Page 4 of 9 FirstFirst ... 23456 ... LastLast
Results 31 to 40 of 81

Thread: Windows 7 screens look like KDE 4!!

  1. #31
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    The "trollish" post has a point though. Linux feels amateurish. It's a fact. The main reason is somewhat kludgy APIs in X. Due to that, Linux lacks in Desktop performance. I can't watch HD movies, I can't play games at the speed I do in Windows, my PC hangs more often than with Windows due to shitty ATI/NVidia drivers. Just to name a few. Windows beats Linux in this respect. It actually doesn't just beat it, it also stomps on it.

    And right now we're at a point where Windows is far more stable than Linux. The days of Windows 95 are over. Ever since XP, one of the main benefits of Linux vs Windows - stability - disappeared. Not only that, but the situation is reversed due to drivers.

    PS:
    You don't get to hear stuff like this from kernel devs though. They don't care about desktops. If it's rock solid on their servers, then that's it. That also means that Linux might be doomed on the desktop. If the component that's at the core of a system (the kernel) doesn't give a damn about desktops, then it's simply not going to make it.
    Last edited by RealNC; 01-17-2009 at 11:50 AM.

  2. #32
    Join Date
    Feb 2008
    Location
    Linuxland
    Posts
    4,988

    Default

    ATI/Nvidia drivers are shitty on the other side too; there was a chart of all reported Vista crashes and over half of it was due to these two drivers.

    In my experience I had way more crashes on the windows side. Also I'm very damn glad it's not even possible for me to see the "Registry is corrupted, recover from last backup" error anymore (no registry! yay!)

  3. #33
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Location
    Greece
    Posts
    3,778

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by curaga View Post
    ATI/Nvidia drivers are shitty on the other side too; there was a chart of all reported Vista crashes and over half of it was due to these two drivers.

    In my experience I had way more crashes on the windows side. Also I'm very damn glad it's not even possible for me to see the "Registry is corrupted, recover from last backup" error anymore (no registry! yay!)
    It's the reverse here. No crashes on Windows but crashes/hangs on Linux. It's been like that for quite some time now. I'd say about 4 or 5 years. I don't dare doing anything "advanced" on Linux due to fear of the drivers crapping out.

  4. #34
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Well it's all very dependent on the hardware and software being used. Windows as an OS has been very stable for quite some time now. A lot of the "linux is way more stable then windows" rhetoric is as outdated as the "linux is hard to use" crud. I haven't seen a bluecreen in windows for quite a few years now that wasn't a result of something such as a failing power supply or an unseated component. The weakest stability factor in any OS is still it's end user.

    As far as the comment made earlier on commercial software being more stable on linux that is a real hit or miss. Ultimately it's the application code and the quality of the port that determines it's stability. Maya for example suffers from flakyness on linux vs it's windows or mac os counterparts as did Pro/E. These apps did not suffer from driver issues but just bad porting in general. Maya's rendering backend does seem to be more reliable then it's windows counterpart but the gui is totally the opposite (not to mention looking and feeling like it's still 1995 with the tcl/tk ui).

    While MS does take more of a reactive approach to bugs, linux isn't that proactive either. The only ones that are really proactive in bug squashing and security issues seems to be the BSD crowd (aka the masterbating monkeys).

  5. #35
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    365

    Default

    Well... if we're already at it:

    Quote Originally Posted by galynda View Post
    If the day ever did come when there was enough people using Linux to make it worth the while for the hackers/criminals, rest assured, you would no longer have that excuse to throw at Windows users, because Linux would be getting targeted by the hackers as well, the only reason it doesn't now is that comparatively speaking, no one uses Linux (</= 1% FACT)
    I think hacking Linux is actually more appealing to hackers, as somebody who'd find a way to get root permissions via a security flaw in the Linux kernel would get damn much reputation in the scene. That argument has been brought up so many times now, and I never really thought it holds.
    Also, Linux and *BSD are still the number one decision for servers, did I miss anything or don't crackers care about servers anymore?

    However.. back to "topic":
    Linux for my needs is just sooo great, but its greatest bottlenecks IMO are:
    - the graphics stack is just... crap... (including the situation about binary blobs)
    - which brings me to the kernel and distro policy about binary elements... Honestly, Linux is about freedom, and if some people want a 100% free system: Okay, but now the other people have no freedom of choice to pick a binary driver
    - sound... pulseaudio improved that, but it just seems like a dirty hack. Application developers still don't have a feature rich and clean API
    - range of software: it's good to have an alternative for many Windows applications, but what do we need 3 or 4 which do all the same? Ah yeah, one that uses GTK and one that uses QT, perhaps another one using wxWidgets...

    Wow, when I come to think about it I really get the feeling Linux is crap
    However, we all know that things are improving and just because there are a lot of disadvantages, that doesn't mean there aren't advantages, too

  6. #36

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    Well it's all very dependent on the hardware and software being used. Windows as an OS has been very stable for quite some time now. A lot of the "linux is way more stable then windows" rhetoric is as outdated as the "linux is hard to use" crud. I haven't seen a bluecreen in windows for quite a few years now that wasn't a result of something such as a failing power supply or an unseated component. The weakest stability factor in any OS is still it's end user.

    As far as the comment made earlier on commercial software being more stable on linux that is a real hit or miss. Ultimately it's the application code and the quality of the port that determines it's stability. Maya for example suffers from flakyness on linux vs it's windows or mac os counterparts as did Pro/E. These apps did not suffer from driver issues but just bad porting in general. Maya's rendering backend does seem to be more reliable then it's windows counterpart but the gui is totally the opposite (not to mention looking and feeling like it's still 1995 with the tcl/tk ui).

    While MS does take more of a reactive approach to bugs, linux isn't that proactive either. The only ones that are really proactive in bug squashing and security issues seems to be the BSD crowd (aka the masterbating monkeys).

    I've got different feeling. I 'use' Win xp (I don't have even my wireless card configured on it right now) for games and Linux for everything else. XP crashed frequently and some time ago, when I had internet connection configured, it crashed just few seconds after launching a boinc manager. On Linux I can run boinc and launch a game at the same time and it's stable as nothing else. An only reason when Linux crashed were nvidia binary blobs. Btw. you could hang this masterbating monkeys system by typing simple command some time ago.

    "linux is way more stable then windows" rhetoric is as outdated as the "linux is hard to use" crud.
    It depends on lot of factors - binary blobs, resistance for broken hardware etc. And Linux is still hard to use for some people.

    EDIT:

    @NeoBrain

    PulseAudio is crap. It takes about 10% of CPU on my box when game is running.
    Last edited by kraftman; 01-17-2009 at 12:52 PM.

  7. #37
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Location
    Germany
    Posts
    365

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    PulseAudio is crap. It takes about 10% of CPU on my box when game is running.
    Yeah, that's why I called it a hack - It does things which are self-evident on other platforms, i.e. make it possible for all apps to run with any sound driver. On top of that, it's actually still more in a development status (it doesn't even provide bass adjustment, setting up surround is a pain, etc) but is already used by most major distros (Ubuntu afaik, Fedora; Debian doesn't use it I think, and that for good reasons)

  8. #38
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    I've got different feeling. I 'use' Win xp (I don't have even my wireless card configured on it right now) for games and Linux for everything else. XP crashed frequently and some time ago, when I had internet connection configured, it crashed just few seconds after launching a boinc manager. On Linux I can run boinc and launch a game at the same time and it's stable as nothing else. An only reason when Linux crashed were nvidia binary blobs. Btw. you could hang this masterbating monkeys system by typing simple command some time ago.

    It depends on lot of factors - binary blobs, resistance for broken hardware etc. And Linux is still hard to use for some people.
    That's exactly what I mean, a lot of people blame the OS when stability issues are a result not so much the OS but supporting software. Crappy code exists in all forms including opensource. Bad code is just bad code period. The systems out there vary so greatly that YMMV on any OS. You haven't heard for example Windows "bricking" hardware but that has happened recently in linux despite it's being opensource. There has been tones of bad code out there that causes all kinds of stability issues, if there wasn't you wouldn't see huge bugfixes constantly in kenel changelog for example, if it was bug free all you would see in those logs would be enhancements and features being added.

  9. #39

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by deanjo View Post
    There has been tones of bad code out there that causes all kinds of stability issues, if there wasn't you wouldn't see huge bugfixes constantly in kenel changelog for example, if it was bug free all you would see in those logs would be enhancements and features being added.
    Yeah, because there are tones of supported architectures . And those huge bugfixes can be in great way just better replacements for old code.

  10. #40
    Join Date
    May 2007
    Location
    Third Rock from the Sun
    Posts
    6,582

    Default

    Quote Originally Posted by kraftman View Post
    Yeah, because there are tones of supported architectures . And those huge bugfixes can be in great way just better replacements for old code.
    The can be just replacements for better code but there are many issues past and present that that are a "oops, that was bad regression". Heck Linus even made a comment to that effect in the last LKML kernel release message. Shit in will always result in shit out.

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •