Wrong, Wrong, Wrong...
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| Rodebian Nov 28, 2011 1:49 AM EDT |
This reply has been submitted as an article. It was much too long for a reply. |
| jezuch Nov 28, 2011 2:46 AM EDT |
Quoting:* Unsupported Hardware I think Linus once said that Linux has the broadest hardware support of all operating systems, ever. All the problems come from some over-protective companies producing hardware strategic for the desktop (3D cards, wireless, ...), which is the most visible to pundits who don't know any better. |
| jimbauwens Nov 28, 2011 5:06 AM EDT |
In my experience, Linux has much better hardware support than Windows, and I have done many installations.
It is true that sometimes there is a little driver problem, but the same can be said about Windows. (My experience) |
| helios Nov 28, 2011 5:37 AM EDT |
Not really sure of the hardware thing. I had to support a lady the other day running Windows 7 with a three year old HP flatbed scanner. It simply isn't supported in Win7 whereas it's plug and play in Linux. The forums are crammed with people trying to get this model to work in Windows7 and they cannot. On the wireless front, the .27 kernel release provided massive relief for failing wireless devices, however we still have a long way to go. Many of the broadcom devices in Linux still report "firmware required" when you click network manager. I consistently solve this by installing b43-fwcutter. What mystifies me is that sometimes you will get a notification that proprietary software is available and sometimes you won't. There is little to indicate to the user that they should install the aforementioned app to get it to work. I just carry with me a tried and tested usb device for wireless and do the app install and bingo, native wireless works. It would be nice to have this little nugget of knowledge a bit closer to the new user than buried with an obscure file name in Synaptic. |
| darkduck Nov 28, 2011 6:15 AM EDT |
everybody,
1) read my "disclaimer" as the first comment to the post
2) Look at LXer category it is submitted to. Don't take it seriously. Monday is a hard day. Let's get some fun to make it easier! |
| Rodebian Nov 28, 2011 6:27 AM EDT |
Ooops. It is under humor isn't it. Ok, then all is good, lol. You would think I would delete that above reply of mine now. But I did so well with that reply. I hate to loose all that work. So if you could actually write a serious one attacking Linux, then I could cut and paste my above reply over to it. Or maybe someone else could? ;-) |
| JaseP Nov 28, 2011 11:09 AM EDT |
@ Darkduck: You know, you should have put a humor tag somewhere on your website to make it clear you were poking fun... |
| Fettoosh Nov 28, 2011 12:45 PM EDT |
Quoting:You would think I would delete that above reply of mine now. @Rodebian; Don't even think about it, it is an excellent reply, one of the best I have seen. MS lackeys come and go all the time, I am sure it will come in handy. Quoting:1) read my "disclaimer" as the first comment to the post 2) Look at LXer category it is submitted to. Considering all the attacks by MS shills & lackeys, this is not funny. They might use text clips and new Linux users might miss the comic part. |
| Steven_Rosenber Nov 28, 2011 1:27 PM EDT |
The blog entry itself is in no way positioned/marked as "humor": http://linuxblog.darkduck.com/2011/11/disadvantages-of-using... |
| Grishnakh Nov 28, 2011 1:48 PM EDT |
The thing about hardware is wrong. Linux has much better out-of-the-box support for hardware than Windows. However, there is one category of hardware it doesn't support well (or frequently at all): cr@p consumer hardware, such as "winprinters". However, this is a good thing. Generally, if a piece of hardware doesn't have Linux support, then you should take it as a sign that that hardware is cr@p and you don't want to use it anyway. Cheap inkjet printers are a great example of this: there is simply no good reason to use these cr@ppy printers. They're cheap initially, yes, but they only have enough ink for a couple dozen pages before the cartridges run out or dry up (you'll use up half the ink in "cleaning cycles"), and then you'll have to pay even more than the initial cost of the printer for new cartridges, which have a higher cost per volume than the finest, most expensive and rare wine on the market. Finally, the printer will break down right after the warranty period's up. These printers have a ridiculously high per-page cost of printing, and simply aren't worth it. Go on Ebay and buy a used office/workgroup laser printer for $100; it'll last forever and the cartridges only cost $25 on ebay, lasting 5000+ pages each. |
| Steven_Rosenber Nov 28, 2011 1:55 PM EDT |
In my experience, the price of laser-printer toner cartridges varies greatly depending on the make, model and age of your printer. |
| lcafiero Nov 28, 2011 2:29 PM EDT |
I'm sorry, darkduck, but I have to go with Steven on this: I don't see anything, other than the LXer designation, marking this as humor. Marking it with the LXer designation as humor doesn't make it so, and Fettoosh makes an excellent point insofar as the "ammo" it provides the MS shills and lackeys who can easily take your blog's "humor" out of context. Also, rather than posting a disclaimer in the comments, it might serve you better to have a "blogger's note" at the beginning of your blog item saying a.) This is a guest blog by $GUEST_BLOGGER_NAME and b.) it doesn't necessarily reflect the views of this blogger. It's not too late to fix that. |
| theBeez Nov 28, 2011 2:43 PM EDT |
Just ignore: a bunch of SOFUD from a clueless journalist - or even a wannabee. |
| Jeff91 Nov 28, 2011 4:12 PM EDT |
I might take the time to read this article... But then again the title just screams "I'm a Troll! Look at me I'm a troll!" So I might just find a better use for my time. ~Jeff |
| fewt Nov 28, 2011 6:00 PM EDT |
Quoting:* No Standard Edition - MS Windows has basic, home, premium, ultimate... It is all Linux. Just because the Desktop might be a little different or the name, it is all the same. But that concept might be too difficult for some to grasp. This makes a little sense though, the Windows variants are clearly defined and come with a definitive list of what sets them apart. In our world we have Fedora, Ubuntu, Mint, SuSE, Bodhi, Fuduntu, and on and on and on with no quick reference guide as to what makes them different or pros and cons. Quoting: * Learning Curve - While there is a learning curve Linux is NOT harder to learn then Windows, (which if you think Linux is hard to learn, you are going to love Windows 8 when it comes out, talk about a learning curve.) Try Linux Mint. What do you have to learn with that to get what most people want on a Desktop PC? Multi-media, Internet, flash, java, etc to work. They want to go to facebook and check their email. All this and more in most Linux Distro's. Until something breaks or stops working due to some sort of failure, usually from an update. Lets for example say they are using Ubuntu and are pulling down the NVidia driver from Jockey. They get this wonderful message that an upgrade is available so they accept it and when they reboot to a black screen. That's when Linux becomes much harder than Windows. Quoting:* Non-Compatible Software - While this is true in some ways. You make it sound like a horrible idea to even try and use a Linux alternative. I am guessing you never really tried Linux have you. You just picked some stuff up off of non linux forums. You never even mentioned Virtualbox, Vmware or Wine that can run a lot of these programs if people really need them. Virtualbox and VMware can even run legal owned copies of MS Windows for those few programs one might need that they can't find in Linux. And if setting those up/installing them by pointing and clicking is too hard for a person, then they might want to stay away from computers and pull out the crayons and coloring book. All of these things make Linux harder to use than Windows because of the extra steps involved. For example, you need to run a Windows application so you go to WineHQ and find that you have to run it in Windows 98 compatibility mode. The first thing a user will think is "how the hell do I do that?" - which to us is easy, to anyone else they won't even know winecfg exists much less how to "run" it. Quoting:* Unsupported Hardware - Hardware manufacturers make drivers for MS Windows. The Open Source community are the ones who get the hardware to work, in most cases. Though a growing number of hardware manufacturers are starting to pay attention to Linux. While in part you are correct, you are very misleading and leave things out. Even on MS Windows some hardware isn't supported on certain version of MS Windows. But with that, since it is all closed source, you are just out of luck. With linux there is a good chance someone is or has been working on a driver that will make it work. Linux is great for old AND new computers. There is also a good chance that they are not. Hardware support is a crap shoot on both platforms. I have a habit of testing hardware with a thumb drive before purchasing if possible, and googling to make sure it works. If it's supported by Windows, most of the time Windows will automatically connect to Windows update and pull down the driver itself. With Linux if it's already in the kernel, awesome. If it isn't though, it won't be fun getting it to work. What, there's a kernel update the next day? Fuuuuuuuuuuuuuuuu!!! ;) Quoting:* Tech Support - If someone wants to pay for support, as they would with MS Windows, then they have that option in Linux as well. Some Linux Distro's have pay options there for the less then tech minded people. At a much cheaper cost then MS Windows. Which by the way charges an arm and a leg after the first couple of free tech calls. After that if you don't want to pay more money then you need to research it online, go to MS Windows forums (which can have some really strange answers there as well.) Or hopefully have a friend or family member that can help you out for free. Unless you pay RedHat you aren't going to get good support. Windows support is pretty good, I've used it a few times. Oh, it isn't very expensive either. $49 for a Windows Email incident, $59 for a phone incident. If they find a problem with Windows you don't get charged. Canonical charges $105, RedHat charges $299. Quoting:Now why didn't you even mention security? Scared to face some real truth that sides with Linux and shows the flaws in other os's? Probably because it isn't a problem anymore. Most of todays problems are application based and Linux is vulnerable too. Quoting:I know I left out much here. I hope others can fill in some more. I suggest you actually research something before you start parroting things you hear from others just to fit in with that crowd. Research? Ok. Quoting:Linux is easy to use. Granted there are a good number of distro's to choose from. But all you have to do is ASK what would be the best one for a new linux user to try. Hell, type that into google and I am sure that would be very informative. Until you have your first problem, and then it often goes to h#ll fast. |
| Rodebian Nov 28, 2011 6:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:This makes a little sense though, the Windows variants are clearly defined and come with a definitive list of what sets them apart. While I agree that there should be more focus on clarifying the so-called differences. All one has to do is ask or Google search. Over all it is all Linux, that was my point. Just as the different version of MS Windows is all MS Windows. The only differences with Linux Distro's is if they are Conservative with their updates or not AND what package management they use. Of course some use slightly different software set ups by default and DE's or WM's. So in that part I do agree. There needs to be a simple, easy and fast way to access that information so the average person can learn about this. Quoting: Until something breaks or stops working due to some sort of failure, usually from an update. Lets for example say they are using Ubuntu and are pulling down the NVidia driver from Jockey. They get this wonderful message that an upgrade is available so they accept it and when they reboot to a black screen. So you never did an update with MS Windows and then got the famous kernel panic.... The blue screen of death? Never had missing .dll files, never had any programs broken after updating MS Windows? To say that is soley a Linux problem is not only wrong but very misleading. Quoting:That's when Linux becomes much harder than Windows. All of these things make Linux harder to use than Windows because of the extra steps involved. For example, you need to run a Windows application so you go to WineHQ and find that you have to run it in Windows 98 compatibility mode. When a person that knows that little about computers and runs into problems like that in MS Windows, what do they do? They ask someone for help. When MS Windows users run into an issue after installing a program, an issue they don't know how to handle, what do they do? They ask for help. So how is it any different then them asking for help with Linux? Quoting:Unless you pay RedHat you aren't going to get good support. Windows support is pretty good, I've used it a few times. Oh, it isn't very expensive either. $49 for a Windows Email incident, $59 for a phone incident. Canonical charges $105 Please. Half of the ones at MS Windows tech support are idiots. You can hear them turning the pages of their manual. Well many people can turn their own pages and skip the middle man cost. And if a problem goes beyond their (MS Windows Tech help,) book or beyond the capability of (knowing how to look it up.) Then it is a waste of time. Linux has some great free support. While I think some of the forums need to be more specific and less of a hassle to use, the free support alone is great. You are also forgetting to add how much Windows costs just to upgrade or buy new. Then the added cost of different software programs that one wants or needs. Then add the cost of tech support on top of that. Quoting:Probably because it isn't a problem anymore. Most of todays problems are application based and Linux is vulnerable too. Security is NOT a problem anymore? Linux is still the most stable and secure OS there is (Well *BSD to.) MS Windows is still lagging in that area, despite what they do. Granted, 7 is better then XP and less annoying then Vista, but still MS Windows has some serious flaws. MS Windows being closed sources if there is a security risk sometimes it can take months before they patch it or even acknowledge it. With Linux, when there are the rare issues like that, you have the whole community that jumps in, since it is open source for all to see. Closed source doesn't give you that option. Quoting:Until you have your first problem, and then it often goes to hell fast. That is more true of MS Windows then of Linux, which is why I gave up on MS Windows and moved to Linux. |
| darkduck Nov 28, 2011 6:35 PM EDT |
Quoting:I might take the time to read this article... But then again the title just screams "I'm a Troll! Look at me I'm a troll!" Rare case when I agree with you, Jeff... 8-) |
| jdixon Nov 28, 2011 6:36 PM EDT |
> Oh, it isn't very expensive either. $49 for a Windows Email incident, $59 for a phone incident. If they find a problem with Windows you don't get charged. ... RedHat charges $299. Yes they do. For a one year subscription. The $59 is per incident. > Most of todays problems are application based and Linux is vulnerable too. Most Windows problems are spyware/virus/trojan related, not application based. > Until you have your first problem, and then it often goes to hell fast. And the same is true of Windows when you have your first virus infestation. |
| darkduck Nov 28, 2011 6:37 PM EDT |
Quoting:You would think I would delete that above reply of mine now. But I did so well with that reply. I hate to loose all that work. So if you could actually write a serious one attacking Linux, then I could cut and paste my above reply over to it. Or maybe someone else could? ;-) Would you consider to convert this into the post "Advantages of using Linux"? I would place it next to "Disadvantages" and interlink them. Serious offer, BTW! Email/message me somehow, please! |
| Rodebian Nov 28, 2011 6:42 PM EDT |
darduck, that sounds good. Let me combine two of my posts here and we can do that. I am sending you an email through Lxer. |
| fewt Nov 28, 2011 7:15 PM EDT |
Quoting:Yes they do. For a one year subscription. The $59 is per incident. @jdixon - Historically, they have refunded all of mine. I didn't even have to ask. Sure that's a one year subscription which is equal to 5 incidents. Unless you call Microsoft more than 5 times in one year, RedHat is more expensive. Not to mention, that cost also includes patches which you get from Microsoft for free. So, to be completely fair that cost is ongoing because you need to continue to receive patches. |
| Rodebian Nov 28, 2011 7:39 PM EDT |
Red Hat is also focused on business and servers, not that average PC user. |
| fewt Nov 28, 2011 7:55 PM EDT |
Quoting:Red Hat is also focused on business and servers, not that average PC user. @Rodebian - A fair point. Meaning unless you are calling Canonical at $199, you pretty much aren't going to get support outside of a forum or mailing list. This kind of support is FINE for people that don't mind digging in to fix a problem, but most people just want a neck to choke when their computer breaks. |
| tracyanne Nov 28, 2011 8:01 PM EDT |
Just read the darkduck article. That's it, I'm not going to use Linux any more, I'm going back to Windows. |
| fewt Nov 28, 2011 8:30 PM EDT |
Quoting:While I agree that there should be more focus on clarifying the so-called differences. All one has to do is ask or Google search. Over all it is all Linux, that was my point. Just as the different version of MS Windows is all MS Windows. The only differences with Linux Distro's is if they are Conservative with their updates or not AND what package management they use. Of course some use slightly different software set ups by default and DE's or WM's. So in that part I do agree. There needs to be a simple, easy and fast way to access that information so the average person can learn about this. The target market though doesn't do that. They go to a store and look at the shelf. They facebook, they twit(or is it twitter?). They aren't going to google about a Linux problem, they don't care enough to do that. I did PC break work for years early in my career, and I've dealt with common computer users directly. They just don't care to research problems that's what service reps are for. That's not to say none do, because the community is growing. :D My only point was that we really do need a distro agnostic "features" catalog that's out there, and well marketed. Quoting:So you never did an update with MS Windows and then got the famous kernel panic.... The blue screen of death? Never had missing .dll files, never had any programs broken after updating MS Windows? To say that is soley a Linux problem is not only wrong but very misleading. Years ago, sure. Not in recent years, no. Not unless it was related to a driver. Then again, the majority of my time constrains Windows to a virtual machine. The few months that I used 7 I had no problems. Missing DLLs? That's a 1990s problem. Check out WinSXS. The context that I used in my comment isn't misleading. It's an actual documented issue that has existed without being solved for years. DKMS helps a little, but not enough. Quoting:When a person that knows that little about computers and runs into problems like that in MS Windows, what do they do? They ask someone for help. When MS Windows users run into an issue after installing a program, an issue they don't know how to handle, what do they do? They ask for help. Under what conditions do you have to use a compatibility mode in Windows? Not very often. When you do, how do you do it? You right click the exe, select properties, compatibility and then the version needed. I'm sorry, I would love to say we have that level of maturity, but we just don't. Quoting:Please. Half of the ones at MS Windows tech support are idiots. You can hear them turning the pages of their manual. Well many people can turn their own pages and skip the middle man cost. And if a problem goes beyond their (MS Windows Tech help,) book or beyond the capability of (knowing how to look it up.) Then it is a waste of time. Linux has some great free support. While I think some of the forums need to be more specific and less of a hassle to use, the free support alone is great. Not in my experience, I've taken a deep dive into many issues with them. Certainly, level 1 is going to be pretty bad. When you call Canonical, do you really think you'll have a direct line to Mark? I didn't say Linux didn't have great free support, I implied that common computer users aren't going to use it. Mostly because they don't know that it is there. When they do find it, most of the responses even in 2011 are commonly RTFM. It's a real problem, sorry. Quoting:Security is NOT a problem anymore? Linux is still the most stable and secure OS there is (Well *BSD to.) MS Windows is still lagging in that area, despite what they do. Granted, 7 is better then XP and less annoying then Vista, but still MS Windows has some serious flaws. Linux is not the most secure, nor the most stable OS out there. Linux distributions can be made to be secure but few of them out of the box are (RHEL has a 188 page hardening guide published by the NSA for example). The sort of things you see commonly today are Flash or Facebook viruses. You don't see many OS viruses anymore. Being closed source doesn't make something more or less of a security risk. Being open also doesn't, there were several examples of that last year. Unrealircd is a fine example, for example. Quoting:That is more true of MS Windows then of Linux, which is why I gave up on MS Windows and moved to Linux. When common users become able to diagnose and repair the NVidia issue I mentioned before, we'll talk. |
| Fettoosh Nov 28, 2011 8:41 PM EDT |
Wow, it didn't take long for shills to prove my point.Quoting:That's it, I'm not going to use Linux any more, I'm going back to Windows. Yea, and I see pigs flying in the US NW. |
| Rodebian Nov 28, 2011 9:12 PM EDT |
We can go on and on about this. So I will make a few quick replies and leave it at that.Quoting:My only point was that we really do need a distro agnostic "features" catalog that's out there, and well marketed. I agree with this. Quoting:Missing DLLs? That's a 1990s problem. Check out WinSXS. I disagree with this. Places like http://www.dll-files.com/ re still going strong with ALL versions of MS Windows. WinSXS looks good. But is the average user really going to get all of that? Quoting:I'm sorry, I would love to say we have that level of maturity, but we just don't. Which is why Distro's like Linux Mint and Ubuntu came into existence. I don't mean to be rude but a trained monkey could use either, especially Linux Mint. (Please Mint and Ubuntu users, don't take that as an insult. You all are not monkeys, lol. I meant that only as in how easy it is to use out of the box.) Quoting:Not in my experience, I've taken a deep dive into many issues with them. Certainly, level 1 is going to be pretty bad. When you call Canonical, do you really think you'll have a direct line to Mark? He better hope not. I have a few choice words I would like to have with him. Quoting:I didn't say Linux didn't have great free support, I implied that common computer users aren't going to use it. Mostly because they don't know that it is there. This is true. People do need to be informed of these places and alternatives. But I will up what you said with two more things. Many forums need to be more opened minded with newbies, by that I mean other posters. They may be the average person and to them what is easy for us is not for them. And no they can use computers without having to know everything about them. Many drivers couldn't even change a spark plug. The world also needs to get out there. Something that is organized and simple. A website that only has a distro or two, has the different levels of services AND also has a couple of forums. That was everyone who supports Linux can get the average user to head there as a start. Enough with the bickering about who's distro is better. It is all Linux and it is all great! Quoting:The sort of things you see commonly today are Flash or Facebook viruses. The reason why you see those more is because of the percentage of people using places like Facebook. That does not mean that there are not other places to get a Virus, Trojan, etc. And flash, well its dying... finally. But that has always been a serious security risk. Wait to all things move to the cloud. You will want a Linux or BSD server, not a Microsoft Windows one. Quoting:When common users become able to diagnose and repair the NVidia issue I mentioned before, we'll talk. Why would the average user want to diagnose Nvidia problems? With Ubuntu and Linux Mint alone, it is easy enough to set up. Click and install. |
| fewt Nov 28, 2011 9:25 PM EDT |
Quoting:We can go on and on about this. So I will make a few quick replies and leave it at that. @Rodebian - Well since you didn't leave much for me to disagree with, I don't think that will happen. Except .. :D Quoting:Why would the average user want to diagnose Nvidia problems? With Ubuntu and Linux Mint alone, it is easy enough to set up. Click and install. Note that I said after an upgrade. I agree setting it up isn't too bad, it's the minor version upgrade breakage that is the most problematic. We've really nailed installation, and basic use cases. Now, we need to work harder on everything else. |
| Rodebian Nov 29, 2011 3:37 AM EDT |
Well no matter our views I enjoyed discussing this with you fewt. Linux does have a little ways to go, But as far as it has come in the last ten years is amazing. I remember when i first started using Linux. If Linux keeps progressing like this. Then next ten years is going to be amazing. Edit: I also took my reply out and submitted it as an article. As a few mentioned already, it was just too long for a reply. |
| BernardSwiss Nov 29, 2011 5:34 AM EDT |
It's a lot easier to run Windows software on Linux, than to run Linux software on Windows. |
| dinotrac Nov 29, 2011 6:49 AM EDT |
@fewt -- Yup. Upgrades still suck like an angry Hoover (vacuum or J. Edgar, as you prefer). The biggest problems with Linux remain: 1. Most of the software that people want runs on something else, although... that is becoming less of a problem as more stuff runs on the web and 2. Windows support is freakin' everywhere. Outside of the workplace, the most important Windows support is not from Microsoft, but from that "computer-savvy" guy you know. Good, bad, or indifferent, that "power-user" type will make you feel more comfortable with Windows than Linux. You might even know a Linux wizard -- and not even know that person uses the stuff. |
| Rodebian Nov 29, 2011 7:04 AM EDT |
Well if you are any good with Computers then you will know more about Operating systems then just MS Windows. I have family and friends now using Linux and they are far from "computer saavy." It doesn't take a rocket scientist to push the power on button or click on web browsers, emails, programs, etc. How many people live in the past when it comes to Linux? It is like saying MS Windows sucks but basing it only on Windows 3.1 |
| fewt Nov 29, 2011 7:31 AM EDT |
@Rodebian - I also enjoyed it. :D We have indeed come a LONG way. I still remember years ago fussing with OpenSound and proprietary X servers just to get a working display and sound. Fortunately, many things work out of the box now. @dinotrac - Agreed. |
| dinotrac Nov 29, 2011 8:20 AM EDT |
@Rodebian: False premise. You can be "good with computers" and know nothing but windows. You won't be good with ALL computers, but you can get a lot done for a lot of folks. You won't impress Linux geeks, but you won't care, and, more importantly, the people who come to you for help won't care either. You'll be able to get Act! running, or Quickbooks, or Auntie Mabel's EZ stitch knitting primer, etc. FWIW -- You can be good with Linux and not very good with Windows. I fall into that category because I've barely touched Windows in the last dozen years. I can sort of work my way through, but all of my kids are better at it than I am. |
| Rodebian Nov 29, 2011 9:17 AM EDT |
@dinotrac I see where you are going with that. That is true. Linux users I think can adapt better to fixing MS Windows more then MS Windows tech can with Linux. So I guess that means wii inuxL youzers R Marter,,, ;-) @fewt my nightmare memories where with the winmodems. Dial up was still pretty popular and trying to get those to work was a mess. Broadband helped with all of that, thankfully. |
| fewt Nov 29, 2011 9:19 AM EDT |
@Rodebian - I'm with you there too. I remember purchasing a 14.4K modem for my BBS expecting it to be a wonderful speed boost only to find it was a soft modem and needed a Windows driver. Unfortunately making it 100% incompatible with my BBS. What a mess indeed. |
| jdixon Nov 29, 2011 10:04 AM EDT |
> Sure that's a one year subscription which is equal to 5 incidents. Unless you call Microsoft more than 5 times in one year, RedHat is more expensive. That doesn't change the fact that you were comparing a per incident price to a 1 year subscription price. Apples and oranges. > Not to mention, that cost also includes patches which you get from Microsoft for free. So, to be completely fair that cost is ongoing because you need to continue to receive patches. The last time I checked, Red Hat's patches are free to download in source form. Or you can simply download them from CentOS when they become available there. There's a reason it's called Open Source. |
| JaseP Nov 29, 2011 10:08 AM EDT |
Winmodems, unsupported printers & wireless cards, ... 1999's obstruction to adopting Linux. I only encounter problems on machines that were designed from the ground up to exclude Linux anymore. Until UEFI "secure" boot comes out, those are getting fewer and farther between. |
| fewt Nov 29, 2011 10:21 AM EDT |
@jdixon -Quoting:That doesn't change the fact that you were comparing a per incident price to a 1 year subscription price. Apples and oranges. If you can find a more comparable pair of support packages, I challenge you to do so. Barring that, they are very comparable because they are both support models from competing vendors. They are not apples and oranges, I explained how they compare. RedHat is more expensive until you exceed 5 Microsoft incidents, that is just how it is. Quoting:The last time I checked, Red Hat's patches are free to download in source form. Or you can simply download them from CentOS when they become available there. There's a reason it's called Open Source. So are you saying it is up to a common user to download the source code, compile it, and make the patches available to themselves? Certainly, an advanced user can do that. I know, because I do exactly that. How do you compare that to updates that automatically download and stage themselves? You can't. You have just described a scenario that makes a RedHat Desktop extremely less user friendly than Windows. @JaseP - +1 |
| jdixon Nov 29, 2011 11:03 AM EDT |
> If you can find a more comparable pair of support packages, I challenge you to do so. It was your comparison, not mine. I'm not going to do your work for you. And why would I care? I won't use either one. And neither will almost any desktop user. The people who use support packages are businesses, not home users. And they often run more than 5 incidents per year. > So are you saying it is up to a common user to download the source code, compile it, and make the patches available to themselves? The Red Hat desktop isn't aimed at "a common user". It's aimed businesses who want a supported desktop. And yes, they will download. compile, and install the patches for their users if they don't want to pay for support. > You have just described a scenario that makes a RedHat Desktop extremely less user friendly than Windows. The common user Red Hat desktop is Fedora. Updates for it are freely available in binary form and are as easy or easier to install than equivalent ones are in Windows. Again, apples and oranges. |
| fewt Nov 29, 2011 11:39 AM EDT |
@jdixonQuoting:It was your comparison, not mine. I'm not going to do your work for you. If you are unable to prove the case that you tried to make, you shouldn't have challenged it. It's not up to me to prove myself wrong, it's up to you. Quoting:And why would I care? I won't use either one. And neither will almost any desktop user. The people who use support packages are businesses, not home users. And they often run more than 5 incidents per year. Right, they will use Ubuntu. Ubuntu has paid support, at the cost of roughly 2 Microsoft support incidents. They also have a knowledge base and documentation just like Microsoft. So, even in the case of Ubuntu, Microsoft is less expensive until you exceed 2 Ubuntu support instances. Quoting:The Red Hat desktop isn't aimed at "a common user". It's aimed businesses who want a supported desktop. And yes, they will download. compile, and install the patches for their users if they don't want to pay for support. .. and you accuse me of comparing apples and oranges? From RedHat.com "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop is built for both the administrator and the end user. " Quoting:The common user Red Hat desktop is Fedora. Updates for it are freely available in binary form and are as easy or easier to install than equivalent ones are in Windows. Again, apples and oranges. Fedora makes a fine desktop for an advanced user, but it is not ready for common users. Even my fork, though much easier to use than Fedora IMHO is still not good enough for end users. Nor are any of the other Linux distributions, IMHO. We are certainly closer than we were 10 years ago, but there is still a lot more work to do. |
| jdixon Nov 29, 2011 12:18 PM EDT |
> If you are unable to prove the case that you tried to make, you shouldn't have challenged it. You were the one making a case, not me. And you used and invalid comparison to do so. > It's not up to me to prove myself wrong, it's up to you. I've already demonstrated that your comparison is invalid. Any argument which requires comparing a single incident cost to a yearly fee doesn't deserve to be taken seriously. I'm not going to do the research to come up with a better one when it's not my argument. If you want your argument to be taken seriously, fix it yourself. > Right, they will use Ubuntu. The last time I checked, Red Hat had far more income from subscriptions than Ubuntu did, even though Ubuntu support is cheaper. Make of that what you will. > From RedHat.com "Red Hat Enterprise Linux Desktop is built for both the administrator and the end user. " What Red Hat claims in their publicity and how they market are two completely different things. I used to be able to buy a copy of Red Hat at Staples. I haven't been able to do that in years now. They don't market their desktop for the end user. > Fedora makes a fine desktop for an advanced user, but it is not ready for common users. ... Nor are any of the other Linux distributions, IMHO. Actually, I agree with that statement. None of the Linux distros are really ready for the common user. But then neither is any version of Windows. They all break far to frequently. The only thing which even comes close is the Mac, and most people simply can't afford Macs. |
| fewt Nov 29, 2011 12:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:You were the one making a case, not me. And you used and invalid comparison to do so. It is a perfectly valid case, commonly compared by people making decisions to purchase support contracts. Your argument that it isn't doesn't hold water unless you can back it with something of substance. Simply saying they don't compare doesn't make them not comparable. Quoting:I've already demonstrated that your comparison is invalid. No, you made a statement. An unsubstantiated theory at best. Quoting:They don't market their desktop for the end user. Then, in your opinion Ubuntu is the only major vendor providing support for consumer Linux. This confirms my implication that you aren't going to get good paid support for Linux, since per your statement, RedHat support isn't even an option. Quoting:Actually, I agree with that statement. None of the Linux distros are really ready for the common user. But then neither is any version of Windows. They all break far to frequently. The only thing which even comes close is the Mac, and most people simply can't afford Macs. Meh. I was given an Apple a few months back, I traded it in for a Thinkpad running Fuduntu. OSX wasn't as stable as often implied. That's just one experience though, so I wouldn't really claim OSX is bad. Windows though isn't nearly as unstable as it used to be. 2009 and 2010 were pretty bad stability wise in the Linux distro world, this year has been much better though. |
| jdixon Nov 29, 2011 1:06 PM EDT |
> Simply saying they don't compare doesn't make them not comparable. Pointing out that one is a per incident charge while the other is an unlimited incident per year charge does. > No, you made a statement. An unsubstantiated theory at best. A statement of fact, not an opinion. One of the two is a per incident charge, the other is a per year charge. Anyone can verify that for themselves. You're the only one who seems not to understand the difference. > Then, in your opinion Ubuntu is the only major vendor providing support for consumer Linux. I've never used the Ubuntu support, so I have no idea if what they're offering actually qualifies as support for consumer Linux or not. Red Hat's doesn't, you're correct. > OSX wasn't as stable as often implied. That's just one experience though, so I wouldn't really claim OSX is bad. I've never tried OSX, but the people who I know who use it never seem to have the problems Windows users do. That's anecdotal of course, since I only know a handful of Mac users. > Windows though isn't nearly as unstable as it used to be. The Windows NT line has always been stable. It was the 9x line which gave Windows it's reputation for instability. It's still not on par with Linux/Unix, but it's no longer an order of magnitude difference. Window's virus/spyware problems are still as bad as ever though, and there's no sign that's ever going to change. > 2009 and 2010 were pretty bad stability wise in the Linux distro world... Well, that depends on your distro. For some strange reason, I didn't really notice a problem on my home machines. :) |
| fewt Nov 29, 2011 1:18 PM EDT |
Quoting:A statement of fact, not an opinion. One of the two is a per incident charge, the other is a per year charge. Anyone can verify that for themselves. You're the only one who seems not to understand the difference. I never said or implied there wasn't a difference, in fact if you re-read my statement I said until you reach X incidents the other is cheaper. That means I had already accounted for the very thing you implied I didn't understand. ;) Quoting:Well, that depends on your distro. For some strange reason, I didn't really notice a problem on my home machines. Possibly. In 2009-2010 I found that there were a lot of regressions in commonly used software, and even in the kernel itself between Ubuntu 9.x - 10.x, and Fedora 12-13. This year - It's just better I really don't have anything to complain about stability wise, last year and the year before I had pretty long laundry lists. That could be because I took more control over what gets installed, but I'd rather believe that there has been a noticeable improvement in stability across the board. |
| jdixon Nov 29, 2011 3:13 PM EDT |
> ...never said or implied there wasn't a difference... Allow me to quote: "$49 for a Windows Email incident, $59 for a phone incident. If they find a problem with Windows you don't get charged. Canonical charges $105, RedHat charges $299." Yes, you've noted the difference since, but not in your original statement. And that's the one I took issue with. If you're modifying that position, we can drop the matter. > In 2009-2010 I found that there were a lot of regressions in commonly used software, and even in the kernel itself between Ubuntu 9.x - 10.x, and Fedora 12-13. Well, as I said, I didn't notice a problem. But then I was using Ubuntu 8.04 on my laptop until i moved to 10.04 late last year, and I run Slackware at home. |
| fewt Nov 29, 2011 3:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:If you're modifying that position, we can drop the matter. I clarified it several comments ago. Specifically on Nov 28, 2011 at 7:15 PM EDT I made the statement: "Unless you call Microsoft more than 5 times in one year, RedHat is more expensive." :) |
| jdixon Nov 29, 2011 5:37 PM EDT |
> Unless you call Microsoft more than 5 times in one year, RedHat is more expensive." :) While that is a clarification, it doesn't exactly note the true nature of the difference. :) But it looks like it's a matter of semantics and not intent, which is all to common. :( |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!