RipNet's article about linux vs Windows

[wldkos]

Oh man. I actually gave this piece of garbage a chance since I though that the "new guy" to ripnet, might have something good to say, but instead, I found myself reading the newbie section of Linuxquestions.org. I seriously doubt that the man who wrote that article has ever tried linux and if he has, he has not tried it seriously. Every first sentence of his remarks were the stupidest, cliche things I hear all that time about linux.

How can an OS nagging you about security be something bad? He is a windows user.
If you want to play games, see if they work on linux, if not, why choose linux?
Did he dare mention Dual booting?

JC: When installing a PC the first priority is to get as much working as possible with minimum fuss.

Let me say something here... who doesn't plan for atleast 2-3 hours or more of installing a new OS?

I would love to go on, but I would be writing my own article.

and btw, here is my signature:

Code: Select all

[wldkos@localhost wldkos]$ uptime
 04:47:39 up 22 days, 11:08,  3 users,  load average: 0.64, 0.41, 0.41

Is this guy telling me that linux can't run as a primary OS?

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:1134, old post ID:10056

[Red Squirrel]

I'd tell you do go for it and it can be featured on their home page, but I don't want to start fights with affiliate sites either.

But you have a point there, security nags arn't a bad thing. Unless it's some kind of packet filter that asks you for every single bit.

"The bit '1' is being sent, do you want to allow it?"

hehe.

I'm sure linux can run as a primary OS, but you just need to be ready to revert to everything Linux, which I'm sure is possible, but lot of learning. (new photo editor software, sound editing, browsing, mail, word processing etc... everything). I personally would not run it as a primary OS, and if I would, I would make it a slow transition and dual boot or something. The Linux/Unix line of OS is best for servers, but I've seen the GUI's on Mandrake and Red Hat, and it beats windows XP without using 255MB for GDI memory lol.

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:1134, old post ID:10065

[wldkos]

I'd tell you do go for it and it can be featured on their home page, but I don't want to start fights with affiliate sites either.

But you have a point there, security nags arn't a bad thing. Unless it's some kind of packet filter that asks you for every single bit.

"The bit '1' is being sent, do you want to allow it?"

hehe.

I'm sure linux can run as a primary OS, but you just need to be ready to revert to everything Linux, which I'm sure is possible, but lot of learning. (new photo editor software, sound editing, browsing, mail, word processing etc... everything). I personally would not run it as a primary OS, and if I would, I would make it a slow transition and dual boot or something. The Linux/Unix line of OS is best for servers, but I've seen the GUI's on Mandrake and Red Hat, and it beats windows XP without using 255MB for GDI memory lol.

Good to hear that red. I think that guys article was totally biased towards linux. Now I understand that since he had to choose a side, but I really don't think it was the right thing to do, to say that linux is harder, more nagging and less supported. I have found programs for linux that windows couldn't even come up with. I update my computers every 3-5 days. My systems run stable. I can't complain at all. All I can say is if that guy that wrote the article has ever tried linux, he didn't read enough about how to use it to it's fullest extent.

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:1134, old post ID:10074

[Chris Vogel]

I could most definitely use Linux as my primary OS because there are no Windows-only applications that I am absolutely tied to, and I don't game much. I miss being in Linux.

For a server, I would use FreeBSD though. Of course, I would have to spend a lot of time getting familiar with it.

Archived topic from Iceteks, old topic ID:1134, old post ID:10132