Quote:
Originally Posted by skynet777
Speaking from experience with AOHell, drop them. I am however interested how good linux actually is though compared to xp, is it better and more reliable? i have used it a little bit but only from the disk, i didn't install though just incase i regreted it.
|
Blimey, mate, you've opened up a can of worms with this... if you ask 100 different people, you'll get 100 different answers. Here's my take on it.
Is it better than XP..? It depends mostly on what you're looking for in an operating system, and also how willing you are to learn stuff the non-Microsoft way.
If you're a gamer, then I'd say that you'll be better off running Windows as your primary operating system - at least for the gaming sessions. There's simply not enough support from the developers for Linux versions of PC games. Although some games can be played under emulation, using products such as Cedega, it's nowhere near as simple as it is getting a PC game to work under Windows.
If, however, you're just looking for an operating system that has applications that will allow you to do some office work, e.g. word processing, using spreadsheets, Powerpoint-type presentations, etc... followed by some browsing of t'internet for reading emails and accessing web sites, and for multimedia stuff, i.e. listening to your MP3s and watching DVDs, etc... then Linux can handle this just as well (if not better) than Windows.
There are very few instances of applications that I can think of (with the exception of games) that don't have a Linux equivalent that is just as good or better than the Windows version.
I do think, personally, that the way the kernel of the operating system is designed in Linux (and all Unix variants) is better than the way Microsoft chose to build Windows. I like the way that, for example, the GUI is completely seperated from the kernel. You're not limited to the one look 'n' feel of the OS that you get with Windows because you can run different window managers (KDE, Gnome, IceWM, fluxbox, etc...) to suit your needs. Windows tries to get around this by offering applications such as Windows Blinds, but they sit on top of the Microsoft GUI which is explicitly built into the
OS.
Talking of the GUI, I am really blown away by the look 'n' feel of the latest versions of KDE and using XGL/compiz. I keep on reading about people saying the new Aero look of Windows Vista is stunning, but it's nothing compared to XGL - which has been available for a while now, can run easily on older hardware, and actually serves a purpose rather than being just eye candy.
Also, I like the way that Unix/Linux was designed from scratch as being a multi-user OS. Windows doesn't handle multiple users as efficiently... try having different users with different screen resolutions under Windows and see if it works as it should
Additionally, the security model used by Unix/Linux is much more reliable than the Windows equivalent. Windows has copied numerous aspects from the Unix world - the latest being the implementation of non-Administrator accounts for everyday usage in Vista (although they've messed it up unfortunately, from what I've seen
). That's not to say that Microsoft haven't done some things right... they have extensively used Access Control Lists for files/directories from NT 3.51 onwards, which differs from and is an improvement to the group/owner level permissions used exclusively by Unix/Linux until fairly recently.
Lastly, you don't have to reboot a Linux/Unix box anywhere near as much as a Windows box, which is sooo nice
Is Linux more reliable than XP...? This is a difficult one that some people seem to get annoyed about, but I'd say that a default Linux installation is more hardened than a default Windows XP installation. Admittedly, both can be locked down to be extremely secure and reliable (that's what I get paid to do
), but for the average home user, I think that XP is less reliable. As well as Linux shipping in a more locked-down configuration, maybe this has something to do with the average Linux user being more aware of security and reliability issues than your average Windows user...?
Needless to say, there are vastly more viruses, spyware, malware, etc... released for Windows than for Linux
(watch the Windows fanboys state that this is only because of a bigger userbase of Windows)
Overall, Windows has some advantages over Linux, and Linux has it's fair share of reasons why you should use it instead of Windows. You've already taken the first steps by giving a LiveCD a whirl, so I'd suggest you try installing a Linux distro, either by creating new partitions on your hard drive, or alternatively by installing - for free - VMWare or Microsoft's Virtual PC and creating a Linux host environment to run within that (if your hardware is up to running both OSes at the same time).
Hope that helps answer your questions
I'm more than happy to share my experiences... although it may be worth creating a new thread over in the Computers/IT section so we don't drag this thread too much off topic