- Site menu:
- Latest Discussions
- Latest Newswire
- Archives
- Submit Story
- Story HOWTO
- Syndicate
- E-mail Alerts
Inconvenient truths: PC vs. Mac, Windows vs. Linux, us vs. them, et al.
|
|
|
Comments (17)
An enjoyable read.
Easy to digest, thoughtful, broad spectrum. Perfect for a Friday morning or whenever. Goes well with coffee and Dire Straits.
Agreed.
Steven, thanks for the high compliments!
Well, except for his point about Windows being fast. :)
All non-Vista Windows installations which aren't saddled with crippleware (see: Dell, HP, Toshiba, et.al.) are fast when you first start them. Give them six months and see how they do, then again a year later, then again at 18 months. At 24 months you'll be screaming at the machine to hurry up and do something, anything, to let you know it's still working.
All non-Vista Windows installations which aren't saddled with crippleware (see: Dell, HP, Toshiba, et.al.) are fast when you first start them. Give them six months and see how they do, then again a year later, then again at 18 months. At 24 months you'll be screaming at the machine to hurry up and do something, anything, to let you know it's still working.
jdixon, I totally agree -- Windows installations tend to get kind of creaky with time. I think you need to religiously back up your data and reinstall the OS from scratch on a yearly basis. One of the great things about Debian is that you can always upgrade from one version to another with little or no trouble.
I've had some really doggy Windows 98 boxes, but my current Windows XP box at work has been running for almost a couple of years now, and it shows no signs of such a slowdown. I'm locked out of the "administrator" level, so I can't even check on the file fragmentation, but I think that XP takes care of the box in that regard better than previous Windows versions.
One thing: Even though I can't be the "administrator" on this box, I can pretty much install any app I want --- although sometimes the system won't let me remove one. I can usually do that anyway, but security when it comes to actual users of Windows boxes is pretty much a joke -- another area where Linux wins big.
I've had some really doggy Windows 98 boxes, but my current Windows XP box at work has been running for almost a couple of years now, and it shows no signs of such a slowdown. I'm locked out of the "administrator" level, so I can't even check on the file fragmentation, but I think that XP takes care of the box in that regard better than previous Windows versions.
One thing: Even though I can't be the "administrator" on this box, I can pretty much install any app I want --- although sometimes the system won't let me remove one. I can usually do that anyway, but security when it comes to actual users of Windows boxes is pretty much a joke -- another area where Linux wins big.
I have always disliked Windows' user management. I never liked it in Win3.1 or 9x. Not sure I really care for 2000/XP either. Although it might be Windows policies, it just seems like so many of my MS Office settings get reset every time someone else logs into our shared box. If I set the toolbars one way, log out, and come back the next day, I find them re-arranged or entirely new toolbars added that I don't use. Actually, that's one reason I installed OOo for my account - so no one else can screw with my freaking settings.
Meanwhile, my resentment of Windows continues to build...
Meanwhile, my resentment of Windows continues to build...
> I've had some really doggy Windows 98 boxes, but my current Windows XP box at work has been running for almost a couple of years now, and it shows no signs of such a slowdown.
It takes longer with 2000/XP, and the slowdown isn't as dramatic, but it's still there. If you could do a side by side comparison, you'd be able to see it.
> I'm locked out of the "administrator" level...
That's probably a good chuck of the reason right there. Not being able to make changes to system files seems to greatly extend the life of a Windows box.
> but security when it comes to actual users of Windows boxes is pretty much a joke -- another area where Linux wins big.
Again, completely true.
It takes longer with 2000/XP, and the slowdown isn't as dramatic, but it's still there. If you could do a side by side comparison, you'd be able to see it.
> I'm locked out of the "administrator" level...
That's probably a good chuck of the reason right there. Not being able to make changes to system files seems to greatly extend the life of a Windows box.
> but security when it comes to actual users of Windows boxes is pretty much a joke -- another area where Linux wins big.
Again, completely true.
poor analysis, Freudian projection
"I suspect that much of my video problems stem from the Flash player in Windows being a better-written app than the one in Linux."
No, it's that Linux does a better job of separating (and protecting!) the browser and the Flash player from each other. That's true of pretty much all Windows apps vs. Linux apps: Windows apps share too much context among one another, up to and including the GDI, with way too little privilege protection. The Linux apps may run slower, but the Unix philosophy, even with its lumps and holes, keeps rogue apps in line much better.
I suppose one could say Unix offers Discretionary Access Control, while Windows offers Indiscreet Access Control.
"Linux -- and the choice to use (or not to use) Linux -- is political. There's no denying it or getting around it."
Wanna bet?
My choice to use Linux stems from the want and need to have a system free of Trojan horses and boot-sector viruses. I lost my entire dual-boot system when my Windows 95 fell to the Chernobyl virus in 1998. I "cast off the bowlines" that tied me to Windows and went 100% Linux. Between the raft of new viruses and security holes that have appeared in Windows since then (even as M$ declared "security is our #1 priority now!") and the outrageous sums charged for the latest and greatest security-hole packages...
How can I ever trust Microsoft again? I'll stay with Linux, thankyouverymuch.
No, it's that Linux does a better job of separating (and protecting!) the browser and the Flash player from each other. That's true of pretty much all Windows apps vs. Linux apps: Windows apps share too much context among one another, up to and including the GDI, with way too little privilege protection. The Linux apps may run slower, but the Unix philosophy, even with its lumps and holes, keeps rogue apps in line much better.
I suppose one could say Unix offers Discretionary Access Control, while Windows offers Indiscreet Access Control.
"Linux -- and the choice to use (or not to use) Linux -- is political. There's no denying it or getting around it."
Wanna bet?
My choice to use Linux stems from the want and need to have a system free of Trojan horses and boot-sector viruses. I lost my entire dual-boot system when my Windows 95 fell to the Chernobyl virus in 1998. I "cast off the bowlines" that tied me to Windows and went 100% Linux. Between the raft of new viruses and security holes that have appeared in Windows since then (even as M$ declared "security is our #1 priority now!") and the outrageous sums charged for the latest and greatest security-hole packages...
How can I ever trust Microsoft again? I'll stay with Linux, thankyouverymuch.
>I suspect that much of my video problems stem from the Flash player in Windows being a better-written app than the one in Linux. All the more reason for Flash to be opened up to the community -- there's got to be a better player out there to be written.
So what about that bothers you so much, or were you to busy jerking knees to consider what he was saying?
His suspicion seems more reasonable than your certainty, especially considering that you haven't seen the code to know.
More to the point, why get so exorcised? He is saying that flash would be better if it were made into free software. Surely that can't bother you.
So what about that bothers you so much, or were you to busy jerking knees to consider what he was saying?
His suspicion seems more reasonable than your certainty, especially considering that you haven't seen the code to know.
More to the point, why get so exorcised? He is saying that flash would be better if it were made into free software. Surely that can't bother you.
I've been doing a LOT of testing of OSes on different platforms, and I'm very much aware of the risks inherent in running Windows -- especially unprotected versions. And I also know that a fresh Windows install runs a lot better than one that's a few years old. I've seen more than one non-techie person have a problem with XP and figure, "Oh well, this computer's a couple of years old and running like crap, I guess I'll buy a new one." Not knowing that a fresh install of Windows (or, heaven forbid, of Linux) could bring back their "old" box.
I'm not in much of a position to comment on how separate the Flash program is from the apps and the OS in Windows as opposed to Linux, but I remain convinced that Adobe's Flash player for Linux isn't that great. I've read about a project to reverse-engineer a FOSS Flash player, and I applaud whoever is working on that project.
If you talk to people at the newspaper where I work (the Los Angeles Daily News), all they talk about is how they want EVERYTHING to be done in Flash. For those with fairly new hardware, it's a lot more seamless than having to run video with external players, and with the rise of things like YouTube, today's generation is heavily enmeshed in Flash video. I believe it's not right to have such a large portion of Web content be in a format that's not free and open, and I'd really like to see an alternative.
Here's another "inconvenient truth" I missed in my original post:
The Windows Media Player for Mac OS is pretty crappy, but not as crappy as the QuickTime player for Windows, which is about as big a piece of total shit as I've seen come out of Apple, ever. It ran like a dying dog on my 3 GHz box, and then it was hell getting rid of it.
I'm not in much of a position to comment on how separate the Flash program is from the apps and the OS in Windows as opposed to Linux, but I remain convinced that Adobe's Flash player for Linux isn't that great. I've read about a project to reverse-engineer a FOSS Flash player, and I applaud whoever is working on that project.
If you talk to people at the newspaper where I work (the Los Angeles Daily News), all they talk about is how they want EVERYTHING to be done in Flash. For those with fairly new hardware, it's a lot more seamless than having to run video with external players, and with the rise of things like YouTube, today's generation is heavily enmeshed in Flash video. I believe it's not right to have such a large portion of Web content be in a format that's not free and open, and I'd really like to see an alternative.
Here's another "inconvenient truth" I missed in my original post:
The Windows Media Player for Mac OS is pretty crappy, but not as crappy as the QuickTime player for Windows, which is about as big a piece of total shit as I've seen come out of Apple, ever. It ran like a dying dog on my 3 GHz box, and then it was hell getting rid of it.
> but not as crappy as the QuickTime player for Windows, which is about as big a piece of total shit as I've seen come out of Apple, ever.
Ain't that the truth. Take a look for something called Quicktime Alternative. I've never tried it, but it's supposed to be better.
Ain't that the truth. Take a look for something called Quicktime Alternative. I've never tried it, but it's supposed to be better.
>>I also know that a fresh Windows install runs a lot better than one that's a few years old.
Back in the Windows days (for me, 2003 was total Linux commitment) I'd always set up my user data on a separate partition, never configure Windows more than installing drivers and absolutely critical apps, and clean re-install it the first time it looked at me funny.
About every 3 months or so.
This was a depressing life with the computer; Windows had totally ruined my hobby. Then Linux came along...
I used to tell customers that Windows installer was designed for TV: Come back and check on it at every commercial break.
Back in the Windows days (for me, 2003 was total Linux commitment) I'd always set up my user data on a separate partition, never configure Windows more than installing drivers and absolutely critical apps, and clean re-install it the first time it looked at me funny.
About every 3 months or so.
This was a depressing life with the computer; Windows had totally ruined my hobby. Then Linux came along...
I used to tell customers that Windows installer was designed for TV: Come back and check on it at every commercial break.
You too, huh? I used to re-install at least 2 or 3 times a year. O.k., with Win3.1 it was more like every other month. But then came the timebomb-ware. I didn't want to do the DOS/Win3.1 --> Win98 upgrade run every time I needed to revamp. So a friend at Microsoft donated me a copy of WinXP Pro. The timebomb-ware reared its ugly head when I tried to re-install the CD burner software. Good thing I used that software to make a back-up of Win98. With no way to burn CDs in XP, I simply reverted to my backup. One good deed deserves another, right?
Eventually, I discovered I could use X-CDRoast to burn CDs fairly easily (I think I was using Mandrake 8.0 then). Anyway, that was one of the key issues that led me to use GNU/Linux more and more. It also weighed heavily in my mind as I read through the GNU Project FAQs. Thanks to HP and their CD burner software partner at the time - in conjunction with Reboot Bill - I'm a huge Free Software Fan.
Note: Reboot Bill is not to be confused with Bootstrap Bill, who is likely a more heroic character than the former.
Eventually, I discovered I could use X-CDRoast to burn CDs fairly easily (I think I was using Mandrake 8.0 then). Anyway, that was one of the key issues that led me to use GNU/Linux more and more. It also weighed heavily in my mind as I read through the GNU Project FAQs. Thanks to HP and their CD burner software partner at the time - in conjunction with Reboot Bill - I'm a huge Free Software Fan.
Note: Reboot Bill is not to be confused with Bootstrap Bill, who is likely a more heroic character than the former.
Blazingly fast at...?
That phrase "may need lots of add-ons just to be usable" is a bit of a clue. Without said add-ons, Win2k is pretty close to a doorstop. Picking a set of add-ons which don't clash with one another is a definite art.
And yes, I've watched a network of Win2k machines trashed in about 3.5 minutes by a single user hitting an envirussed website.
OTOH, I have 7-year-old Linux server installations regularly sending me happy status reports from the other side of Australia.
The one Linux fileserver at the above site was the single machine which did *not* propagate the virus (since said virus used NetBIOS insanity to propagate itself, and SaMBa simply responded with a virtual finger in the air). It also had a virus scanner (ClamAV) which detected the nasty, & but for management paranoia about Linux, it would also have filtered said nasty out of the web traffic, courtesy of Squid. Management got a reinstall-27-workstations lesson in the usefulness of reflex paranoia. Rather than learn it, they paid the bill & went right on down suicide alley. AFAICT, if they hit the same website today, their network would be toast again.
Fast? Yes. Blazing? Yes. Desirable? No. Well... maybe if I was drunk and feeling masochistic.
And yes, I've watched a network of Win2k machines trashed in about 3.5 minutes by a single user hitting an envirussed website.
OTOH, I have 7-year-old Linux server installations regularly sending me happy status reports from the other side of Australia.
The one Linux fileserver at the above site was the single machine which did *not* propagate the virus (since said virus used NetBIOS insanity to propagate itself, and SaMBa simply responded with a virtual finger in the air). It also had a virus scanner (ClamAV) which detected the nasty, & but for management paranoia about Linux, it would also have filtered said nasty out of the web traffic, courtesy of Squid. Management got a reinstall-27-workstations lesson in the usefulness of reflex paranoia. Rather than learn it, they paid the bill & went right on down suicide alley. AFAICT, if they hit the same website today, their network would be toast again.
Fast? Yes. Blazing? Yes. Desirable? No. Well... maybe if I was drunk and feeling masochistic.
hilarious, thanks for the post hioho :)
Puts things into perspective for people who may not get the chance to run Linux on their networks.
Puts things into perspective for people who may not get the chance to run Linux on their networks.
>>hilarious
Actually, I found the anecdote a bit depressing. When I consider all the lost productivity due to MS incompetent-ware it makes me wonder how far advanced we could be without MS holding us back.
I had this experience: About 2002, at Dell, I came in for a regular Saturday shift to find my co-workers outside smoking and talking.
Turned out an IIS worm (Sasser, I think) had brought the entire internal network down, and was replicating so fast, the network had to be shut off for repair.
Dell, of course, runs entirely on computers and their programs. But their choice of software left much to be desired, and has caused IT clampdowns, and ridiculous policies like forcing non-mnemonic passwords.
Actually, I found the anecdote a bit depressing. When I consider all the lost productivity due to MS incompetent-ware it makes me wonder how far advanced we could be without MS holding us back.
I had this experience: About 2002, at Dell, I came in for a regular Saturday shift to find my co-workers outside smoking and talking.
Turned out an IIS worm (Sasser, I think) had brought the entire internal network down, and was replicating so fast, the network had to be shut off for repair.
Dell, of course, runs entirely on computers and their programs. But their choice of software left much to be desired, and has caused IT clampdowns, and ridiculous policies like forcing non-mnemonic passwords.
Aladdin, I had the same experience at Corporate Express due to a printer driver! Several weeks of inexplicable slow response on network drives, didn't bother me as I was programming on Unix. But then one day it got really bad and they had us all go home. Then they doubled down a went with one server for network drives and another for print spooling. Then at some point they found the offending printer driver. It must be real hard to do "find . -mtime -14" on a gui only OS.
Post a comment
A free account is needed to post. Write your comment here first: your text is kept in this browser while you sign up or log in, and is waiting for you when you come back.
Your message:Markdown: **bold**, *italic*, [text](https://link), - lists, > quotes, $x^2$ for math. Formatting help
Sign up and post (it is free) or Log in and post