What does Linux has that Windows doesn't?

[xXxJiggabobxXx]

Hi, I'm new here but I'm wondering what features Linux posseses that Windows does not?

A good enough list might just make me turn to the dark side. I've trawled the net but I just can't find a good normal list.

 

[panchoman]

It's very moddable, you can do almost everything on it except for dx10 gaming(though it'll be made avaliable via the alky project very soon). linux is all about tailoring it to your needs. one thing i really like is workstations, you can have different workstations and switch between them, makes everything a lot neater and more organized.

this fun little article thingy puts all the oses into perspective: http://www.linuxscrew.com/2007/10/07/fun-linux-unix-windows-os-x-and-dos-airlines/

 

[xXxJiggabobxXx]

Hmm thanks but I need a serious list lol.

 

[Deleted member 3]

It's very moddable, you can do almost everything on it except for dx10 gaming(though it'll be made avaliable via the alky project very soon). linux is all about tailoring it to your needs. one thing i really like is workstations, you can have different workstations and switch between them, makes everything a lot neater and more organized.

this fun little article thingy puts all the oses into perspective: http://www.linuxscrew.com/2007/10/07/fun-linux-unix-windows-os-x-and-dos-airlines/

I'd like to see something working from alky first. Besides, Windows can have multiple desktops as well via 3rd party software.

It is correct however that it's modable, however this isn't for most users. However it is the main advantage, being open source you can do anything with it. It is nice for embedded systems though can be a bloated piece of junk as well.

However to actually name something it has that Windows does not, I wouldn't know anything. There is an alternative for basically anything.

 

[Ripper3]

I'd like to see something working from alky first. Besides, Windows can have multiple desktops as well via 3rd party software.

It is correct however that it's modable, however this isn't for most users. However it is the main advantage, being open source you can do anything with it. It is nice for embedded systems though can be a bloated piece of junk as well.

However to actually name something it has that Windows does not, I wouldn't know anything. There is an alternative for basically anything.

It's actually less bloated really.
Look at Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon. It fits onto a single CD, uses completely open source software (when and where possible, there's always a driver or two, but they warn you with the useful Restricted Drivers Manager), has an awesome 3D desktop as standard (and works great, as long as your graphics card is supported properly); a full free office suite, in fact all the software a regular user would need, really; some pretty fun standard games; a brilliant package manager that makes it easy to download and install extra software (from undreds, if not thousands of packages); and workstations as standard.

Look at Vista, it has a nice looking desktop, yes, but why is it weighing in with a full DVD? Where's my office suite as standard? Etc...

Still, users demand Windows, thinking its a huge difference, when really, they coudl easily get used to Linux, it's just a matter of practice, something my dad was lacking (along with a mapping program, since I could only get Google Earth to work, but AutoRoute is his preffered app), but he did enjoy it, just a shame it didn't have everything he needed.
I'm still certain I could find the mapping software he needs though.

 

[panchoman]

dont forget that ubuntu can run right off of the cd, whereas vista has compressed files onto the dvd just waiting to be expanded.

 

[Ripper3]

Yarr, but since Vista needs to be paid for, runnign it off the disc might not be beneficial to MS, but either way, it'd be too large to run from RAM and read-only memory, as is the case of the DVD.
Also, Ubuntu does get a little slow, even on this, my main system, while running from CD. I do like the smaller distros that can run fully from RAM though. With 2GB of RAM, Knoppix is almost a possibility for running straight from RAM
Until then, DSL, Puppy, Feather, and GeeXBoX Linux distros can very very easly run from RAM (and there must be others, but I'm not doing a complete list, heh). DSL needs as littel as 128MB or something, to be run completely in RAM, while GeeXBoX's older versions were only up to 16MB in size, if you decided to install additional codecs, otherwise, you would see disc usage of a maximum of up to 8MB. It made for a nice little media front-end.

 

[panchoman]

well of course ubuntu running off of your hdd is gonna run a lot faster then from your cd drive

 

[Ketxxx]

In a nutshell: Linux = neat and tidy, Windows = bloatware.

 

[strick94u]

It does have invisable snakes so becareful.

 

[sixor]

it does an amazing 3d desktop with beryl, the 3d in vista is lame,just like 2 effects and that´s it, while beryl has like 20 effects + 3d cube full of desktops + a lot more of customizations

it has an office suite (openoffice)

a program to edit photos professionaly (gimp)

it runs off the cd, so you can repare/fix your pc without writing files to your hd

it´s free

BTW i use mandriva one 08

 

[lemonadesoda]

Linux is great... but requires a lot of skill setting up, and usually, defering to a build made by someone containing a full-working set up. Although such a build is easily modable... you'll be spending months of time to learn how to do that well.

Windows on the other hand is so standardised that nearly anyone can use it right out of the box. Although many people criticise it for "bloat", in fact, the functions and services available, built right in, are enormous.

So what that it doesnt run off a CD. We all have CHEAP, HUGE, HDDs today.

The advantages of Linux are therefore:

1./ License price (if important)

2./ Lower system specs that Windows

3./ "Nerd" cred.

The advantages of Windows are:

1./ Everyone can install it and use it

2./ A lot more functionality built in

3./ A typical home user is able to "manage" it

SUMMARY

• If you have LOTS OF TIME, and NO MONEY, go linux.
  
• If time=money, go Windows.
  
• If you want more sex, go Mac.

 

[lemonadesoda]

I think I should just comment on the last bullet point there... more sex is statistically true, but I cant guarantee it would be with girls

 

[Ripper3]

So what that it doesnt run off a CD. We all have CHEAP, HUGE, HDDs today.

Running it off disc is always a useful option for repairs, diagnostics, virus-scanning, etc.
Also, sometimes, you might want/need to make a small system, without a hard drive, that boots or runs from disc, which is where running from disc comes in handy.
A good example of this: I'm thinking of making my old iBook into a digital picture frame. Advantages of running from flash memory is that it's fast, and small, and silent.
Advantages of running from CD meanwhile, it's free, 'cept for the price of a CD/DVD, and can take away some of the hassle, although it's harder to get your photos onto it, without re-burning the whole damned thing, heheh.

 

[Ripper3]

I think I should just comment on the last bullet point there... more sex is statistically true, but I cant guarantee it would be with girls

No, you can, that's the thing, 'cept for one or two exceptions to the rule, at my Uni, the people that use Macs the most (their own, not the media suite's Macs, that's different, they ahve no choice there) are all girls. Mostly kinda hot too.
All the guys I've seen rolling with laptops, have anything from UMPCs, to Tablet PCs, to gaming machines (one had a bloody heavy looking Alienware, but he looked happy, playing some Doom 3 in the refectory, heheh)

 

[AsRock]

dont forget that ubuntu can run right off of the cd, whereas vista has compressed files onto the dvd just waiting to be expanded.

And not just that you can partition a drive without losing data on it too. Yes from just booting of CD lol. Memtest on CD boot lol.

 

[Wile E]

It's actually less bloated really.
Look at Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon. It fits onto a single CD, uses completely open source software (when and where possible, there's always a driver or two, but they warn you with the useful Restricted Drivers Manager), has an awesome 3D desktop as standard (and works great, as long as your graphics card is supported properly); a full free office suite, in fact all the software a regular user would need, really; some pretty fun standard games; a brilliant package manager that makes it easy to download and install extra software (from undreds, if not thousands of packages); and workstations as standard.

Look at Vista, it has a nice looking desktop, yes, but why is it weighing in with a full DVD? Where's my office suite as standard? Etc...

Still, users demand Windows, thinking its a huge difference, when really, they coudl easily get used to Linux, it's just a matter of practice, something my dad was lacking (along with a mapping program, since I could only get Google Earth to work, but AutoRoute is his preffered app), but he did enjoy it, just a shame it didn't have everything he needed.
I'm still certain I could find the mapping software he needs though.

Vista also carries all versions on a single DVD - Home Basic thru Ultimate.

But anyway, whilst Linux is generally less bloated than Vista, it can still get just as bloated. Linux is also more work than Windows. It's not a matter of being able to get used to it, just about anybody could learn it, the question is why would most people want to? Especially when you consider Windows is point and click easy. Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, Fedora is my preferred distro, but I find myself using it less and less, because Windows is so much easier.

 

[DIBL]

I'm wondering what features Linux possesses that Windows does not?

Linux features YOU owning and operating your computer, however you want. Windows features Microsoft/WGA strictly limiting what you can do with "your" computer, running THEIR OS.

 

[Deleted member 3]

It's actually less bloated really.

I said it "could be" just as bloated. There are hundreds of distributions, most have different versions as well. There are plenty of distributions that are just as bloated as Windows. Though like I said, it's modable, but not by the average user. Windows can be really tiny as well, look at embedded editions (most small Linux editions are aimed at embedded applications as well)


As to Pancho, Windows can boot from CD as well, it's called PE.


Linux and Windows simply are different OSes and both can do basically anything.

 

[Grings]

What does Linux has that Windows doesn't?

a scarily loyal userbase, who will defend it to the end

quite a contrast to windows users, who love nothing better than ranting about ol' wild bill

 

[Solaris17]

a completely open source code i can my distrobution mine if i need too i can adjust it and tweak it for my system completely.

@Danthebanjoman actually you can though controll what goes into it and its really easy at install you have the option to controll exactly what packages get installed and its really easy to do and easy to find the option its blatently obvious in all gui based installers iv seen.

 

[Deleted member 3]

@Danthebanjoman actually you can though controll what goes into it and its really easy at install you have the option to controll exactly what packages get installed and its really easy to do and easy to find the option its blatently obvious in all gui based installers iv seen.

I support over 450 Linux machines. Most users complain about open office being complex and they keep losing their files because they don't even understand what a directory is. They open files right from the e-mail client (Ximian Evolution) and then wonder where the files went. You obviously think they have any clues about packages?
Trust me, the more freedom in configuration and customization the less attractive something is to the greater public. Why do you think mr Jobs can sell his machines for high prices?

 

[Solaris17]

i guess thats a good point.

 

[mab1376]

Since Wal-Mart is now selling a $200 PC with Ubuntu hopefully it will become more popular alongside Dell and HP offering it as a windows alternative.

Once that happens M$ will have to make their OS completely open and moddable start giving it away.

The only thing that sucks is that people who haven't heard of Linux before shy away from it, since the slightest little error msg makes them think they broke their PC permantly.

 

[3991vhtes]

a scarily loyal userbase, who will defend it to the end

That's about it. IMO.