Linux vs. windows (7)
My friend was having problems with her computer so I offered some help and got into a debate with one of her friends.
Somebody suggested installed MS Security Essentials. I said I didn't trust anything M$ puts out and never to pay for anything as there's always a free alternative.
Me: Download Malware Bytes Anti-Malware; Spybot: Search & Destroy; Clamwin Anti-virus.
Also having a Ubuntu or Linux Mint LiveCD is always good to have around.
API: security essentials is free, and actually pretty good. Also, some problem with Clamwin. It, like most clamAV wrappers, doesnt do realtime scanning for files and such, so it's a bit lacking. Totally agree on the liveCD comment though (though... knoppix is still king for easy recovery work)
Me: *shrug* I don't use inferior OSes so I don't know.
Ah, yes Knoppix. :) I suggested the others mostly because if people like it or are interested in using it they can just install and not have to worry about silly things like that anymore. ...Unless they're using "cutting edge" stuff that's buggy still or accidentally/intentionally break or mis-configure something. It's still not much of a problem to reset things though.
API: ::shrugs::, win7 is pretty good, winxp by this point is a pretty useful OS too (though still not the rock solidness that was 2k) Vista was abysmal, but MS fixed their mistakes on it. I honestly moved beyond considering windows an "inferior... OS" years ago, I work with 5 OSs on a daily basis, they all have their quirks and they all have their advantages, and I actually will admit I enjoy using windows 7 when I do use it :-)
Me: I haven't used 7 much mostly because of the insane requirements just to install and run it. I don't really understand why they're so high when I can have all those features and more elsewhere.
Also, I think i...t's the philosophy with the OS and the company with their evil business practices.
I do admit that automatic scans and defragments are necessary given the major of the user base, plus it just makes things easier. Until they interfere with what you're trying to do.
I need more customization and believe that open source is usually better in general. I don't like being restricted at all with what I can do with my stuff. It's a tool, I own it and I will do what I please with it. I refuse to "borrow" something like that and have restrictions.
API: ::chuckles:: I don't disagree with you on open source (just google me if you don't believe me). What are you specifically referring to with win7 requirements, because to me the system requirements aren't exactly mindblowing... (from: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/system-requirements)
Me: Mostly the 16GB of hard drive space just for an OS. When I install Linux I allocate about 10GB and use only about half of that. Those are minimal, which doesn't ever run smoothly. Sure, if you buy a new computer, which is half the cost of a... new machine from a cheap place like walmart. I'm looking on Newegg now for an upgrade and it's currently 115$ for "home premium." That's another thing that really bugs me. I don't think there really should be anything other than 32bit, 64bit, desktop and server versions.
Keep in mind that on regular Linux installs that ~5GB comes with a ton of software and you're ready to go after about a half hour or so from putting in the disc and powering on to install. I'm able to keep using my older hardware without much of a slow down. Sure, I could install BlackBox and use that instead of Explorer for the window manager but Explorer usually still runs in the background and I'm not saving many resources. Maybe I just haven't done it right.
Another major issue is the option to turn off security. I noticed most people I talked to disabled that thing that asks you for the administrator password whenever you try to run something that can make system wide changes. What good does that do?
I also think NTFS is a little outdated because it leaves fragments all over the hard drive and in my experience often puts unmovable data towards the end of the disk making it difficult for me to repartition later on. I suppose it's got some good uses if people accidentally wipe data and need to recover it but I'd trade that in for mostly not being able to get it back in favour of it actually being gone when I delete it. If people make multiple or at least a single back up of important data, it's usually not a big problem. Again though, the problem is anything mainstream must cater to the masses and thus be terribly dumbed down in order to be user friendly. Unfortunately, I think that's how society is now.
API: It doesn't actually necessarily eat that much space on an install, though i see your point. As a counter though, it depends on what you're using your OS for. The debian install on my main tower has ~35GB used *not counting* /home and /var, ...so just my apps, the base system, and system resources. On the other hand a mac mini I have also running debian as a DNS and DHCP server is using a grand total of 1.7GB for *everything* on the machine. Linux is more customizable than windows in stuff like that, but it takes more knowledge to customize an OS for the user so MS throws in everything but the kitchen sink to make sure it's good to go. That includes layers of APIs for binary support of older apps, every service they feel they need to cram in, piles of graphics API, etc. Home premium is pretty much fine for anyone not either a distinct power user or using it for corporate use, and the price is almost meaningless since most people don't pay directly for windows: they get it on the machine they bought. I'd also argue you'd probably have a problem if they made it impossible to turn off the security 'cause then it wouldnt be customizable enough, catch 22 there. You get the same problem sometimes with users and root access (I used to run a cluster for the chem dept here, I'm *intimately* familiar with that problem :;shudders::)
I'll also point out that given the size of most drives these days (SSDs excepted since they still count as a premium option), the space needed for 7 is rather negligible. I just bought a 2TB samsung drive for $65....
The unmovable data at the end of the disk is window's swap file, and can be disabled in the system panel last I checked. To resize a partition easily: disable it --> use a format tool to resize --> re-enable.
I would love to see a replacement of NTFS, but at least it doesn't need to be defragged as much as FAT used to be (and will run decently without at all) - and the move to SSDs for system drives should help reduce the need further even without a shift in filesystem.
(oh, that space count on my workstation doesn't count my compiles and tools in /opt I just realized, add another 45GB of software to that 35, again, not counting my home directory, my storage drives, used scratch space, or the web server data, boot images for different nodes on my test cluster, etc in /var)
Me: I was talking about disk usage after the initial install to get it functional. I've never used more than the first disc or two when installing Debian. If I recall correctly the other 6 or whatever discs are mainly for having a hard copy of the software repository if you have no access or unreliable access to the internet and in most cases there's no reason to install everything.
I could go around the internet and install everything I see as well and use up another 80GB if I wanted but that's not what I'm talking about here. Obviously after install you're going to put other programs in if you're got more needs than Email, web browsing media playing, word processing and chatting etc. It doesn't really matter what OS you go with from there, they all take up a lot after adding stuff to them.
That's exactly what I'm saying, it's not financially sensible to buy a copy of windows, especially since you can easily download it for free. I don't think they care too much even if you do as you're still locked into their system. Most people aren't going to buy a license, they're going to buy a new machine, their old one is probably slow from absent-mindedly clicking next and installing excess junk like toolbars in their web browsers along with malware so, even though their tasks are usually simple and don't take much processing power, they're getting a whole new machine and making a ton of waste as the old one goes on the curb or, if they're lucky, they'll have help or just give it to a nerdy friend like us.
Somebody suggested installed MS Security Essentials. I said I didn't trust anything M$ puts out and never to pay for anything as there's always a free alternative.
Me: Download Malware Bytes Anti-Malware; Spybot: Search & Destroy; Clamwin Anti-virus.
Also having a Ubuntu or Linux Mint LiveCD is always good to have around.
API: security essentials is free, and actually pretty good. Also, some problem with Clamwin. It, like most clamAV wrappers, doesnt do realtime scanning for files and such, so it's a bit lacking. Totally agree on the liveCD comment though (though... knoppix is still king for easy recovery work)
Me: *shrug* I don't use inferior OSes so I don't know.
Ah, yes Knoppix. :) I suggested the others mostly because if people like it or are interested in using it they can just install and not have to worry about silly things like that anymore. ...Unless they're using "cutting edge" stuff that's buggy still or accidentally/intentionally break or mis-configure something. It's still not much of a problem to reset things though.
API: ::shrugs::, win7 is pretty good, winxp by this point is a pretty useful OS too (though still not the rock solidness that was 2k) Vista was abysmal, but MS fixed their mistakes on it. I honestly moved beyond considering windows an "inferior... OS" years ago, I work with 5 OSs on a daily basis, they all have their quirks and they all have their advantages, and I actually will admit I enjoy using windows 7 when I do use it :-)
Me: I haven't used 7 much mostly because of the insane requirements just to install and run it. I don't really understand why they're so high when I can have all those features and more elsewhere.
Also, I think i...t's the philosophy with the OS and the company with their evil business practices.
I do admit that automatic scans and defragments are necessary given the major of the user base, plus it just makes things easier. Until they interfere with what you're trying to do.
I need more customization and believe that open source is usually better in general. I don't like being restricted at all with what I can do with my stuff. It's a tool, I own it and I will do what I please with it. I refuse to "borrow" something like that and have restrictions.
API: ::chuckles:: I don't disagree with you on open source (just google me if you don't believe me). What are you specifically referring to with win7 requirements, because to me the system requirements aren't exactly mindblowing... (from: http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/products/system-requirements)
Me: Mostly the 16GB of hard drive space just for an OS. When I install Linux I allocate about 10GB and use only about half of that. Those are minimal, which doesn't ever run smoothly. Sure, if you buy a new computer, which is half the cost of a... new machine from a cheap place like walmart. I'm looking on Newegg now for an upgrade and it's currently 115$ for "home premium." That's another thing that really bugs me. I don't think there really should be anything other than 32bit, 64bit, desktop and server versions.
Keep in mind that on regular Linux installs that ~5GB comes with a ton of software and you're ready to go after about a half hour or so from putting in the disc and powering on to install. I'm able to keep using my older hardware without much of a slow down. Sure, I could install BlackBox and use that instead of Explorer for the window manager but Explorer usually still runs in the background and I'm not saving many resources. Maybe I just haven't done it right.
Another major issue is the option to turn off security. I noticed most people I talked to disabled that thing that asks you for the administrator password whenever you try to run something that can make system wide changes. What good does that do?
I also think NTFS is a little outdated because it leaves fragments all over the hard drive and in my experience often puts unmovable data towards the end of the disk making it difficult for me to repartition later on. I suppose it's got some good uses if people accidentally wipe data and need to recover it but I'd trade that in for mostly not being able to get it back in favour of it actually being gone when I delete it. If people make multiple or at least a single back up of important data, it's usually not a big problem. Again though, the problem is anything mainstream must cater to the masses and thus be terribly dumbed down in order to be user friendly. Unfortunately, I think that's how society is now.
API: It doesn't actually necessarily eat that much space on an install, though i see your point. As a counter though, it depends on what you're using your OS for. The debian install on my main tower has ~35GB used *not counting* /home and /var, ...so just my apps, the base system, and system resources. On the other hand a mac mini I have also running debian as a DNS and DHCP server is using a grand total of 1.7GB for *everything* on the machine. Linux is more customizable than windows in stuff like that, but it takes more knowledge to customize an OS for the user so MS throws in everything but the kitchen sink to make sure it's good to go. That includes layers of APIs for binary support of older apps, every service they feel they need to cram in, piles of graphics API, etc. Home premium is pretty much fine for anyone not either a distinct power user or using it for corporate use, and the price is almost meaningless since most people don't pay directly for windows: they get it on the machine they bought. I'd also argue you'd probably have a problem if they made it impossible to turn off the security 'cause then it wouldnt be customizable enough, catch 22 there. You get the same problem sometimes with users and root access (I used to run a cluster for the chem dept here, I'm *intimately* familiar with that problem :;shudders::)
I'll also point out that given the size of most drives these days (SSDs excepted since they still count as a premium option), the space needed for 7 is rather negligible. I just bought a 2TB samsung drive for $65....
The unmovable data at the end of the disk is window's swap file, and can be disabled in the system panel last I checked. To resize a partition easily: disable it --> use a format tool to resize --> re-enable.
I would love to see a replacement of NTFS, but at least it doesn't need to be defragged as much as FAT used to be (and will run decently without at all) - and the move to SSDs for system drives should help reduce the need further even without a shift in filesystem.
(oh, that space count on my workstation doesn't count my compiles and tools in /opt I just realized, add another 45GB of software to that 35, again, not counting my home directory, my storage drives, used scratch space, or the web server data, boot images for different nodes on my test cluster, etc in /var)
Me: I was talking about disk usage after the initial install to get it functional. I've never used more than the first disc or two when installing Debian. If I recall correctly the other 6 or whatever discs are mainly for having a hard copy of the software repository if you have no access or unreliable access to the internet and in most cases there's no reason to install everything.
I could go around the internet and install everything I see as well and use up another 80GB if I wanted but that's not what I'm talking about here. Obviously after install you're going to put other programs in if you're got more needs than Email, web browsing media playing, word processing and chatting etc. It doesn't really matter what OS you go with from there, they all take up a lot after adding stuff to them.
That's exactly what I'm saying, it's not financially sensible to buy a copy of windows, especially since you can easily download it for free. I don't think they care too much even if you do as you're still locked into their system. Most people aren't going to buy a license, they're going to buy a new machine, their old one is probably slow from absent-mindedly clicking next and installing excess junk like toolbars in their web browsers along with malware so, even though their tasks are usually simple and don't take much processing power, they're getting a whole new machine and making a ton of waste as the old one goes on the curb or, if they're lucky, they'll have help or just give it to a nerdy friend like us.