I am wondering if linux is better than the Microsoft operating system and how easy is it to learn?
I don’t think you’ll get a GQ answer to this, especially as to whether it is better or worse than an MS operating system. It’s different, and that’s further complicated by the fact that there are various “flavours” of Linux.
Difficulty? Well, you don’t need to be a genius to use it. I’d say a person who was reasonably computer-literate could install it and get it working. I wouldn’t recommend it for less savvy folks.
Hopefully you’ll get better answers from someone who knows more than I do.
Moving to IMHO from GQ.
Colibri
General Questions Moderator
The main issue with Linux is drivers. You can’t get drivers for everything like you get with a Mac or PC. I tried to run Red Hat Linux but I could not get my printer to print. It was a basic HP printer but it just would not work. I have heard that HP printing on Linux is a lot better now. Back when I tried it the drivers were not from HP, they were written by someone else.
Since I have a (pretty undeserved) reputation as a computer god, I keep getting asked this sort of question. My stock answer: “better at what?”
My recommendation would be to get a live CD — I’m only familiar with Ubuntu, but I understand that other distributions have live CDs as well — boot from it, and take the OS for a test drive. Then you’ll be in a better position to answer your own question, or at least to frame it more precisely.
Just a data point: I bought a HP printer/scanner combo (psc 2175) a couple of years ago and it has GPL’d linux drivers by HP which work perfectly.
To the OP: linux is the mostly Unix system available for consumer hardware. It runs on pretty much all hardware (though fully capable drivers for more exotic expansion cards can be hard to find/non-existent). And it’s free.
The big advantage of Linux is that it’s very accessible: you can configure pretty much everything you want, it’s based on standards that are well-known and proven, and it has TONS of documentation and is easy to program for, and if you want to, you can change the system completely, since it comes with full source code.
for the reasons above, IMHO Linux is easier to master than MS Windows. The problem for Linux has always been to make it easy to start using. Ubuntu Linux is apparently pretty good at this, and comes with pretty much all the basic office and internet software an average user needs, so maybe you can take that for a test drive.
I’ve been a Linux convert for closing in on two years now, started with Ubuntu 7.04. I currently run Ubuntu 8.04 on my laptop and Arch Linux on my desktop. I still have versions of Windows on both machines, but I very rarely use them (e.g., I used Windows just recently to file my taxes online, since Turbotax won’t let me use a Linux browser).
I’m a grad student in a technical field, so I do quite a lot of programming. Unix platforms make it very convenient to write scientific programs, and give you tools that make synchronizing your work between multiple computers very easy. I really like many things which make Linux easy to use:
[ul]
[li]I love the repository system that most Linux distributions use to install programs, which makes keeping your entire computer up to date as simple as typing a single command.[/li][li]I love the ability to automate just about any task you want through the command line, and the fact that so much documentation is available on how to do it.[/li][li]I love that you can customize your GUI in so many ways. I use Gnome on the laptop and KDE 4.2 on the desktop. I’ve also spent time on XFCE and Openbox, all giving an entirely different feel to the computer.[/li][li]Compiz and KDE’s desktop effects are great fun.[/li][li]I love that I’m not treated to a barrage of pop-up messages from the anti-virus and the firewall and the wireless connection manager and update managers for so many pieces of software and warnings that OH MY GOD THERE MIGHT BE UNUSED ICONS ON YOUR DESKTOP!!!1!![/li][li]I also love that I can use the computer right after it boots up, rather than waiting through several minutes of the hard drive spinning its little heart out as Windows does whatever-the-fark that it does during boot up.[/li][li]Oh, and I love surfing for porn without worrying about viruses.[/li][/ul]
That all said, there are drawbacks (no games, no MS Office, no Photoshop) that a lot of people care about. I second OttoDaFe’s suggestion to try out a Live CD and see how it works for you.
HP drivers have to be better than drivers written by some 14 year old kid in Romania. 
One thing I found that was strange was I actually had to compile the drivers - of course first I had to download the C compiler to do that. I assume the HP drivers don’t need compiling.
I remember a while back when all the people who hated MS used a Mac, I guess now they can use Linux as well. I also remember many Mac users telling me how Intel chips were garbage, guess they stopped saying that!
Printing problems can go both ways, with Vista. My not-very-old HP laser hasn’t been provided with a Vista driver, and I had to resort to tricking Vista into installing the XP one. Ubuntu manages to plug-and-play with it, though!
For the OP: try Linux out. You can download a Ubuntu CD image, burn it, boot from it, and play around with it without touching anything on your hard drive. The Ubuntu forums are also extremely helpful and newbie-friendly.
FWIW, I keep on flirting with Linux, and have a dual-boot setup, but still haven’t torn myself away from Windows just yet. Vista has pushed me closer, though…
Linux is derived from unix. Back in the days when microsoft was making DOS, unix was multitasking, had administrators and users, and had a whole bunch of stuff like this all figured out.
Of course, unix was never known to be user friendly. The old joke used to be “Unix is very user friendly, it’s just particular about who its friends are.”
So anyway, years go by, and AT&T, who used to give unix away for free to universities, realizes that they can actually make a profit on it, and tells the unix professors who teach operating system theory to go stuff it. Some guys create minux, which is just like unix, only it doesn’t use any of AT&T’s code, so the university guys can teach with it and not pay anyone. Now you’ve got a battle between one group of people who want to make minux a full featured OS that keeps up with AT&T, and the professor types who want to keep minux small and simple so that it’s easy to teach with.
Along comes this guy named Linus Torvalds, who for his thesis takes minux and makes a full OS out of it, and releases it to the world. And thus, Linux is born.
In the mean time, microsoft “invents” multitasking, and all sorts of other things that unix, vms, and lots of other operating systems already had. Point and click and easy user interfaces take over the world. Microsoft borrows from Apple, who borrowed heavily from Xerox (a point that the anti-microsoft guys who say microsoft stole everything it knows from apple always leave out). Ancient operating systems like unix and vms go oh gee, we need one of them graphical interface thingies, so those guys are all playing catch-up at this point.
And, most importantly during this time, MICROSOFT TAKES OVER THE WORLD!!!
So, fast forward to now, and you’ve got microsoft, who RULES THE FREAKING WORLD and a bunch of little guys like apple and linux.
Which one is better? Well, it depends on your definition of “better”. Linux is based on unix, which is a very mature and very well defined OS from the ground up (it had a lot of years to learn). Microsoft came late into the game and even to this day isn’t so good at multitasking (for example, in most cases users on a windows box runs as administrator, which is a great big gaping security hole). On the other hand, linux at its core is still unix, and while it has made great strides in its user interface, it still can be a cryptic pain in the backside to deal with. Apple, underneath the hood is unix, but they went to really great pains to make an easy user interface, so they actually have the easiest computers to use.
So, if “better” means a more stable operating system that isn’t so easily trashed by misbehaving programs and hackers, linux and apple win. Microsoft is better than it was, but they still come in third, easy.
There’s also the issue that people HATE microsoft. The fact that microsoft actually acts the part of the Evil Empire ™ doesn’t help. So, there’s about a trillion viruses out there for microsoft. Apple and linux (1) don’t have the hate factor and (2) are tiny little guys with very few computers out there, so, while viruses do exist for apple and linux, they aren’t very common.
So, if “better” means how likely an evil virus is likely to screw up your computer, again apple and linux win.
On the other hand, microsoft RULES THE FREAKING WORLD. They have 95 percent of the market. If you are making some spiffy new device or writing some spiffy new piece of software, unless you’re an idiot (or you have some weird thing against actually making a profit) you are probably going to be making it for windows first. Linux and apple are way down in the priority list for most developers, and a lot of software just isn’t available for apple or linux. Even some popular software isn’t available for linux, or the linux version is pretty crappy. Microsoft office, for example, is available for windows (of course), mac, but not linux. Linux does have open office, which is ok if you want to do some simple word processing, but it is not even close to a full replacement for microsoft office.
So, if “better” means how easily you can get software and gadgets for it, microsoft wins by a huge margin. Linux and apple aren’t even close.
If you go back quite a few years, the graphics and sound capabilities on PCs sucked. The graphics and sound on the older 8 bit computers was better. So, in the older days, apple had a huge lead on the graphical interface. Because of this, apples were much better suited to graphics arts types of programs. A modern PC has just as good (if not better) graphics capabilities as a modern apple, but just from inertia alone apple still leads in the graphics arts software arena. Similarly, even though an apple is just as good of a number cruncher as a pc, business software is much better on a pc, just because of history and market inertia.
If all you are doing is internet and e-mail, all three systems will do what you want.
Ease of use: microsft and apple are best, linux is getting a lot better than it was. A lot of the newer linux distributions install almost as easily as windows. Installing third party software on a linux box can make grown men cry, however. Quite often one of the first steps in installing linux programs is to compile the program. Well, now you’re not a user, you’re a freaking software developer. Come on guys, that’s not a user friendly way to distribute programs.
Specifically to the OP, if you are switching from windows to linux, you’re going to find that most linux distributions install just as easily as windows, with the rather important “if” that all of your hardware must be supported by linux. The bad news is that if something f***'s up, you might be stuck editing some cryptic command file to fix it. The good news is, when windows f’s up you’re pretty much screwed, but if linux f’s up there’s often some sort of workaround for it, and you can usually find out what that workaround is by googling.
You may find that some software packages you are used to don’t have linux equivalents, or the linux version sucks. The more “typical” software you use the less likely you are to run into this problem.
You still need to be aware of viruses and security issues, but just the fact that linux uses administrators (called root) and users, and you typically run as a user will save you from a lot of possible harm. You need to get used to running as a user, and knowing when to switch to administrator type privileges. This is something you never have to do with windows, so it’s an extra thing that gets in your way (i.e. it’s less user friendly) but on the other hand it’s more secure and prevents a lot of the vulnerabilities that plague the windows architecture.
My advice is to try it out and see what you think. There are “live” CDs that you can boot off of and experiment with just to get a feel for the OS.
All of my linux machines dual boot linux and windows. This is very easy to set up as long as you install windows first. Windows does not play nice with the other children (he’ll make your linux no longer bootable). Linux on the other hand doesn’t mind co-existing with another operating system.
As other people have mentioned, better at what?
If all you want to do is basic web browsing and editing then both are fine. Linux has the advantage of being free and has fewer viruses because most of the h4k0rs who write viruses hate Microsoft. Ubuntu has made installing Linux no less painful than Vista.
However, if you want to do heavy editing then Linux can be lacking. It can have problems in more esoteric browsing situations (it’s not trivial to get Flash running on 64-bit Linux) and Linux word/photo editing isn’t as polished. I find that the email applications for Windows (e.g. Outlook) are more powerful than those for Linux. The gaming situation heavily favors Windows.
If you are hoping to learn how to program and run your own website than I’d lean towards Linux. It has everything you need (for free) and the volume of tools can be staggering. I periodically geek out with all the cool stuff I can get for Linux.
I have both Linux (Ubuntu) and Windows at home. I find that I spend a little more time on the Windows PC.
Why is it that with Linux the user has to compile software before installing it? Would it be difficult for developers to compile it before distributing? Is it just not possible? Is it a philosophical thing? Inertia?
While you can compile from source, there are quite a few binary packages and various distros have their own version of most software customized for their installers. Either Deb or RPM , just to name a couple.
When Linux was making inroads, it was on older computers that required a more compacted space, so intead of a shared driver library, you downloaded what ever dependencies you needed and that was it. So you could turn an old pentium one into a router or a mythbox or what have you.
Declan
Overall a very good post, but I have a nitpick with this. MS rules the consumer market. Virtually nobody who knows what he’s doing and has a choice runs a server with any Windows OS. In addition, about 90% of the world’s supercomputers run some flavor of Linux. Maybe 1% use Windows.
An exellent post, but this point is not totally accurate. Installing Windows will screw up the Linux bootloader, but it’s pretty easy to fix it from a live CD. A little technical, but not too difficult, I don’t think. Detailed instructions.
This is no longer true. I’ve installed flash on 2 64 bit distros (Arch and Ubuntu) with nary a problem. Also, Adobe has released a working alpha version of 64 bit flash for Linux.
As a Linux/UNIX developer I can offer two reasons:
-
There are myriad of Linux/UNIX distributions, all using different versions of common libraries and different locations to store the libs/config files/or even executable formats, making comped binaries for one system incompatible with other ones.
-
Most good Linux distributions (like Debian and Ubuntu) have their own servers with all the dependency tracking etc needed to handle software packages. Dependency tracking means that if I install a program on my system, the tracking will take care that all the required libraries and other software that the program needs are automatically installed too.
In other words: the developers release their software as source code (and possibly one or two binary versions of the linux version(s) they personally use), and then people in the various distros’ organizations will take that source code and make a binary package for that specific version of linux, and hopefully send fixes/patches back to the developer if needed.
This means the developer can concentrate on just writing the code, and the package managers can concentrate on making the software work on their specific version of Linux / BSD / other Unixes, with communication going back and forth when needed. And everybody can work on their expertise.
Compiling it before distributing ties it to one particular computer - in essence, the ‘only available for Windows’ problem. Do it yourself, and it’s going to work for you, as long as it compiles! The modern user-friendly distros have ways of installing a lot of stuff without even the bother of the familiar Windows installers, and for any software worth bothering with they’ll be making sure it works with these.
I think this is a bit of a “no true Scotsman” assertion – in truth I think you’ll find that Windows Server has a respectable share of the market, and not very much through ignorance or coercion.
MSX alone is one reason that Windows Server succeeds for business and industry. Yes, it costs more, but there are tangible benefits to running Exchange that go way beyond being inexpensive and “not Microsoft.”
One thing that doesn’t come up very often in these sorts of threads is a cautionary tale both my roommate and I have gone through.
My computer is homebuilt. I took what care I could, but it wasn’t professionally built. Windows XP runs beautifully on it, but when I tried going to Ubuntu last year I continually experienced random crashes and computer restarts. They weren’t random, but I couldn’t determine the pattern well enough to figure out how to combat it. I eventually had to go back to XP in order to use my computer for more than an hour or so.
My roommate has a first-generation iMac, which obviously runs quite well. Recently she decided to put Linux on it so she could run City of Heroes better. However, after an hour or two she noticed the computer was overheating badly and she had to go back to MacOS.
The common thread in both these anecdotes is that Windows and MacOS may have limiters in them, buffers that restrict how hard you can use your equipment. Linux doesn’t bother and happily makes the most of anything you’ve got, and if your hardware isn’t well constructed or has certain flaws, it can suffer some damage. Car analogy: a car may have a governor on it limiting its speed to 80 mph, which is fine for most people. However, if you take the governor off, the car is capable of achieving 150 mph…but after a certain point the wheels may come loose or the engine may overheat.
That shouldn’t stop you from trying out Linux if you want, especially if your computer was professionally built, but it’s something to keep in mind.