As a frequenter of the common Internet, I've run into many arguments about Windows and Linux. Most of them were Linux users bashing Windows for various things, with no rebuttals allowed. The rest were Windows users doing the same to Linux.
So, I'm here asking for a completely unbiased, simple comparison. What are all the differences between the two Operating Systems, for the common computer user, and for the expert specialist, and why does everyone keep arguing about them?
2007-10-21 13:42:03 · 7 answers · asked by matrim 2 in Computers & Internet ➔ Software
Why don't you install a Linux distro and find out for yourself.
When you have it installed, try to play some music with it. Oh wait, you can't, you don't have an MP3 engine installed and compiled.
So you go download one, and then the compile fails. So while you google linux commands and figure out what a "root" account is, 3 hours later you can play your music.
That was an unbiased, true to fact opinion, if you don't believe this statement, honestly try it.
Linux's popularity is people who use linux like it for the elitist feeling of being superior to the common Windows users, even though they secretly loathe it.
Linux's only virtue is for it's networking, so therefore is good in the server environment.
2007-10-21 13:52:17 · answer #1 · answered by Anonymous · 7⤊ 4⤋
Well, they are both operating systems, but they have different philosophies behind them, as well as different technologies.
Linux is based around freedom, communities and collaboration - working together to make things better. Microsoft is based around how much money Bill Gates can accumulate. So, Microsoft hates Linux because you can't make money out of selling software for free, and Linux isn't keen on the monopolistic, anti-freedom of Microsoft.
http://www.fsf.org/
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Open_source_vs._closed_source
So, for the "common" computer user... you won't see much difference. You can still watch your movies, surf the web, email and do whatever you want to do with either OS. Sure, Microsoft Windows has some big virus problems, but you can get by those.
For the expert specialist, each has its place. For example, if you're running a Web server then you're more likely to go down the Linux route. The majority of web servers run Apache, and thats the default web server on Linux. The freedom of licencing also means you can install Linux anytime, anywhere - the opposite of Microsoft's complex licencing restrictions. But then you may have a client who is locked in to Microsoft software, and wants you do Microsoft stuff, and so a Microsoft solution comes out best there.
2007-10-21 13:45:15 · answer #2 · answered by Anonymous · 2⤊ 9⤋
oh I don't know.
free OS used for things like secure backed up servers and such what nots. people can change and dispute code for free to meet their own needs.
difficult for the average user to install / use
compared to
expensive OS
easy to use for anyone of the age or 4 - 3213.
difficult to have assured security.
Vista forces you to update hardware and spend more $$$$ for it to run or unlock features
each have their own strong and weak points.
people who say one is better than the other don't consider all the facts. most people don't.
BTW microsofts web sites are ran with unix
2007-10-22 15:55:17 · answer #3 · answered by Mercury 2010 7 · 0⤊ 3⤋
linux is still free of problems discovere for it.
2014-12-09 03:59:29 · answer #4 · answered by Andy 3 · 0⤊ 0⤋
That's a tough one to answer,I don't think one is really better than the other,I believe that linux is more secure,windows does so many things automatically which allows it to be compromised easier.I dual boot windows xp pro and pclinux 2007.I make sure windows is protected with good antivirus/security programs.Whereas i dont with linux,I am starting to lean towards preferring linux just a little bit more.Download pclinux and run it from the cd,see what you think. www.pclinuxos.com
2007-10-21 13:52:57 · answer #5 · answered by rdaltonsr 3 · 2⤊ 6⤋
(I'm sure you figured to start a "Holy OS War")
Each operating system fills a need, much like a mechanics toolbox so first and foremost, neither operating system fits every situation. You could certainly use each one in many cases, but they won't necessarily be the optimal tool.
The biggest differences tend to involve licensing, interface, customizing and third party support.
Licensing: Microsoft is a commercial product with a fairly strict license that most people see as reserving most rights to Microsoft while Linux is an open source product with a license designed to protect user rights, even at the cost of prohibiting open source code from becoming proprietary (i.e. vendor that wants to use open source but deliver a proprietary solution may have restrictions that require opening their code depending on how it is integrated).
Interface: Microsoft has often focused on interfaces designed for non-technical users to enable them with the technology. Linux historically has been command line based and often allows greater control at the sake of complexity. More recent developments to Linux packages has lead to a more graphical environment like Microsoft but doesn't always have the polished look of Microsoft. You can find administrators that argue for either approach, especially when having to administer large networks of systems.
Customizing: Microsoft's proprietary nature does tend to limit customization to some extent. Microsoft does include kits and provide access to allow customization, but often has the strict license requirements (they are a business after all). By Linux providing source code with a fairly open license, developers are able to perform customizations relatively easily. The downside from a business perspective is that you will probably need to provide source code access to your modifications.
Third party support: Microsoft's operating systems have enjoyed market dominance at the desktop level for quite some time now so they have more third party applications targeted for their platform. Linux has been struggling at the desktop level to gain an installation base so fewer third party developers have targeted the Linux platform. Where Linux really seems to have the most effect so far has been in taking on the UNIX server vendors. In the server market, Linux is often desired for the ability to customize to provide optimized systems with unique solutions that could be implemented on Windows, but likely with greater effort (i.e. creating a stripped down installation to maximize certain processing sequences).
Now to refute a few people above:
Kryptonian - What version of Linux have you tried to install and has it been a fairly recent version? Are you primarily a MS WIndows, Linux, or UNIX administrator/developer/user? I've worked with all the operating systems (a bit less with Linux) and haven't had any problems that weren't quickly solved. This all depends on your level of expertise with any system. I first learned on UNIX so at that point, I would have seen a Microsoft Windows problem from the same viewpoint you present Linux. (FYI - "root" is the power account on the system, much like "Administrator" or the "SYSTEM" accounts on MS Windows. Not really a tough concept for anyone that has worked with the non-home versions of Microsoft products)
On the subject of "elitist", I've seen my share from all operating systems. I don't see why people get so attached to an OS, but they do. You can find as many Microsoft elitist on this forum, in fact I used to pick on my brother for being an exclusive Microsoft Windows admin until he recently started working with VAX, Suse Linux, and Solaris x86 systems.
rdaltonsr - Linux isn't necessarily more secure than Windows, nor is Windows more secure than Linux. It all depends on how you configure them. If you do both correctly, the systems will both be fairly hard to get into. As for the anti-virus, make sure to use protection on both systems. Both operating systems are generated by humans, and we tend to be imperfect beings, especially when coding. Remember, software is never done, it is just a release in progress.
** Edit #2 **
I guess when the moderators are reading for thumbs up/down, they are preferring the biased opinion of Kryptonian. At least when I last checked this, his was the one that bashed Linux the worst and had the highest thumbs up.
2007-10-22 07:44:31 · answer #6 · answered by Jim Maryland 7 · 1⤊ 6⤋
I am sure if you put the little bit of effort needed to do a google search you could easily find more unbiased, authoritative comparisons that you will get from your posting the questions here.
2007-10-21 18:31:20 · answer #7 · answered by Sp II Guzzi 6 · 0⤊ 7⤋