Re: Linux, over hyped by the Linux community, discuss.

kobold <1@xxxxx> writes:

Linux, buggy and unstable at the application layer, always in some
half
baked beta release even when it is declared stable, poor and often
lacklustre hardware support, rarely supported and seldom back by big
software developers and hardware manufactures, fine as a web server
yet
poor as a desktop OS, not quite as secure and immune to viruses and
worms
as many of the myths would have us believe, after all this time as a
free
OS still with a tiny market share even though many of the Linux
community
claim it to be far superior to the competition, the OS of choice for
paranoid anti capitalist anti conformist geeks, the Linux community
are
often in complete denial with regards to the competition.

I have heard all these things said about the Linux OS and the people
who
use it. Is there any truth in these rumours?

Is anyone willing to discuss these allegations sensibly without just
posting a load of abuse and completely one sided debate?

Since so often these kinds of questions are just disguised trolling,
I'm not going to post a long response. Plus, I get tired of repeating
myself.

I'm a full-time writer and photographer and I use nothing but Linux. I
don't even dual-boot. I send my writing and photos by way of the
Internet.

While I'm not going to claim that I've never had a problem I couldn't
trace to Linux software, I've had fewer of them than I ever had when
using Windows. It's remarkably robust. A crash or freeze is
unexpected, not business as usual. My security worries have basically
vanished. I don't have to "activate" programs, a practice I
particularly despise, and if I need something new, I just take out my
distribution disks and look for something. Chances are, it's there.

Overall I've found that I get more done with much less effort with
Linux, something critical to my livelihood. And I've found that I just
prefer Linux programs. With such a variety of programs, it's much
easier to find applications that work the way you work, not force you
to work the way they work.

All that said, hardware support is the biggest problem. Manufacturers
ignore the Linux market, something surprising to me. But those that
don't get my business. I bought a Samsung laser printer while out
shopping largely because it said "Linux" on the box.

And there are some people that are absolutely dependent on a program
for which there's no Linux equivalent. But I suspect they aren't the
majority. Linux has no AOL, Photoshop or Quicken. If you're not
absolutely married to those three, it does have programs that access
other Internet providers, GIMP for graphics and photos, and
spreadsheets. Not to mention the usual word processors and general
office programs people use. Plus other programs Windows and Mac users
would find vital if they were available to them. I speak from
experience on the last one.

Before I moved to Linux I asked someone who knew something about
operating systems about Linux. He told me you trade one set of
problems for another. In a sense that's true. But I traded some big
problems for some small problems.

To me the question "Why do you use Linux?" is wrongly phrased. It
should be "Why do you stick with Windows?" I consider going to Linux
the smartest computer decision I ever made. I don't need drama in my
life from computer problems.

And don't forget I'm a writer, not a computer geek. If Linux were
hard, unstable or weird I wouldn't be writing this.

My response was a little longer than I planned.

--Rod
______________________
Author of "Linux for Non-Geeks--Clear-eyed Answers for Practical
Consumers" and "Boring Stories from Uncle Rod." To reply by e-mail
take the second "o" out of the e-mail address.
.

Quantcast