UNIX-Better or worse?

[Ronnie]

If you took a percentage of ALL software written, how much do you think would have been written for Linux?
Open-source is awesome, hey its free! For misers like me thats a major plus. I dunno, different people weight up the pros and cons, some like them, some don't. The ironic thing is to pass my tafe course, I need to be proficient in the *nixes. I guess I'll have to embrace and delve.

ummm there are MILLIONS of programs written for linux, just google linux programs and its amazing how much FREE software is available for linux.
there really isnt one thing you can do on xp that a person cant do with linux

 

[Kharn]

Look at my sig if you would like more info on Linux an just how wrong some of your posts are S0ULphIRE.

Unix based OS's have a much better reputation in the scientific world that windows has ever had, not to mention the server world. Gaming is not the only thing that makes a OS useful, I Dual boot with XP an Linux because i have to (I need XP for work) but unless I am doing something that specifically needs a windows environment to work I am to be found in my Linux boot.

One valid claim of yours in command line, it is archaic an needs a overhaul it can an will put of new users, but so will dos screen to your average windows user. I am still no genius with command line an i have to use the forums or google to help me get what i need to do some times. But its getting better all the time.

Popularity is growing for *nix flavors like it or not OSX is based on BSD which itself is based on Unix, All linux sectors are undergoing a massive boost with more an more companies turning to linux as a cost effective solution, and even some OEM's offering linux as a factory option.

Before you post again please watch "Revolution OS" which can be found on Google video you can see why RMS decided to start the GNU project an why unix was chosen as a basis, not to mention why Linux is one of the quickest growing operating systems in the history of computing an why it is more flexible than windows could be.

 

[Greg]

One valid claim of yours in command line, it is archaic an needs a overhaul it can an will put of new users, but so will dos screen to your average windows user. I am still no genius with command line an i have to use the forums or google to help me get what i need to do some times. But its getting better all the time.

The CLI doesn't need to be easy, it needs to be learned. It's really not that hard when once you get used to it, though.

 

[Kharn]

Yes I am sorry, I should have worded it better. What I should have said was To a windows user it seems archaic an needs a overhaul, I still think it needs some overhauling though.

 

[atomic tofu]

different strokes different folks

I started on the apple IIe, my brothers computer. We would buy magazines and run the little batch programs it had in them to see our amazing results after, lol

Then onto ms dos, win3.1, win95, winnt, w2k, wxp, and now Vista

Bill Gates wanted to bring computing to average people, not some elite groups of xxx whatevers. Now this could just be my humble opinion, but I believe it's fact.

meanwhile, the other people thumbed their noses at the average consumer, apple with it's OSx with it's "creative" folk, IBM with it's OS2Warp (partially codeveloped by MS) business/corporate market, and Unix fostered by some AT&T people with it's behind the scenes tech types.

While everyone did this and that, MS really wanted to make things for the consumer. That is how they got where they are today, not some supposed monopoly claim that isn't entirely valid.

During our Dos days and moving into Windows and the GUI we had our run using the text line commands and what not. With MS, that was viewed as something to get away from...and they did so. Then they became full force GUI and people started to try and make snide remarks.

Meanwhile the supposed gui that MS copied was still monochrome, had only 1 mouse button and didn't understand the meaning of multi-tasking. You save a file and that's all you did until it was done.

So people tried to insult MS/Win...and still to this day. But you have Linux desktops that of course, want to offer the rich gui of...Windows.

Things that MS push or support and make it better for consumers. USB and DirectX. Firewire/IEEE 1394 came out and just stagnated..."no need to improve"...but in the MS/windows world....there is always improvement. Apple thought firewire was theirs...didn't innovate. They had a part in USB...but MS took it and embraced it...so now we have USB 3.0

Same thing for 3d and Directx vs OpenGL. When someone doesn't want to improve upon something...don't blame MS for taking the alternative and evolving it.

Of course, now they are trying to keep 1394 inline with usb...and also there are some efforts to revamp opengl.

Many corporate entities and many clueless consumers, want to blame MS/Windows for things, but it's like the prime example of 3dfx:
3dfx - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia

If MS sells WinX to consumers, and you don't, and you see 50million people buying WinX while 100,000 people buy your non consumer friendly product, who do you blame? Easy answer in this litigious society, top dog, MS.

Nix variants can be more viable if they want to be, just by becoming a consumer product, not some supposedly snooty elite use product only for the gifted minority.

It's past the year 2000, time for the OS to be done and done, and all the consumer does is use it...not try to recompile or run obscure command lines to get going.

In the end I like it all, but I dislike the misplaced blame and finger pointing, and the presumptousness of certain ideas. Do it, do it well...do it better than MS (truly and not just in the opinion of individuals) and it will be used over an MS product.

I have my legit Office2k3 and Office2k7 and eventhough I've downloaded openoffice, I'm not going to really use it.

If an os is not ready for consumers, as i don't believe any Linux distro is yet, just don't pretend it to be. I am not even sure if the Linux community is cohesive on this subject...do they ALL want to make a consumer friendly OS for the masses or just some? Open source, yet fractured right?

 

[Vaanish]

linux is not hard to learn or use at all... Even I can use ubuntu, it cant be that difficult. also gnome is good.

 

[Disillusion]

This thread is worthless. Obviously the OP has no idea what the **** he is talking about.

 

[S0ULphIRE]

True for most of my posts, I didn't research before posting, I just posted what I thought. hence putting it in the off topic forum, not the os forum. Now I've got lots of new info on *nix, with the only side affect being I ****ed various people off. thanks for all the points/notes/info. and before someone can say it, yes it would have been easier to just ask for info, but not so many people would have contributed because it's much more interesting to correct someone who dont no **** and pretends he does, than to answer a post like 'hello i wonder what do you use unix for?'. nehuz

 

[Greg]

 

[Apokalipse]

at RMIT university (where I go), they have Unix and Windows.
They have 3 servers (I think one of them has 16 CPU's, and I think 16GB or 32GB RAM), which you log on to from a terminal. Two of them run Unix, and one of then runs Windows.
Though, when you run Unix, you can actually run Windows through a virtual machine.
A lot of the terminals are actually using Via CPU's, either Eden on C7, not sure which (though they're both the same, just with different clock speeds)


Anyway, I use Unix a lot of the time, because it's faster, and a lot of the time actually easier to get things done.

I've been starting to write Java programs, and Unix is perfect for that.