware just to get linux working? Give me a break. I must point out how people take this so personally with their affiilations to their own respective camps, and thus I say none of this is the OS developers' fault - more of a cold stern look at the market share, and the appropriate amount of support from third party firms.
At the very worst, the idea that linux must automatically be preffered by everyone due to ease of maintenance is a very questionable claim, and so in a way you and I both agree. I said in my earlier post that if one could put enough effort to teach and familiarize oneself to work with an alien OS (assuming most people are predominantly used to windows), it should not be so hard for him to manage his windows machine to a point at least where it is not so crash prone. Ditching windows because it crashes a lot is an overstatement and overused excuse IMO.