I would first like to start of by saying that I like Linux. I’ve tried many distributions of Linux including Fedora, Ubuntu, Mandriva, PCLinuxOS, Debian, OpenSUSE, Mint, and a few others. I have even retried these distributions as they age to see the new features they have to see those features in action. I like the idea of open source and what it represents. I have even converted others to using Linux instead of Windows. As for myself there are just a few reasons why I can’t use Linux as my day to day operating system. I will explain those reasons here.
- Release schedules. It seems every distribution of Linux I have ever tried reinvents itself at least once a year if not more times than that per year. Ubuntu, for example, releases a new version of it’s take on Linux every 6 months. I need stability. To me, migrating to a new OS, or learning to use new features of the same OS, is a pain. This is one of those things I really don’t like to do. I would rather set up an operating system once the way I like it then install updates for security fixes, etc, when they are released. I understand there are ways to migrate to the new version from an old version. Quite frankly I have better ways to spend my time. And what happens if I migrate to the new version of the OS and the new features are not wanted or a pain to deal with or to get rid of?
- Application compatibilities. There are certain programs that I use that have no Linux equivalent. I will give credit as I see the open source world is trying hard to fill in the gaps and make programs that are similar to those I use. However there are just some than run in Windows that have no good replacements or the ones that do have Linux equivalents do not have all the features the windows versions have.
- Games. Really this subject can explain itself. All of my favorite games run on Windows. There are no Linux versions. Some people will point out that I can use WINE to run my games. I have learned through trial and error that WINE itself is a bit hard to setup and that it will not run many of my games.
- Hardware. Like it or not there is just some hardware I use that will only work with Windows.
- Appearance. Both KDE and GNOME desktops are too bland looking for my taste. I like the polished glass looking effects of Windows. I guess a decent one click skinning program combined with well thought out skins could solve this issue. All of the skinning programs I have tried for KDE and GNOME are complicated to use compared to programs for skinning Windows such as Stardock’s Windowblinds.
As I said I like the ideas around the idea of open source. I believe if open source projects want to compete with operating systems like Windows they should begin by having all of the authors of each distribution get together and decide on setting some standards that each distribution should adhere to so there is more compatibility among each distribution. How about making it easier to install and uninstall apps? I understand in the end we need to see more major players make software for Linux if anything is to happen.
As for me, I’ll stick to Windows 7.
January 18, 2012 at 3:52 pm |
Hi Kona0197,
I followed your link from your Fedora Forum posting. I would like to address your concerns listed in your posting about why Linux would never work for you.
1. Release schedules: Yes, most distributions have a frequent release schedule. It is the nature of ones such as Fedora which is, after all, a test-bed for Red Hat Enterprise Edition Linux to be on the leading edge, innovating and breaking things. If you want stability and less-frequent releases, then you would need to go for one of the enterprise class releases such as Centos or Scientific Linux (both based of of Red Hat Enterprise Edition) or one of the Long Term Support releases which come out periodically from Ubuntu or Mint. These have longer support, but at the price of not having the latest software. However, they are kept current with security fixes for the life of the product.
2. Application compatability: You have a point. However, there is a good solution if you have the hardware to support it. That is, you can install a virtualization system such as VirtualBox. With that, you can install a copy of Windows and then you can run the program in question in a virtual machine running actual Windows. I have some programs set up this way, and it works quite well. This has advantages over dual-booting as you do not have to shut down what you are doing and reboot to run the program and then reboot again to get back to the Linux desktop. The reverse works also. You can use VirtualBox (or VMware) on a Windows machine to install Linux in a virtual machine). You can have such a virtual machine for web surfing. That way, if something happens and it gets hopelessly contaminated with malware (much more likely with Windows than with Linux), you can wipe out the virtual machine and start again with your main machine’s operating system isolated from the trouble.
3. Games. You have a valid point. There are many more games for Windows than for Linux at this point. Setting up a virtual machine may work, but since I don’t play many games, I really have not tested this. If it requires OpenGL, then it should work fine. DirectX is a different issue and is likely to have problems or not work at all.
4. Hardware: Yes, and that is a reason to check out hardware purchases before spending the money to make sure that they have the widest compatibility. It was the same way when the cheap win-modems came out. One could spend the additional money to get a real modem or be cheap and get the low-end one that lacked the proper hardware and relied instead on the host system’s processor and software to do the work. There are enough hardware compatibility sites (such as linuxprinting.org) to ensure that purchases are made with sufficient information to avoid the situation you describe.
5: Appearance: You know that Stardock originally started as an OS/2 software company. Windowblinds was their version of making the Windows desktop function more like OS/2′s Workplace Shell. Linux has many choices in window managers. Gnome and KDE are but two. There are also ones like XFCE, LXDE, OpenBox, etc. See this link for some examples: http://www.makeuseof.com/tag/8-great-alternative-desktop-managers-for-linux/ . Some of the comments also refer to other options as well.
6: Installation/removal of software: Yumex, Synaptic, Aptitude, PackageKit, etc. There are a number of graphical tools available for use to simplify adding and removing software. The advantage of Linux is most of the time installation/removal of software does not require rebooting the system (quite unlike Windows).
One thing that is both a strength and weakness of the number of Linux distributions is that the variety feeds innovation, but hinders standardization. However, this variety means that one can try out different Linux distributions and find one that fits his or her style. For me, I keep coming back to Fedora, although it is currently with a customized version of XFCE, not Gnome Shell. I have installed Mint for some machines I have configured for others. For the church where I am a member, I installed Centos 6.2 so that it would not require changing for several years since it will be supported until 2017.
In the end, you will choose what works for you. If that is Windows 7, then that is what you will use. For me, I use and prefer Linux. I have Windows, but it is rarely booted, ususally only long enough to update it, then it gets shut down and I go back to Linux. The exeption is the virtual Windows, which gets used a bit more often as there are a couple of programs I use that will not work or work better there. Even so, they are not used too often so the virtual Windows only gets booted up once a week or so.
I’ll send you a couple of screenshots of my desktop on fedoraforum. Then you can see that Linux can be quite flexible.