Linux Will Never Be As -Good- As Windows DistroTube
video description
Date: 2022-03-30
Related videos
Comments and reviews: 10
Greg
Been a win user since 3.1 & MSdos, Linux since initial release. I currently run Win 7 pro 64 and Linux Mint 20.2. I appreciate each OS for their strengths. Linux has warts, but windows IMHO is worse. There is no such thing as a -perfect- OS, but there are OS's better or worse suited to an individual user. If I may also ramble a bit, my windows annoyances, in no particular order, include:
1. Windows refusal to unmount a drive, claiming it is -in use-. My external USB mount activity LED says it is NOT in use. So I must shut everything down, unplug, and reboot. Windows usually understands a Shutdown command trumps an Unmount, but not always, sometimes a power cycle is needed. Linux has NEVER refused to unmount an external drive or forced me to cycle power.
2. Windows locking up. OK, my Windows install is a year old, but must I re-install everything yearly ? It would appear I must. Linux & BSD up-times run into decades, without problems. Opinion: Windows is a -dirty- operating system, and accumulates trash that ultimately causes problems.
3. Enormous windows shutdown times. I am talking 5, maybe 10 minutes to power down, with blazing disk activity. Linux is under a minute consistently. I have no idea what windows is doing.
4. Early AM internet software updates pushed by Msoft. I sometimes run compute intensive apps overnight, and having them shut down by a software update at 3:00 AM is very annoying. Yes, I know, that is not a bug, that is a feature. Linux never auto installs anything, you must ask first.
5. Windows does not move easily. I can take my drive with Linux installed to another machine and boot up no problem. Not so with Windows. Lots of driver and license problems await.
6. I cannot gracefully upgrade hardware on windows. See #5. OS upgrades are much easier on Linux too. Msoft appears to think users would never upgrade their OS, so they made it hard to do, hard to migrate installed apps to a new (Microsoft) OS or new Machine. OS succession appears to be a foreign concept.
7. Windows changes the User Interface. I use Win 7 Pro 64, I would like to use Win 10, but I have no idea where anything is, and little inclination to play hunt and seek with my OS. I could not even figure out how to shut Win 10 down to get out initially !
8. After decades of development and billions of dollars invested, windows is still the target for viruses. Open source Linux is not nearly so vulnerable, and problems are quickly addressed by an enormous pool of talented engineers. Msoft has an enormous pool of talented engineers as well, they just respond much more slowly.
9. Having to keep a collection of favorite windows tool installation disks, with installation keys, since I need to rebuild Windows on pretty much a yearly basis, a dreaded task that takes a good day of fiddling around.
10. Windows -lockups-. I rarely get the -Blue screen of death-, but for me windows has a nasty habit of locking up and refusing to take any user input. Cycling power is a cure, if a dicey one, as you risk corrupting your disk doing this.
11. Windows, please quit moving things around in the -hidden icons- menu !
12. Stability. Linux seems very solid, upgradeable, and usable. Windows is fine at initial install, but degrades and becomes brittle over time. There is a reason there is no -up time- calculation available in Windows, my installs currently would only need an -Hours- field.
13. Windows update is inferior to Linux update / upgrade which handles all applications on the machine at one time.
14. Windows, built originally on MS DOS, is an example of how far one can push an idea through accretion of features. Linux, based on the ideas behind Unix (but not the code), is an example of a clearly thought out model, make simple tools that do something well and allows linkage.
To be fair, my major Linux annoyances are:
1. Disk naming. To deal with a disk drive, you must find it, sometimes in -mount-, sometimes in -media-. Windows -A: for floppy & C: for 1st hard drive- etc, is easier to use (yes, I still have a floppy disk drive).
2. File copying in Linux takes place sequentially, in Windows it is in parallel. I am not sure yet which I prefer.
3. Constant entering of admin password becomes tedious, which promotes short easily hacked passwords. Bad for administrators ! If I am logged in as Admin, just let me do what I need to do with Admin privileges, quit nagging me.
4. Repository software often lags current versions, sometimes significantly.
5. Choice. Yes choice can be a negative too, with several dozen major distributions and a few desktops to choose from, Linux choice can be daunting.
6. The world changes when you move between a terminal command line and GUI interface, a different UI paradigm takes over. There is no cure for this.
7. For new Linux users, Linux like Unix assumes you know what you are doing, and is not overly chatty about what the consequences of any action might be. Linux, for example, given the proper command, will allow you to erase everything, which is not likely to be what you wish to do. Is this an annoyance ? Only the first time you do it ! After the first time, it is indelibly burned into your brain, DON'T DO THAT.
reply
Been a win user since 3.1 & MSdos, Linux since initial release. I currently run Win 7 pro 64 and Linux Mint 20.2. I appreciate each OS for their strengths. Linux has warts, but windows IMHO is worse. There is no such thing as a -perfect- OS, but there are OS's better or worse suited to an individual user. If I may also ramble a bit, my windows annoyances, in no particular order, include:
1. Windows refusal to unmount a drive, claiming it is -in use-. My external USB mount activity LED says it is NOT in use. So I must shut everything down, unplug, and reboot. Windows usually understands a Shutdown command trumps an Unmount, but not always, sometimes a power cycle is needed. Linux has NEVER refused to unmount an external drive or forced me to cycle power.
2. Windows locking up. OK, my Windows install is a year old, but must I re-install everything yearly ? It would appear I must. Linux & BSD up-times run into decades, without problems. Opinion: Windows is a -dirty- operating system, and accumulates trash that ultimately causes problems.
3. Enormous windows shutdown times. I am talking 5, maybe 10 minutes to power down, with blazing disk activity. Linux is under a minute consistently. I have no idea what windows is doing.
4. Early AM internet software updates pushed by Msoft. I sometimes run compute intensive apps overnight, and having them shut down by a software update at 3:00 AM is very annoying. Yes, I know, that is not a bug, that is a feature. Linux never auto installs anything, you must ask first.
5. Windows does not move easily. I can take my drive with Linux installed to another machine and boot up no problem. Not so with Windows. Lots of driver and license problems await.
6. I cannot gracefully upgrade hardware on windows. See #5. OS upgrades are much easier on Linux too. Msoft appears to think users would never upgrade their OS, so they made it hard to do, hard to migrate installed apps to a new (Microsoft) OS or new Machine. OS succession appears to be a foreign concept.
7. Windows changes the User Interface. I use Win 7 Pro 64, I would like to use Win 10, but I have no idea where anything is, and little inclination to play hunt and seek with my OS. I could not even figure out how to shut Win 10 down to get out initially !
8. After decades of development and billions of dollars invested, windows is still the target for viruses. Open source Linux is not nearly so vulnerable, and problems are quickly addressed by an enormous pool of talented engineers. Msoft has an enormous pool of talented engineers as well, they just respond much more slowly.
9. Having to keep a collection of favorite windows tool installation disks, with installation keys, since I need to rebuild Windows on pretty much a yearly basis, a dreaded task that takes a good day of fiddling around.
10. Windows -lockups-. I rarely get the -Blue screen of death-, but for me windows has a nasty habit of locking up and refusing to take any user input. Cycling power is a cure, if a dicey one, as you risk corrupting your disk doing this.
11. Windows, please quit moving things around in the -hidden icons- menu !
12. Stability. Linux seems very solid, upgradeable, and usable. Windows is fine at initial install, but degrades and becomes brittle over time. There is a reason there is no -up time- calculation available in Windows, my installs currently would only need an -Hours- field.
13. Windows update is inferior to Linux update / upgrade which handles all applications on the machine at one time.
14. Windows, built originally on MS DOS, is an example of how far one can push an idea through accretion of features. Linux, based on the ideas behind Unix (but not the code), is an example of a clearly thought out model, make simple tools that do something well and allows linkage.
To be fair, my major Linux annoyances are:
1. Disk naming. To deal with a disk drive, you must find it, sometimes in -mount-, sometimes in -media-. Windows -A: for floppy & C: for 1st hard drive- etc, is easier to use (yes, I still have a floppy disk drive).
2. File copying in Linux takes place sequentially, in Windows it is in parallel. I am not sure yet which I prefer.
3. Constant entering of admin password becomes tedious, which promotes short easily hacked passwords. Bad for administrators ! If I am logged in as Admin, just let me do what I need to do with Admin privileges, quit nagging me.
4. Repository software often lags current versions, sometimes significantly.
5. Choice. Yes choice can be a negative too, with several dozen major distributions and a few desktops to choose from, Linux choice can be daunting.
6. The world changes when you move between a terminal command line and GUI interface, a different UI paradigm takes over. There is no cure for this.
7. For new Linux users, Linux like Unix assumes you know what you are doing, and is not overly chatty about what the consequences of any action might be. Linux, for example, given the proper command, will allow you to erase everything, which is not likely to be what you wish to do. Is this an annoyance ? Only the first time you do it ! After the first time, it is indelibly burned into your brain, DON'T DO THAT.
reply
Hixbi
Tldr -stop telling people that they should like a product for the reasons that you like it, and start understanding why people use certain OS's in the first place.-
-why can't you make it a GUI, because you would need a GUI that would do a hundred million thousand things.-
-no one is going to sit there and do a hundred million thousand things unless you're a tinkerer and everyone's not a tinkerer. Same with Windows you can use powershell or command but there is a GUI that allows you to do the simple things why is that so hard to understand?
-You can do so many things with Linux. You can rip the guts out of it and and build it how you like.-
You can do the same thing with a creality printer, you can build it how you like, make it larger, turn it into a laser etch, but here's the problem, while you're tinkering with a 3D printer that printer is down and if you need to print parts for your work a job or to make a prototype... You now can't. Developing and modifying is a tricky process you need to work the bugs out. Not everybody has time to sit down and just tinker. I do a lot of coding, but I don't have time to sit down and tinker with Linux when I need work done. Sometimes I just need to hop in and go and Linux doesn't do that.
-There is no community for Windows.- I guess modding communities for Windows don't count? You know, the ones that make shell skins and GUIs?
Look I don't like Windows, I would have loved for them to do builds of existing Windows instead of just coming up with a -new- version of Windows. If there was any other operating system with a user interface that allows plug and Play, and I don't have to sit there and fight with it for a week just to play a video or get a sound card to work I would jump in it in an instant.
I produce music I master engineer soundscapes, I like to game, design 3D models and 3D print, why would I care about the hundreds of millions of things that I could want to do in the code, when there are a bunch of things that I need to do? Who cares how powerful Linux is if you have to scrub through code just to get a microphone to work? Who cares if you can go in the code and look up everything about a file if all you want to do is play steam games? This type of disconnect is why people don't like using Linux, even as the concept it is. This whole elitist crap whether it be Linux, Mac OS, or Windows is trash.
reply
Tldr -stop telling people that they should like a product for the reasons that you like it, and start understanding why people use certain OS's in the first place.-
-why can't you make it a GUI, because you would need a GUI that would do a hundred million thousand things.-
-no one is going to sit there and do a hundred million thousand things unless you're a tinkerer and everyone's not a tinkerer. Same with Windows you can use powershell or command but there is a GUI that allows you to do the simple things why is that so hard to understand?
-You can do so many things with Linux. You can rip the guts out of it and and build it how you like.-
You can do the same thing with a creality printer, you can build it how you like, make it larger, turn it into a laser etch, but here's the problem, while you're tinkering with a 3D printer that printer is down and if you need to print parts for your work a job or to make a prototype... You now can't. Developing and modifying is a tricky process you need to work the bugs out. Not everybody has time to sit down and just tinker. I do a lot of coding, but I don't have time to sit down and tinker with Linux when I need work done. Sometimes I just need to hop in and go and Linux doesn't do that.
-There is no community for Windows.- I guess modding communities for Windows don't count? You know, the ones that make shell skins and GUIs?
Look I don't like Windows, I would have loved for them to do builds of existing Windows instead of just coming up with a -new- version of Windows. If there was any other operating system with a user interface that allows plug and Play, and I don't have to sit there and fight with it for a week just to play a video or get a sound card to work I would jump in it in an instant.
I produce music I master engineer soundscapes, I like to game, design 3D models and 3D print, why would I care about the hundreds of millions of things that I could want to do in the code, when there are a bunch of things that I need to do? Who cares how powerful Linux is if you have to scrub through code just to get a microphone to work? Who cares if you can go in the code and look up everything about a file if all you want to do is play steam games? This type of disconnect is why people don't like using Linux, even as the concept it is. This whole elitist crap whether it be Linux, Mac OS, or Windows is trash.
reply
fischi
TL;DR: open/closed source doesn't impact the user experience
PS: If Linux becomes windows there is no point of having both, 1 of em is enaugh. Btw... MS lately has quite some open source software that is pretty good, just think about VS-Code
I see no dofference in the jobs the OS should do, no matter if it's open source or not. In fact, just as a fun fact, there are parts of a lot of linux distros that originally were heavily inspired by windows, and there are also parts from windows that are heavily inspired by linux. Like most users, they don't care if the software is open source or not, they want it to work. It's about the same like saying: I don't care if the motor my car has is free for me to look up on the internet and check out how it works etc... I just want it to work (as a normi)... then if you like cars you may apreciate having a 3d model of your motor to download and inspect, idk, but for the vast majority it simply doesn't matter. And if I press the left mouse button to execute an application I don't care if the operating system that takes my mouse input is linux, unix, windows, templeOS.... most people don't care, they want the application to run and that's it.
How do people think the usecase of a product is differenr because it's open source or not? it makes no difference.
reply
TL;DR: open/closed source doesn't impact the user experience
PS: If Linux becomes windows there is no point of having both, 1 of em is enaugh. Btw... MS lately has quite some open source software that is pretty good, just think about VS-Code
I see no dofference in the jobs the OS should do, no matter if it's open source or not. In fact, just as a fun fact, there are parts of a lot of linux distros that originally were heavily inspired by windows, and there are also parts from windows that are heavily inspired by linux. Like most users, they don't care if the software is open source or not, they want it to work. It's about the same like saying: I don't care if the motor my car has is free for me to look up on the internet and check out how it works etc... I just want it to work (as a normi)... then if you like cars you may apreciate having a 3d model of your motor to download and inspect, idk, but for the vast majority it simply doesn't matter. And if I press the left mouse button to execute an application I don't care if the operating system that takes my mouse input is linux, unix, windows, templeOS.... most people don't care, they want the application to run and that's it.
How do people think the usecase of a product is differenr because it's open source or not? it makes no difference.
reply
Bharogh
Gotta say, that I tried a lot of times to make Linux my go to desktop but I always have a top high end machine and I have limited hardware support and for games it's kind of a nightmare.
Even if something works, by exception but never crystal clear..you will get less FPS, if you lose 30fps or 40 fps, thats like going in with a 2080Ti but have 2070 results..and thats a lot of cash...lost..just for running Linux.
I noticed a lot of people using linux use old pc's..outdated hardware...and I get it, linux make it so their Pc's are alive again.
I might buy an older laptop with 256gb ssd on it just for linux and networking....but as for day to day use with gaming involved and stability...I can not recommend Linux (as much as i like it).
For peripherals software, its not about the RGB, but about the configuration you make on that software(thats not available on linux). The reason you pay up 200$ for a mouse is to be competitive, and without the software, its pretty much just a mouse.
Edit: I just switched 2 days ago from Manjaro to Windows (again...).
reply
Gotta say, that I tried a lot of times to make Linux my go to desktop but I always have a top high end machine and I have limited hardware support and for games it's kind of a nightmare.
Even if something works, by exception but never crystal clear..you will get less FPS, if you lose 30fps or 40 fps, thats like going in with a 2080Ti but have 2070 results..and thats a lot of cash...lost..just for running Linux.
I noticed a lot of people using linux use old pc's..outdated hardware...and I get it, linux make it so their Pc's are alive again.
I might buy an older laptop with 256gb ssd on it just for linux and networking....but as for day to day use with gaming involved and stability...I can not recommend Linux (as much as i like it).
For peripherals software, its not about the RGB, but about the configuration you make on that software(thats not available on linux). The reason you pay up 200$ for a mouse is to be competitive, and without the software, its pretty much just a mouse.
Edit: I just switched 2 days ago from Manjaro to Windows (again...).
reply
Ava
My story with linux started recently and it's been a blast.
I went straight for arch. I had some free time in late december through the end of january and i decided to spend it learning how to properly set arch up and RTFM, whatnot. The ammount of things you learn taking the time to do other things yourself is mesmerizing. I still keep windows on the dual boot - Windows does the gaming part best. I've tested wine but I'm a real sucker for cranking all the performance out of the games. This issue isn't Linux fault, but rather, I blame these devs for not supporting linux natively. And furthermore, NVIDIA for having such a pain-in-the-ass driver for linux. Nouveau is a gift from the gods, despite not being ideal. I should be switching to AMD soon, and am looking to maybe contribute to the development of nouveau in the (much) further future.
Linux is the way, FOSS is the way, and the more people adhering to this philosophy, the better its fruits will become
reply
My story with linux started recently and it's been a blast.
I went straight for arch. I had some free time in late december through the end of january and i decided to spend it learning how to properly set arch up and RTFM, whatnot. The ammount of things you learn taking the time to do other things yourself is mesmerizing. I still keep windows on the dual boot - Windows does the gaming part best. I've tested wine but I'm a real sucker for cranking all the performance out of the games. This issue isn't Linux fault, but rather, I blame these devs for not supporting linux natively. And furthermore, NVIDIA for having such a pain-in-the-ass driver for linux. Nouveau is a gift from the gods, despite not being ideal. I should be switching to AMD soon, and am looking to maybe contribute to the development of nouveau in the (much) further future.
Linux is the way, FOSS is the way, and the more people adhering to this philosophy, the better its fruits will become
reply
Shawn
Your argument is fundamentally flawed. Firstly, complicated is _not_ the opposite of good, and I have no idea what went wrong in your life to make you believe it is. (were you born into a Mac family?) Secondly, _all of Linux_ doesn't need to be as good as Windows; it just needs to offer _one or two comprehensive sets of highly-polished options_ for people who just want an OS they can use without spending hundreds of dollars or hundreds of hours on it. Linux devs can keep working on their crappy side projects, but don't publish them until they've been tested by noobs. I don't get to stop working on the software I write until someone can use it with nothing more than a single page -cheat sheet-, and Linux devs _can and should_ be held to the same standard.
reply
Your argument is fundamentally flawed. Firstly, complicated is _not_ the opposite of good, and I have no idea what went wrong in your life to make you believe it is. (were you born into a Mac family?) Secondly, _all of Linux_ doesn't need to be as good as Windows; it just needs to offer _one or two comprehensive sets of highly-polished options_ for people who just want an OS they can use without spending hundreds of dollars or hundreds of hours on it. Linux devs can keep working on their crappy side projects, but don't publish them until they've been tested by noobs. I don't get to stop working on the software I write until someone can use it with nothing more than a single page -cheat sheet-, and Linux devs _can and should_ be held to the same standard.
reply
Mohamed
I am happy that you use linux just because its open source but that is not why I use it (I have used it as my main for around 8 years so far). Everyone is different and they can use linux for a different reason. While I admire linux for its openness (I can actually read the source code and demystify the OS), its not the reason I use it. Also saying its gonna be worse than windows just because its free/open source is an insult to open source devs working on these systems. Like somehow being closed source is the secret sauce. The reasons linux is worse (by some definition) could be varied.
reply
I am happy that you use linux just because its open source but that is not why I use it (I have used it as my main for around 8 years so far). Everyone is different and they can use linux for a different reason. While I admire linux for its openness (I can actually read the source code and demystify the OS), its not the reason I use it. Also saying its gonna be worse than windows just because its free/open source is an insult to open source devs working on these systems. Like somehow being closed source is the secret sauce. The reasons linux is worse (by some definition) could be varied.
reply
phr
I've been thinking quite a bit about why I like Linux. For me it comes down to the architecture. I developed for Windows for over 15 years (1995 - 2012). It was so awful trying to make software to work across computers supposedly running the same OS. Linux is an absolute breath of fresh air to make settings changes, migrate set-ups, make modifications to the OS and just understand what is going on. I use the terminal but even the Linux GUI utilities beat Windows hands down because you always have the option to drop to a lower level and there is always documentation to help you.
reply
I've been thinking quite a bit about why I like Linux. For me it comes down to the architecture. I developed for Windows for over 15 years (1995 - 2012). It was so awful trying to make software to work across computers supposedly running the same OS. Linux is an absolute breath of fresh air to make settings changes, migrate set-ups, make modifications to the OS and just understand what is going on. I use the terminal but even the Linux GUI utilities beat Windows hands down because you always have the option to drop to a lower level and there is always documentation to help you.
reply
n.steam
Linux isn't just about FOSS, it's also about privacy and control. My main motivator to turn to Linux is because I wanted to operate my system. I don't want MS operating my system, forcing updates, and rebooting my computer if I leave it idle too long. Don't get me started on Windows effectively being spyware that you have to pay for.
FOSS isn't what will convince most Windows users to turn to Linux, but if they eventually do convert to Linux, it will only be then that they will start to appreciate FOSS.
reply
Linux isn't just about FOSS, it's also about privacy and control. My main motivator to turn to Linux is because I wanted to operate my system. I don't want MS operating my system, forcing updates, and rebooting my computer if I leave it idle too long. Don't get me started on Windows effectively being spyware that you have to pay for.
FOSS isn't what will convince most Windows users to turn to Linux, but if they eventually do convert to Linux, it will only be then that they will start to appreciate FOSS.
reply
Artoooooor
My first experience with Linux was Knoppix. It worked... and it's all I could say about it. Next was Ubuntu. It didn't even start on 512 MB RAM (Windows XP then was blazingly fast on this amount). Hardware support - it's the main reason I run Windows as my main OS. And the damn massive mess Linux of linux graphics stack. Micro$oft tries to convince me to Linux with the windows 11 though.
The problem with Linux (and all FOSS OSes) is that it's only for tinkerers and professionals.
reply
My first experience with Linux was Knoppix. It worked... and it's all I could say about it. Next was Ubuntu. It didn't even start on 512 MB RAM (Windows XP then was blazingly fast on this amount). Hardware support - it's the main reason I run Windows as my main OS. And the damn massive mess Linux of linux graphics stack. Micro$oft tries to convince me to Linux with the windows 11 though.
The problem with Linux (and all FOSS OSes) is that it's only for tinkerers and professionals.
reply
Add a review, comment
Other channel videos
