Linux OS

[Red Cloud]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux
installation CD but I don't know
If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with
Linux OS, so I have to get
Linux version but some program is not available for Linux that means I
can't use that program.

 

[Paul]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux
installation CD but I don't know
If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with
Linux OS, so I have to get
Linux version but some program is not available for Linux that means I
can't use that program.

It depends a lot, on which of the 500 distros it happens to be,
as to how much you'll enjoy it.

And it's very much a matter of testing it for yourself.
Don't rely on the opinion of others, to judge it.

And being a volunteer effort, you can find all levels of
fit and finish to the application programs. Programs
like the LibreOffice package (Microsoft Office equiv),
GIMP (Photoshop equiv), Totem or VLC for movies, those
are pretty good. There are plenty of other well-meaning
efforts, that for one reason or another, fall short.
There was one program I used to use, to watch TV via my
WinTV card. That one, the sound no longer works since
PulseAudio was introduced. And nobody has fixed it. Some
distros removed the program, rather than listen to complaints
that the sound was broken. A shame, as the video quality
while watching TV was great.

Paul

 

[philo]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux
installation CD but I don't know
If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with
Linux OS, so I have to get
Linux version but some program is not available for Linux that means I
can't use that program.

I've been using Linux for years and many Windows applications will run
under WINE.

That said...not all Windows software will work in WINE...so I have not
abandoned Windows entirely.

 

[Mr. Man-wai Chang]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux

installation CD but I don't know

If you are using an existing WinXP happily, there is really no reason
for you to change.

If you planned to buy a new PC and wanna move away from Window$ 8 and
Office 2013, you might want to consider Linux. But first thing first,
make sure that Linux has all the drivers of the new PC.

--
@~@ Remain silent. Nothing from soldiers and magicians is real!
/ v \ Simplicity is Beauty! May the Force and farces be with you!
/( _ )\ (Fedora 18 i686) Linux 3.7.8-202.fc18.i686
^ ^ 23:03:01 up 6:32 0 users load average: 0.00 0.01 0.05
ä¸å€Ÿè²¸! ä¸è©é¨™! ä¸æ´äº¤! ä¸æ‰“交! ä¸æ‰“劫! ä¸è‡ªæ®º! è«‹è€ƒæ…®ç¶œæ´ (CSSA):
http://www.swd.gov.hk/tc/index/site_pubsvc/page_socsecu/sub_addressesa

 

[Michael Black]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux
installation CD but I don't know
If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with
Linux OS, so I have to get
Linux version but some program is not available for Linux that means I
can't use that program.

If you have to ask, then probably not. Everyone buys into Windows so they
can't see alternative.

Linux is based on Unix, which is now over 40 years old. It's had a long
development time and helped to set the standards for other operating
systems. It's not "free Windows", it's an operating system based on a
different philosophy, and is a pretty reliable operating system, one that
gets used on a whole lot of servers.

The binary isn't Windows/free but Windows/Linux. Most people who think
there's a reason to move to Linux sees only "free" rather than a stronger
operating system. The silly part is that since most people are paying for
Windows, when they buy their computer, switching to Linux isn't a savings.
They need to find the other reasons for moving.

Most people just want to go with the pack. They have WIndows, and it's so
"inconvenient" to switch.

I've never run Windows other than playing with it briefly before I erased
it from a "new" computer. I never used MS-DOS either, other than to play
with it briefly. I ran Microware OS-9 starting in 1984, precisely because
it was "Unis-like", and then eventually Linux was useable and the hardware
was "cheap" (unlike 1984 when you needed lots of ram, 512K and a hard
drive, 10Megs, to run Unix, and getting Unix or a clone was expensive).

So I can't fuss over what's standard or not. If someone sends me
something in a Microsoft format, I complain, I don't comply. I have no
idea if Linux applications are "inferior" to WIndows since I've never used
Windows. I use Gimp to manipulate graphics, and it seems fine, but how
would I know since I'm not comparing it to anyuthing else?

Michael

 

[Flasherly]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux
installation CD but I don't know
If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with
Linux OS, so I have to get
Linux version but some program is not available for Linux that means I
can't use that program.

I don't really see, nor in a universal sense, really much at all for
approaching a ten-percentile of assurances any and all of a *Nix
presence is an aggregate compound to computer usages, which can be
interpolated well within something less of ten-percent of browser-call
poll IDs, in a worldwide survey I looked at within a year or two, by
report backings for a *Nix positive. I do not believe such daunting
or insular numbers are a greater reflection of *Nix software
implementation, however, in fact, far be it from level of involvement
often involving compiling if not directly writing or modifying *Nix;-
there are other corollaries, studies, composites or compendiums, as
you will, indicative of secular computer usage patterns -- i.e. a
substance of higher attainability and manifest proficiency one might
supplant by programmer, rather than populist endowment of Guru --
supportive of such sufficiency, possessiveness within technical
perspicuity, apt well to lend the *Nix mien a level of specialized
proficiency best suited its operators;- NASA, up until and within
relative recency, I believe would impart that special contingency by
employing 486 MPU units among on-board extraterrestrial omnibus, by
design intent sufficient, when a far greater technological means
within processing power was actually available to their engineers.

 

[Mike Easter]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP?

XP is nearing is end-of-life re support and security upgrades. XP is an
'old' OS which doesn't support some modern software. There is a lot of
software available which runs on XP which does not run on linux or
linux/wine/crossover. Linux is not Windows.

XP is very vulnerable to exploits which requires a lot of 'strategy' and
prior planning to avoid malware and to be able to restore an infested
system. If one is surfing in linux, there is practically none of that risk.

I made Linux installation CD but I don't know

It is very very easy to make lots and lots and lots of different linux
CD/DVDs or even better thumb/flash drives to boot up different
iterations of linux to see how you like each one and whether or not you
have any hardware difficulties.

The advantage of the thumbdrive is that it boots and runs faster than
from the optical.

If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with Linux
OS, so I have to get Linux version but some program is not available
for Linux that means I can't use that program.

Correct. Personally I like to be able to use XP and linux at the same
time. That way I can use the application which I prefer. I use XP
native, linux native, and Win programs in linux under wine. Almost all
of my linux installs are able to dual boot with an XP, but I prefer
using KVM to flip between the two rather than rebooting.

95% of the time I'm in linux.

 

[Mike Easter]

John Doe posted some headers to 3 groups, 2 of which I deleted:

My understanding of your headers post is that you don't know how to
interpret them, so you want someone else to do it for you.

Is that correct, or do you have some other reason for posting the
headers of a message you reply to and crosspost to 3 groups?

 

[John Doe]

A ranting racist like this thing might note that Windows is made by
white men...

 

[Yousuf Khan]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux
installation CD but I don't know
If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with
Linux OS, so I have to get
Linux version but some program is not available for Linux that means I
can't use that program.

One of the main uses of Linux is as a fallback option, in case something
gets scrambled in Windows. Linux is able to read and write to the
Windows partitions, and therefore you can use it to fix up Windows. You
can also continue using many of the same Internet applications in Linux
that you get in Windows, such as Firefox, Thunderbird, and Chrome.

Yousuf Khan

 

[Mike Easter]

Racism is OK as long as it is against white people instead of against
minorities?

You are the only one speaking racism in this thread. I have no idea why.

 

[Mike Easter]

John Doe wrote:
Date: Thu, 21 Feb 2013 16:47:31 -0800

.... and your clock/system's date is set in the future by some number of
minutes greater than 45.

 

[John Doe]

Racism is OK as long as it is against white people instead of against
minorities? **** that.

 

[Paul]

You are the only one speaking racism in this thread. I have no idea why.

Check the profile maybe ? Mr. Red Cloud has been here before, and
on occasion, drifts off on a rant.

http://groups.google.com/groups/pro...ABX-1WeL-EWkYMWRusRq3LbWMj6vob75xS36mXc24h6ww

Paul

 

[John Doe]

Considering the fact that this troll is a regular here, it should know
what I'm talking about. But I sometimes wonder if Mike is getting
senile...

--

 

[Red Cloud]

If you have to ask, then probably not.  Everyone buys into Windows so they
can't see alternative.

I'm such... What else can I do with Linux that can't be with
Windows?

Linux is based on Unix, which is now over 40 years old.  It's had a long
development time and helped to set the standards for other operating
systems.  It's not "free Windows", it's an operating system based on a
different philosophy, and is a pretty reliable operating system, one that
gets used on a whole lot of servers.

Windows is so dominating for me that I thought I was running Linux
version of Windows. Hoping to do like Windows and didn't not. I just
installed Linux Mint on my empty HD I could not instantly figure out
how to execute the file. Oh no it is not "xxx.com or xxx.exe!" It's
Unix command.

The binary isn't Windows/free but Windows/Linux.  Most people who think
there's a reason to move to Linux sees only "free" rather than a stronger
operating system.  The silly part is that since most people are paying for
Windows, when they buy their computer, switching to Linux isn't a savings..
They need to find the other reasons for moving.

Right on that... I guess I have to relearn Unix commands which is
back to basic!!

Most people just want to go with the pack.  They have WIndows, and it'sso
"inconvenient" to switch.

Linux Mint is more closer to Mac than WinXP.

I've never run Windows other than playing with it briefly before I erased
it from a "new" computer.  I never used MS-DOS either, other than to play
with it briefly.  I ran Microware OS-9 starting in 1984, precisely because
it was "Unis-like", and then eventually Linux was useable and the hardware
was "cheap" (unlike 1984 when you needed lots of ram, 512K and a hard
drive, 10Megs, to run Unix, and getting Unix or a clone was expensive).

I choose DOS over UNIX cuz i thought DOS gonna be more popular OS
than Unix which has been.

So I can't fuss over what's standard or not.  If someone sends me
something in a Microsoft format, I complain, I don't comply.  I have no
idea if Linux applications are "inferior" to WIndows since I've never used
Windows. I use Gimp to manipulate graphics, and it seems fine, but how
would I know since I'm not comparing it to anyuthing else?

My first experience with Linux Mint met with strange problem. The
system
stop while using VLC program came in the installation. The primary
screen
got blacked out while the secondary TV output was dubbed with some
weird video frequency signal out of control. Currently I'm stop and
I dunno If I want to go on unless I go back to learn Unix basic.

 

[Mark]

I've been using Linux for years and many Windows applications will run
under WINE.

That said...not all Windows software will work in WINE...so I have not
abandoned Windows entirely.

Not all Windows software will work in Windows either ;-)

For a new user you could try a LiveCD (Mint or Ubuntu) without
installing it to see whether you like it.

 

[RayLopez99]

Is there any reason to use Linux OS over WinXP? I made Linux

installation CD but I don't know

If I need Linux. WinXP software program is not compatible with

Linux OS, so I have to get

Linux version but some program is not available for Linux that means I

can't use that program.

There is a fellow called White Cloud in comp.os.linux.advocacy that advocates against using Linux--I agree.

The problem with Linux (and it's true I bash it at COLA) is IMO you don't have the same ecosystem as you do in Windows (or perhaps Mac). Yes you can 'replicate' this ecosystem in Linux but it takes a lot of time. Better to stick with Windows. As for cost reasons, that is, Windows software is expensive, just use a proxy server, visit Piratebay.se, and download all the programs you need. I've rarely found a virus or trojan in any of the stuff there--rare as in 1% to 3% of the time. Just my honest two cents (and I have played around with Linux).

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

One of the main uses of Linux is as a fallback option, in case something

gets scrambled in Windows. Linux is able to read and write to the

Windows partitions, and therefore you can use it to fix up Windows. You

can also continue using many of the same Internet applications in Linux

that you get in Windows, such as Firefox, Thunderbird, and Chrome.

Speaking of fallback, what do you do if they switch off the internet? I'm sure you've seen those articles on Egypt when, during the Arab spring uprising of 2011, they did just that.

RL

 

[RayLopez99]

But Linux is superior to windows in every way, apart from the fact that

almost all of the apps are free. I have played around with windows too,

and it stinks compared to linux - even bloat ware like Ubuntu is orders

of magnitude faster that windows 7.

Are you sure about that j? Perhaps Linux is faster because you're not running several programs at the same time, like with Windows. In Windows 7, with Task Manager, I typically see well over two dozen programs running in the background (resident in memory). Not sure in Linux has that sort of complexity. As I said in COLA, a paperweight is 'stable' and 'fast' in that itsits there, does not change state, and will always be a paperweight. Samewith Linux--if it's doing one thing or two, it's gonna be fast, but not domuch. Just asking, not flaming, which I reserve for COLA.

RL