I think there's a lot of crap on both sides of the fence. Contrary to the belief of those on either side, neither Windows or Linux (or the BSDs or Mac, etc.) are the pinnacle of computing experience, nor are any of the above horrible operating systems that you wouldn't inflict on your sister.

There are strengths and weaknesses on both platforms. From my own standpoint, I currently use XP and Mandrake 9.1. As I am a unix developer, the linux environment is a natural venue for me to continue my development activities. For most other uses, I tend to default to XP, partly because I get to use all the goodies that stardock provides, but also because it is the default environment for most of what I do (other than development) at work, and it does have a pretty good user experience.

Neither platform is inherently superior to the other, they just fulfill different needs. Both can be secured quite well with a little attention to detail, and both systems are quite unprotected by default. Just as a carpenter would have different tools in their toolbox to perform different tasks, so will many computer users also have different computer tools available, as needed.

The only thing that bugs me about most of the naysayers on both sides of the fence, are that they will spout off an opinion about a system they have never actually used (or at least, never actually used past the point of seeing one thing they didn't like, and using that as a basis to denigrate the rest of the system). Having a genuine preference is one thing, but to blindly bash one or the other based merely on hearsay or defensiveness is immature and unnecessary.

Admittedly, hawking Linux on a site devoted to customizing Windows is probably a clear sign of targeting the wrong audience .

Well stated Aleatronic.

I however question the resistance to discussing Linux on this site when other topics that have nothing to do with customizing Windows are discussed here as well. Examples are movies, games, French Fries, music, RIAA, and ect.

MAC attempted to make the idiot proof box and evolves towards giving users more control over things.

Windows attempted to allow users coming from the Dos environment more control over things and evolves towards becoming an idiot box.

Unix, AIX. Linux and even DOS to some extent, put the "G" in Geek, as in Computer Geek.

It all depends on what you ant, where you want it and what you decide to take up to get there...



I like em personally

[Message Edited]
[Message Edited]

Good point IPural. Maybe the Linux bashers are just jelious that they don't have the intelligence to learn Linux.

TC,

I actually agree that there's nothing wrong with discussing Linux here (apparently we're managing quite nicely in this thread ), but coming here with a positive opinion about Linux is much like going to Slashdot with a positive opinion about Windows. Which I think is kind of sad, because there are people on both sites (and many others), that are into computing because of what they can do with computers, not only in terms of what they can do with computers, but also in terms of how they can personalize their computers to suit their own needs and aesthetics.

I've seen themes here (and on other sites for Linux) that have enough effect on the system as to render it substantially different from the base material, both in appearance and interaction. In my opinion, anyone who has the attitude that they can improve their user experience on a computer, regardless of the underlying OS, should be exactly the kind of user that is willing to honestly examine the different offerings available, if only because they might find something they like that can be translated to the system they prefer to use.

Just as an example, I like Macs, but I don't own one, largely because of cost, and also because I'm not willing to absorb the cost of transferring all of my apps, etc. But I do think that there are things that the Mac does better than any other system, and if the preponderance of Mac like themes on this site (and others) is any indication, I'm not alone in that assessment. Additionally, I feel that there are things that Windows does better than anything else, and there are things that Linux does better.

I like computers. I like all kinds of computers, and I've been playing with them in one fashion or another for 27 years. I have successfully managed to avoid being infected with the idealogical malady of believing that any one system is fundamentally better than any other. For me, all computers (and operating systems, etc.) are a limitless resource containing knowledge and fascination and discovery. And the more you know about all computer systems, the better you'll be able to understand and make use of any particular computer system.

Here is a money making thought. Why can't stardock make WB for the Linux system?

Kona, Linux does already has something similar to WB in each desktop environment such as KDE for example. http://www.kde-look.org/ offers skins for KDE which are just as much of a face lift on KDE that WB skins are on Windows.

I remember reading a couple years back that Stardock was originally a software developer for the OS/2 operating system. OS/2 failed to sell so Stardock had to migrate to another OS to stay in business. They chose Windows because of the popular misconception that all Linux apps must be free. It is a shame that such FUD scared them away from Linux since there are some commercial apps for Linux that are neither free or open source. I would like to see Stardock products on Linux but Linux would have to become more mainstream for Stardock to consider something like that.

What is ironic about Stardock starting out on OS/2 is that Windows XP is based on the NT kernel which is based on OS/2. In a way Stardocks still supports OS/2 based systems.

They chose Windows because of the popular misconception that all Linux apps must be free. It is a shame that such FUD scared them away from Linux since there are some commercial apps for Linux that are neither free or open source.

I'm going to go out on a limb here on the fact that no, its not because "all linux apps must be free" but the fact that nobody would pay for desktop enhancements when the market is already saturated with free alternatives. Its nowhere near as lucritive a market as Windows is.

And never will be.

Hi there,

As far as i know isn't NT based on OS2 but on VAX?

NT is built off of the OS/2 system that IBM and Microsoft collaberated on. Microsoft and IBM split and each developed their own OS based on the one they built together. IBM continued to use the OS/2 label while Microsoft opted to develop their OS under the name Windows NT. Microsoft hired the guy responsible for developing VAX/VMS to head the development of NT. In a way NT is a decendant of both OS/2 and VAX/VMS.



[Message Edited]

I don't know about you guys, but I used linux, about 2 years ago, couldn't get much of anything to work, for a month I tried, couldn't adjust the screen resolution which was like 1600x1600 drove me crazy how small everything was. Couldn't get my modem to work, and it was a top of the line, worlds most common, us robotics. so I couldn't go online, and I had so much trouble installing software, the fact is I fixed my first computer when I was 8. I could use dos, and windows better than the experts by the time I was in high school. But I couldn't make heads or tails of linux. Im not saying it's bad, but you'd better have a degree in computer science if you want to use linux on a daily basis. However that was two years ago.

Just to add, the main reason I love windows so much is because of Stardock, without them I may not be so biased, I hate to use a computer anymore without windowblinds, and desktop x is best things I've ever used for productivity... they don't have those for Linux (or mac

I had lots of problems with ahrdware as well when I first installed Windows XP. But XP changed, and so did Linux. I've installed Linux recently without a single problem about anything.

Linux has changed so much in a user perspective that I would indeed consider it for a "gamma" computer. It has become just as easy t use than Windows or Mac.  The dowsides are mainly the lack of support from the major players in the software industry (Adobe, Macromedia, etc.) and the uninstall process for the applications. Most causal users (email, browsing the Net, occasional Word letter, etc.) don't install a lot of stuff so for them it wouldn't be an issue.

I think that Linux is perfectly viable and a very valid choice for an OS, as much so as Widows. But the reason I like it is mainly because Microsoft has to be tought that they don't own the World. Competition is good, and I will always welcome alternatives and the right to choose.

that depends on what you use. Red Hat, Mandrake and SuSe are quite full of "holes". They
are not so secure, but other like free bsd and Debian is the best you can use
when it comes to security

My 2 pennies worth >>>
I use OSX, Linux & BeOS as well as Windows XP.
I don't personally think either is better then the other, all of these OS's have there pros and cons, I tend use my Windows XP box the most because of the the sheer amount of software there is for it. I love my iMac, but I seem to use it less and less these days. BeOS is by far my favorte OS and I use this the most, but it is in serious need of a update and I hope that the new version "Zeta" will do that and bring some much needed "zing" to it.

Thats it I feel better now

Red Hat, Mandrake and SuSe are quite full of "holes".

That is complete FUD >

da_zman20: Give Linux another try. It has changed over the past two years, and the list of supported hardware has grown. I may be a person with a computer science degree, but I do not believe that you need one to get use out of Linux. All we used in college was Windows so there was not much in my background for Linux except for an understanding of computer science concepts. Linux just takes time and patience and maybe a bit of intelligence too.