+12 12 0
Published 8 years ago by caelreth with 21 Comments

Join the Discussion

  • Auto Tier
  • All
  • 1
  • 2
  • 3
Post Comment
  • [Deleted Profile]

    [This comment was removed]

  • Tawsix
    +5

    Linux has its uses, but for general use I prefer Windows. Is Linux powerful and customizable? Sure, if you're willing to fuck around with it for a weekend. I'm just way too lazy to bother and Windows performs its job good enough for me.

    • caelreth
      +5

      Well, it can be easier than spending an entire weekend on it. Or more complicated than that. Of course, I know of Windows users who spend more time customizing Windows, too. But, I can't disagree that it comes out of the box with a measure of usability and is "good enough" for lots of people. Though, if you are really on the "it just works" side of things, why not a Mac?

      • spaceghoti (edited 8 years ago)
        +6

        "It just works" depends on the distribution you choose. Linux Mint is an Ubuntu-based distribution that "just works" out of the box pretty well, especially with things like media codecs and other normally proprietary drivers preinstalled. Anyone who thinks that Windows doesn't take some time to find and install the software you want after first boot is kidding themselves.

        • caelreth
          +4

          I can't tell if you are actually replying to me or to Tawsix here - but I don't need convincing that Linux is a viable choice :)

          • spaceghoti
            +4

            I meant to reply to you. :) The myth that Linux isn't ready for the desktop continues to be perpetuated by discussions conceding that Windows is a more mature desktop platform and "just works out of the box." If you use Arch Linux and build your own kernel then yes, you're going to have to configure every little thing. Most distributions don't expect you to micromanage your computer that way and while Mint is a more extreme version of "it just works" in the Linux world, Redhat, Ubuntu and all the other major players don't need any more work to configure after first boot than Windows.

            • caelreth
              +3

              But I didn't say Windows was "a more mature desktop" - I said it is "good enough" for lots of people out of the box. And it is. Yes, the distros you mentioned don't need much more work out of the box. But the problem is that you still have to get new Linux users to the right "box." They don't have to do research (even simple research like asking a friend to recommend a distro) to find the "right" Windows.

              I'm not perpetuating a "myth" here, I'm just not sneering at Windows for being Windows.

            • spaceghoti
              +3
              @caelreth -

              That was the impression I got when I read your initial comment. It's possible I'm misreading it when you say that 'But, I can't disagree that it comes out of the box with a measure of usability and is "good enough" for lots of people.' It sounds here like you're conceding that Windows is simply more usable out of the box than Linux, which is the point I mean to address. If I misunderstood your intent then I apologize.

              I'm not perpetuating a "myth" here, I'm just not sneering at Windows for being Windows.

              I understand. Windows isn't the Devil and it shouldn't be lambasted simply for being Windows. But Microsoft has put a lot of money and effort into denigrating Linux as "too technical" or "insecure" or otherwise "not ready for prime time" and your comment seemed to feed into that perception.

            • caelreth
              +2
              @spaceghoti -

              But, I can't disagree that it comes out of the box with a measure of usability and is "good enough" for lots of people.

              This part of my comment really seems to be being misunderstood. I am stating that Windows comes out of the box being able to be used. That's it. Not that it's better or worse than Linux or anything else. Just that it is usable and that that is good enough for plenty of end users, and if it's good enough for them, then who am I to argue?

        • [Deleted Profile]

          [This comment was removed]

      • Tawsix
        +2

        Of course, I know of Windows users who spend more time customizing Windows, too.

        You can but you certainly don't need to. I've never once had to worry about dependencies or tracking down obscure shit that hasn't been supported or updated in 3 years just to get some simple functionality that was on a context menu in Windows. I will say this, I certainly felt like Indiana Jones sometimes while working with Linux: researching through forums and mail lists, seeing hints of an elusive fix and then finally having enough pieces to put it together and finally get it working, it could be fun at times but holy shit I just don't have to time to do that for every little thing.

        why not a Mac

        Money money money. Plus I like gaming and even with increased coverage of Linux and Mac platforms, Windows is still where it's at.

        • caelreth
          +4

          Please don't misunderstand - I'm not trying to argue with you about Windows, hence:

          But, I can't disagree that it comes out of the box with a measure of usability and is "good enough" for lots of people.

          My point was that with the right Linux distro (Linux Mint has been mentioned), you don't have to spend as much time as you used to in order to get a usable system. From there, it's very much like Windows as far as being able to choose how much time you spend customizing it. And with modern package managers, dependencies are much less frequently a problem these days. But I can't say never :)

          Couldn't agree more about the cost of a Mac... And it's sad, too, because I grew up using Macs and now can't justify the money.

          • spaceghoti
            +4

            My point was that with the right Linux distro (Linux Mint has been mentioned), you don't have to spend as much time as you used to in order to get a usable system.

            In other words, I misunderstood what you were saying. Mea culpa. :)

            • caelreth
              +3

              No problem. It happens. But I assure you that I am a long-time Linux user who knows that it is quite the usable platform. I just long ago had to concede that Windows is usable, even if I don't prefer it and can tell you why Linux is better.

  • plastico
    +2

    Every once in a while I find myself trying out a new distro or revisiting old ones that I've used before. Point is, I always come back to Windows and I really don't know why. Old habits die hard I guess.

    • caelreth
      +2

      To each his own. Don't need a reason - if that's what you prefer, then that's what you prefer :)

      • plastico
        +2

        The thing is, I THINK I prefer Linux, however, I can't bring myself to use it for a long stretch of time. There's always some game or application that pulls me back to Windows for a while. Overall I like both, the ease of use of Windows and the potencial and OSS in Linux.

        • caelreth
          +3

          I think that's true for a lot of people (the one application keeping them with Windows) - especially for games.

          • spaceghoti
            +2

            The Linux world keeps resisting the introduction of a standardized API because they assert they aren't needed. Certainly with Steam putting out a platform exclusively for Linux they seem to have a point. But the gaming industry is sufficiently invested in programming for the Windows API that they don't seem interested in changing any time soon.

Here are some other snaps you may like...