Why I love Linux,.

[Annah]

Originally posted by Platyna
... it not crashes like ME or 98SE, but I wouldn\'t put it on any machine that actually does something imporant...


Regards.

 Others do.

 

[Platyna]

And others are getting h4x00r3d.


Regards.

[John_Thazer]

Originally posted by Nightrogue
3ds Max and Maya are both considerably more powerful than Blender. They do cost a helluva lot more though.

Blender is a very professional program and is used in maaany movies since it\'s free.

Err...are you sure? Generally movie producers dont like to skimp on their equipment. Not that Blender is bad, it\'s just that it isn\'t the best, and the best is what movie producers go for.

Did you know that Blender was used in Spiderman 2? It\'s pretty nifty app, too bad I just completely not good at any art based stuff...

[ramlambmoo]

Did you know that Blender was used in Spiderman 2? It\'s pretty nifty app, too bad I just completely not good at any art based stuff...

Yeah, it was used to make the pre-visual. (The nice images that come up while the opening credits play).  Not sure if it was used anywhere else, thats just what i could find out.  So it obviously cant be that bad.

From wikipedia

The first large professional project in which Blender was used as the primary tool was the animatics pre-visualization for the Hollywood movie Spider-Man 2.

[Induane]

It is probabily a matter of personal preference.  I prefer linux, others prefer windows.  Linux and Windows are different worlds, and it is tough at times to draw comparisons between the two.  Anyone can skew benchmarks one way or another, and there isn\'t any security that can NEVER be broken afaik.  Linux may be more inherently secure than Windows, and windows server 2003 might be less secure, but that is not because of stability (i\'ve heard 2003 is quite stabile as well though it is what our work server runs, and its uptime is about 50% - at least the file server part. - It also borks up on using itself as a internet gateway and its DHCP server capibilities are a bit weird.  Even though its set to give an indefinate time for the lease, it randomly assigns me new IP addresses at will - not sure why) - the reason it has problems is that it shares some of the same weaknesses as its desktop counterparts.  Windows has made leaps and bounds since its buggy ME and 2000 editions, and this is a good thing.  Hopefully Linux will become more of a threat than it already is so that both will be improving more quickly.  Thats what real competition ensures.  With coimpetition, some company can\'t ignore the needs of the user - instead they are forced to constantly innovate, producing better products.  Would Intel have processors as fast as they are without AMD pushing the envelope of processor technology?  

I\'ll continue to use Linux exclusively, and help get my freinds free of MS not because I hate MS, but because I think they can produce a better product if they put the users first.  The only way that will happen is if they have some real competition, not Apples 5% marketshare.  Linux may be the best hope for that - the OpenSource community is quite strong and can psuh that.  Hopefully competition can drive foreward new interesting things in the broad scope of OS\'s.

[Leeloo]

Originally posted by ramlambmoo

Some time ago I wanted one of those beautiful iBooks. If I had room for it, and a shitload of money, I would want one of those great graphics machines, you know, Silicon Graphics... Soon I\'ll add a Playstation 3 to that list (I already have a PS2, but the lack of a hard drive prevents me from running Linux on it).  

Hmm, so linux is good when you want to run High performance graphics rendering, and when you want to install an operating system onto a computer which wasnt designed for it.

I didn\'t say anything about high performance graphics rendering. I wanted the iBook because it\'s cute, the SGI for the geek factor, and the PS3 is of course because of the games primarily.

As for wanting to install an operating system onto a computer which wasn\'t designed for it, well, I basically can\'t install Linux without doing so. Your \"designed for Windows XP\" computer is not designed for running Linux anymore than the PS3 or the Mac is.

I can\'t get Windows support for it, and no I didn\'t get a Windows disc from the manufacturer. I did get a Solaris disc though.  

Uh hu.  And what do you use the computer for again?  Is it better and faster then a current windows configured computer at ordinary tasks?  Keeping in mind i dont do much Multidisciplinary Design Optimization, so that stuff dosnt really count.

I don\'t use it anymore, it\'s much slower than my brand new system. I was only using it as an example of a machine that does not have the \"designed for Windows\" sticker, to show that Windows does NOT run on it.

You must be looking at the top \"made for Windows XP\" chips there. Go take a look at the real top hardware - SGI/MIPS, SUN/Sparc, IBM/Power/Cell, HP/PA-Risc... None of it has Windows support. Nearly all of it supports Linux to some degree.

In case you missed the running theme for me here, im an ordinary user.  I use the internet.  I play some high performance games occasionly.  I dont run a Web Server from my bedroom for my website displaying my wonderfully rendered 3D images while using my dreamcast to run the linux kernel.  If i did, im sure i\'d be very impressed with linux.  The way it is, im not.

I thought we were discussing which OS had best support for hardware that isn\'t designed for the OS. At least that\'s what I was trying to show - that Linux has support for lots of hardware, neither which is designed for Linux, where as Windows basically only supports \"Designed for Windows\" hardware.

[khanistine]

Originally posted by ramlambmoo

Amen brotha. This says pretty much my thoughts.. Androgos made alot of good points too. Seems alot of these windows users bashing on linux can\'t tell the difference between closed source, open source, GPL vs closed source code liceneses etc. If your gonna bicker about something stupid at least build a decent foundation on which you base your opinions so that we don\'t laugh at you at the start. Gotta get at least halfway thru the arguement, I mean com\'on.

Personally I use linux 99.9% of the time because that\'s what serves me best. Do I hate windows, no. Do I dislike windows because of certain functionality they\'ve put into it, sure. I\'m sure if I had alot of free time I can look thru the linux kernel and find alot of implementations I disagree with there as well.

Sometimes linux is the best tool, sometimes windows is. Sometimes neither are and Solaris, a *bsd, one of the mac os\'s could be, etc, etc... you get my point.  Really why bicker over something so silly and in a mmorpg forum of all places, rofl. Where\'s the love? Where\'s the peace? No seriously where is it?

Sorry, had to.  Peace be with you my fellow computer users. Now let\'s find something worth arguing about like IE vs Firefox, or red vs blue. How about the color of the sky? I\'m out, gl with this.

Ahem?? Some of these windows users bashing linux?? If you\'re referring to me perhaps you might want to give some quotes instead of making unbased claims?  I\'ve been programming for 5 years and i find the claim that i dont know open source from closed source personally insulting.  
If you think this is turning into a flame war, then dont participate.  From my view we\'re just having a discussion about the differences between the o/s because we want to.  We\'re allowed to disagree.  I havnt seen anyone flaming me, and i dont think i\'ve flamed anyone in return.  If you dont like the conversation, dont participate.
Oh and btw, I.E vs firefox is just stupid.  Firefox wins hands down.  

And it is obvious that most of you who didn\'t like linux because of dependancy issues when you tried it tried noob distros, ever tried debian? or archlinux? or gentoo? these distros are prettymuch built without dependancies.

This is turning into a flame war, and it is my guess that it will soon become like the thread about the peta sponsored racoon beating.

Noob distros?  This is the one thing i hate above almost everything else about linux: No matter what distro you use, whenever you talk to a linux user they\'ll tell you its the wrong one.  I have tried debian but it didnt work well for me.  Never tried archlinux and gentoo though.  Personally i dont have the time required to install every single linux distro.  But i mean the fact that you have o rely on knowing with distros are \"noob\" distros and thus choosing other ones is just another reason not to use linux, personaly.

My point is that things do go wrong in linux and in its component parts, but it is always the fault of the user, and it is always fairly easy to figure out what is wrong and to fix it. It is a lot easier to fix a problem in a .conf file then in a .dll file. When something goes wrong in windows, you\'re pretty much just screwed in my experience.  

Yeah, but same for windows.  Most of the errors i get are from me doing something really stupid or from my programming.  Though your point about .dll files is indeed valid.

Well, I wasn\'t specifically meaning anyone in particular but if you think I meant you alrighty.....

I can really just post entire post made by you and their mainly just whining. You complain about an os you obviously made no attempt to learn about before jumping in. You complain that your hardware isn\'t supported, oh wow, on so many other non-windows os\'s alot of the hardware is proprietary or isn\'t supported and the users know this, they research before running the os and don\'t seem to complain about this in a year as much as you did in a single post.

\"Ahem\" .. like your very first post in this thread, lol. And your a programmer?

Hmm, I thought programmers would know more about lisencing then.. because your whole post ripping nvidia\'s *closed sourced* license for their *closed source* drivers was hilarious. You really think you know what your talking about there? Because you can say you did but I\'d like to quote

Originally posted by ramlambmoo Wow, thanks nividia for looking out for us, protecting us from evil reverse engineering, and protecting their precious copyright, and making sure they\'re not responsible if anything happens. Linux Software lincenses are so much better!!

I mean that\'s the \"general nvidia license\" that\'s not linux specific and it\'s certainly not any license written or wanted by either the open source community or anyone doing linux development, ie. kernel writers, distro dev\'s, etc. I could go on and on but this is already me turning this into a flame and setting up some good bait.

Just wanted to point out some funny points about the person targeting me because they thought, in their paranoia, I was referring to them because they\'re special and noone else in this entire post talking bad about linux could I have possibly been also aiming at, lol.

[Robinmagus]

\"How a linux thread turned into a Windoze on Linux thread in less than a week\" - My new hit TV series inspired by this thread...BTW...Windows rocks

[ramlambmoo]

Well, I wasn\'t specifically meaning anyone in particular but if you think I meant you alrighty.....  

What you said was

Seems alot of these windows users bashing on linux can\'t tell the difference between closed source, open source, GPL vs closed source code liceneses etc.

There are three people who have argued for Windows in the thread at some point: Me, Annah and Platyna.  Since you said \"alot of these\" users bashing linux you must be referring to more than one.  Saying i wasnt reffering to someone in particular is like me saying \"Alot of people who use linux are \" and then saying oh well i didnt mean anyone in particular.  You\'re just resorting to generalisations to try and make your point, because you have nothing objective to say.  Either acccuse someone of not knowing something upfront, or dont bring it into the conversation at all.  

I can really just post entire post made by you and their mainly just whining.

Im sorry if english isnt your first language (im assuming this based on that sentence) but we cant have a coherent discussion here if i cant understand you.  I\'ll have to assume what you meant to say was \"You\'re just whining about linux\".  Well, by that logic, you\'re just whining about me whining then aren\'t you?  Not only are you whining, but you\'re a hypocrite...  I dont see how saying that somebody is whining makes what they say any less relevant or true.  Again, come back when you have something objective to say and maybe add something to the discussion.

You complain about an os you obviously made no attempt to learn about before jumping in. You complain that your hardware isn\'t supported, oh wow, on so many other non-windows os\'s alot of the hardware is proprietary or isn\'t supported and the users know this, they research before running the os and don\'t seem to complain about this in a year as much as you did in a single post.  

Hmmm so now you have to research linux before trying it?  What do you want, a 1000 word essay?  Though it\'s true, if i had of researched linux i probablly could have figured out that it wouldnt work using my hardware anyway, and so i shouldn\'t have even bothered trying it.  But I thought i should give it a chance regardless.

Hmm, I thought programmers would know more about lisencing then.. because your whole post ripping nvidia\'s *closed sourced* license for their *closed source* drivers was hilarious. You really think you know what your talking about there?

My point was that in order to use linux with a GeForce 7800 GTX you must agree to a license which is not protecting your rights, and not like was stated in the first post of this thread.  Open source license agreements are all good and well for linux however the fact remains you must still agree to many of the same types of licenses that windows users have to agree to anyway.

I mean that\'s the \"general nvidia license\" that\'s not linux specific and it\'s certainly not any license written or wanted by either the open source community or anyone doing linux development, ie. kernel writers, distro dev\'s, etc. I could go on and on but this is already me turning this into a flame and setting up some good bait.  

Regardless, you have to agree to it to use The chip on a linux machine.  It dosnt matter who made it, the reality is you have to accept it, whether its a nice linux GNU license or an evil nividia one.  Thus

3.) I rarely have to sign any EULA\'s

4.) The EULA\'s I do have to agree to are designed to protect my rights, not the rights of a large company.

Cannot simultanesly hold true while you are using the state of the art Hardware, or actually anything more Nividia for that matter.  And probablly pretty much any other chip maker on the planet, if i bothered to go out and read their licenses.  The fact that the core Linux licenses are GPL does not mean others things that you have to agree to are as well.

Just wanted to point out some funny points about the person targeting me because they thought, in their paranoia, I was referring to them because they\'re special and noone else in this entire post talking bad about linux could I have possibly been also aiming at, lol.

As i mentioned before, there have been three people who have stated support for windows in this thread:  Me, Annah and Platyna.  Put your money where you mouth is (no pun intended) and say something about one of us, or be quiet about it.

I didn\'t say anything about high performance graphics rendering. I wanted the iBook because it\'s cute, the SGI for the geek factor, and the PS3 is of course because of the games primarily.

I dont generally base a $1500 investment in computing hardware on whether something is \'cute\' or not.  As for the SGI, what would you use it for?  I assuming you\'re going to actually do something with it, and as you will see (or probablly already know) those tasks aren\'t very common.  Again, if you\'re just buying something for the \'geek\' or the \'cute\' factor, i dont think it has much relevance in a discussion about o/s.  As for the PS3, if you\'re buying it for the games, then it has no relevance to the discussion, because i asked about hardware you would like that runs linux not windows.  I\'d also love a PS3, but it just isnt really relevant to what we\'re talking about.

I don\'t use it anymore, it\'s much slower than my brand new system. I was only using it as an example of a machine that does not have the \"designed for Windows\" sticker, to show that Windows does NOT run on it.  

Point taken.  I was just showing that you could get a windows system that does the same thing, and just as fast anyway.

I thought we were discussing which OS had best support for hardware that isn\'t designed for the OS. At least that\'s what I was trying to show - that Linux has support for lots of hardware, neither which is designed for Linux, where as Windows basically only supports \"Designed for Windows\" hardware.

Yes, however the point im making here is that linux has support for lots of (from a general computing users perspective) useless hardware.  Like linux has support for all this hardware used in high detail 3D modelling- but what use is that to the general user?  My point is that in the realm of everyday computing used for general tasks and gaming, windows has better support.  Linux overall has wider support for hardware- but in the area of general computing and gaming, the amount of hardware supported is less than that of windows.  And since general computing and gaming is what i primarily do- and what a majority of other computer users do- thats all that really matters for me.  If i were to go beyond the general computing experience- into using servers, using 3d graphics- then my perception of the situation would change due to my needs changing.  But I dont forsee that happening anytime soon.

As for wanting to install an operating system onto a computer which wasn\'t designed for it, well, I basically can\'t install Linux without doing so. Your \"designed for Windows XP\" computer is not designed for running Linux anymore than the PS3 or the Mac is.

Well i\'m sure someone here mentioned they had a designed for linux computer, so im sure you can.  And yes, my computer is not designed for linux any more than the PS3 or the mac.  Thats why my computer running linux is about as functional as a PS3 running linux.  Which is why i dont use linux.

[Leeloo]

Originally posted by ramlambmoo
My point was that in order to use linux with a GeForce 7800 GTX you must agree to a license which is not protecting your rights, and not like was stated in the first post of this thread.  Open source license agreements are all good and well for linux however the fact remains you must still agree to many of the same types of licenses that windows users have to agree to anyway.

Your fault for going with a nVidia card. The license for the nVidia drivers has nothing to do with Linux, it\'s the same license as for using a nVidia card on Windows.

My current PC has an ATI Radeon 9250, and I never had to agree to such a license to use my card. Look here to see the differences: http://x.org/X11R6.8.2/doc/LICENSE.html. My old computer had a Matrox G200, and I later added a Voodoo 2, no Windows-style EULAs there either.

I do see some of those licenses though, the last one was Doom 3. But Doom 3 is in no way necessary for any hardware to work, I can use my computer perfectly fine without it.

I dont generally base a $1500 investment in computing hardware on whether something is \'cute\' or not.  As for the SGI, what would you use it for?  I assuming you\'re going to actually do something with it, and as you will see (or probablly already know) those tasks aren\'t very common.

I would use it for the same things as any Linux machine I have. It runs the same software, it does the same things, basically there is no difference. As for the iBook, the advantage is that I could easily bring it wherever I go.

 Again, if you\'re just buying something for the \'geek\' or the \'cute\' factor, i dont think it has much relevance in a discussion about o/s.

Say what? Maybe we think of things in different ways, but for me, there\'s the geek stuff (including gaming), and there\'s the work stuff. I buy things for the geek stuff, and I let my employer buy things for the work stuff. In short, if it\'s not for the \'geek\' factor, I won\'t be the one buying it.

 As for the PS3, if you\'re buying it for the games, then it has no relevance to the discussion, because i asked about hardware you would like that runs linux not windows.

Your PC is for gaming too, right? So it\'s irrelevant too? Or are you simply declaring the PS3 for irrelevant, because it runs games AND Linux (although not at the same time), but not Windows?

The PS3 is a perfect example of consumer hardware made for gaming that doesn\'t work with Windows. And it does run Linux. I\'m not sure if the Linux disc is going to be included or not, we\'ll just have to wait until the launch to see about that.

Point taken.  I was just showing that you could get a windows system that does the same thing, and just as fast anyway.

But I don\'t want a Windows system. I\'m not interested in Windows, why should I limit my hardware choice to fit your OS of choice?

Yes, however the point im making here is that linux has support for lots of (from a general computing users perspective) useless hardware.

Useless because it doesn\'t run Windows, and that\'s what \"general computing users\" use.

My point is that in the realm of everyday computing used for general tasks and gaming, windows has better support.

Of course. Because those tasks are what Windows is used for, of course Windows supports these things, otherwise they wouldn\'t be \"in the realm of everyday computing\".

Basically all you\'re saying is still that Windows is better at supporting \"Designed for Windows\" hardware.

As for wanting to install an operating system onto a computer which wasn\'t designed for it, well, I basically can\'t install Linux without doing so. Your \"designed for Windows XP\" computer is not designed for running Linux anymore than the PS3 or the Mac is.

Well i\'m sure someone here mentioned they had a designed for linux computer, so im sure you can.

Well, there might be one or two shops in the US that does that, but there aren\'t any around here. And even those shops just pick the best supported stuff from the \"Designed for Windows\" hardware, NONE of them design their own hardware. Look inside it, and it says Intel/AMD/ATI/nVidia/Matrox and so on.

 And yes, my computer is not designed for linux any more than the PS3 or the mac.  Thats why my computer running linux is about as functional as a PS3 running linux.

Wait, didn\'t you say that you had problems with hardware support? Then how can it be about as funtional as a PS3 running Linux flawlessly?

[schloob]

i didn\'t read all of the threads but some things i\'d like to say are:

- gentoo is the best. no doubt about it. software management, installation and uninstallation is a breeze. installing gentoo is a bitch, but only if you\'re doing a stage 1 install. the only problem with the rest is just the time to compile the kernel, X, and gnome (yes, gnome), and other system necessities.

- windows sucks

- nvidia > ATI. for a few reasons:

--- nvidia is better for openGL, ATI is better for directx. and if any of you have some sense in you, you\'d know that directx sucks. openGL is so much easier to c0de in, with a much better interface and API.

--- ATI drivers for linux are worse than christ himself.

--- nvidia is a cooler name

- and it doesn\'t matter what computer you have, you can run linux on it. doesn\'t matter whether you have a dell, emachines, or a  home built computer, you can install linux on it.

- KDE SUCKS. gnome is better than KDE in every way. no doubt about it. gnome just makes it easier to do what you want, fast. with multiple workspaces you can easily put web surfing in one, play games in another, and have things like BMP/xmms in a third one. the only thing KDE has over gnome is applications. while i like gnome\'s IDE anjuta over kde\'s KDevelop, i like applications like k3b, kate, and.. other stuff that i can\'t think of at the moment :]

[Androgos]

Originally posted by schloob
directx sucks. openGL is so much easier to c0de in, with a much better interface and API.

DirectX doesn\'t suck, but OpenGL is better IMO.
I think DirectX is actually easier to code in since it\'s a bit more highlevel (or ?)

\"c0de\"? If you want to play cool, you have to act cool too:
c(size_t(~0))de - Hell yea

Originally posted by schloob
- and it doesn\'t matter what computer you have, you can run linux on it. doesn\'t matter whether you have a dell, emachines, or a  home built computer, you can install linux on it.

Actually, you can install it in cellphones, heck even your microwave

Originally posted by schloob
- KDE SUCKS. gnome is better than KDE in every way. no doubt about it. gnome just makes it easier to do what you want, fast. with multiple workspaces you can easily put web surfing in one, play games in another, and have things like BMP/xmms in a third one. the only thing KDE has over gnome is applications. while i like gnome\'s IDE anjuta over kde\'s KDevelop, i like applications like k3b, kate, and.. other stuff that i can\'t think of at the moment :]

First, I like GNOME better than KDE, but you\'re being unfair.
KDE has multiple workspaces too and you can run gnome programs the other way around too.
[/QUOTE]

[schloob]

First, I like GNOME better than KDE, but you\'re being unfair.
KDE has multiple workspaces too and you can run gnome programs the other way around too.

maybe i was being unfair. since i never actually used KDE and i\'m judging solely on screenshots. but still, gnome has a cooler name and therefore is better.


and when i worked with directx, i hated it. i said \"wow let\'s try something new and use directx\" and then i\'m like \"wow this sucks\". because it was just god awful. leave it to microsoft to make a bad interface to a bad library :[

[Robinmagus]

Originally posted by Androgos
\"c0de\"? If you want to play cool, you have to act cool too:
c(size_t(~0))de - Hell yea  

I bow to your coolness...


Robin bows to the Androgos\' superior coolness


BTW: This thread is really funny for ones not so seriously involved. I\'m laughing the hell out of myself right now seeing you people argue like this.

[miLosh]

Originally posted by schloob
- KDE SUCKS. gnome is better than KDE in every way.

man whats up with you guys. i\'m getting the impression that the only desktops you can think of are gnome or kde. but remember, those desktops strive to get as closely to the windoze desktop as possible, gnome even wanted to introduce a registry similar to windoze.

ever heared of WindowMaker? if you ask me, thats the desktop of joice. it goes fully with the original spirit of linux - KISS, keep it simple and sexy. its lightweight, starts in about 2 seconds, it\'s highly configurable and themeable with just a few clicks. please stop pretending as kde and gnome are the only desktops for linux, there are many others which do not turn you into a windoze-linux-mutant.

however, never forget to have phun