Linux is useless

Post Reply New Topic

Linux is completely useless. It is an excellent operating system, but this doesn't make it useful.

I used Ubuntu until the point that I finally told myself "why am I using this useless operating system?". It's completely and utterly useless. It pretty much defines the word useless. Linux is about as useful as a watch with no battery in it.

If I wanted to run a fast and stable OS (which would run mediocre software), I'd go with Linux. But a fast and stable OS + mediocre software = Sh*t. Windows may cost money (lots of it), be less resource-friendly and be overly-user friendly, but it runs software that is 100x better than the mediocre stuff that's available for Linux. Sure, there's Wine, but there are lots of compatibility issues with it.

Time will tell when these Linux-lovers will decide to get the most potential out of their systems and use Windows instead. Most of the software that is developed for Linux is laughable, that's how bad it is. I can't believe that anybody would choose to use such poor software just so they can use an OS that is a tiny bit quicker than Windows.

Words of advice: Quit being complete morons and use Windows until better software is developed for Linux. You're only making yourselves look like fools by using your mediocre software and choosing to get the least out of your system.

Remember my formula: A fast and stable OS + mediocre software = Sh*t

That formula might come in handy for some of you people.

[youtube]http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=d85p7JZXNy8[/youtube]

it depends on what you use your system for. Word processing ? Budget ? Listening to music ? I agree Windows is the best choice for those, you don't really mind if your system's ressources are used efficiently as long as you can easily work your things.

But if you need a system that will be used as, let's say, a firewall, so your company's 1000 employees can surf the net, you need something robust and efficient, and you don't really care how good it look on the screen. So then you have the choice of going with commercial softwares (50,000+$, Checkpoint on Solaris for instance), or free Linux with built-in firewall capabilities.

It all depends on what you do with it. Linux is a geek trip. And it's FREE. It's stable and efficient. Did you know many handheld devices runs on it ? You wouldn't want to see your Motorola U9 cellphone software crash. Imagine your cellphone freezing while your going thru the menus, or rebooting while having a conversation, or slow down until no longer work because it caught a virus....

could it be, you don't know what you're talking about?

You havent defined what makes it mediocre, or useless. You are just ranting. No substance.

How about pressing the off button on your feelings and tuning on your logic and posting again?

Not really. This used to be true like 3 years ago, right now there really aren't many problems with WINE, at least not with these apps you love so much, there are issues with random games, but WINE 1.0 has really made it possible to run Office and photoshop.


windows is a Linux program, so I call this post worthless.

OpenOffice tops MSoffice every day, for me at least, I have to write tons of formulas in my homework and MS' way for this is incredibly lame. The gimp is ok, not everybody needs the freaking ultra esoteric features from photoshop. I can run MSOffice and photoshop in my virtual machine if I wanted too. If I used windows I would use firefox, openoffice and the gimp anyways, I prefer openoffice to MSOffice, Internet Explorer is quite a mediocre browser and Photoshop is too expensive for a tool I don't really need that much, or what is your alternative? Piracy? That's illegal, sugar. Programming-wise, the environment I got in Linux makes my life soo much simpler without the need of that restrictive nanny you call Visual Studio, which is also quite freaking expensive.

If I ever need windows stuff I just run my virtual machine, if you like XP you'd love running it in a virtual machine, as you get all its compatibility without worrying about giving it an internet connection.

Budget maybe, I have never needed to do that, so I don't know. , but I have no issues whatsoever with multimedia or word processing.

I have been using this ubuntu thing for 1.5 years already and never had to boot windows anymore. I really am more efficient on a Linux desktop than on a windows desktop which forces you to use a terminal-less crowded taskbar and many other things like the lack of symlinks. Etc.

Also, that a software is unfamiliar with you does not mean it is mediocre. People keep giving stuff they are familiar with much more credit than those things deserve. They instantly assume familiar means friendly or even that familiar means superior which is an absurd conclussion, but unbelievably enough people do take that conclussion. Odd?.

--
MSOffice is mediocre software, it doesn't even support the ISO standard ODF.

Wrong. Windows and Linux are both operating systems. One does not run on the other (except by virtualization, but that's another topic). It is true that Windows was once a DOS program and not a true OS but that is no longer the case.

You don't need budget and tax software. I do it the old-fashioned way with a Openoffice Spreadsheet and online help from trustee math magician websites about this thing. There is also alternatives to windows media player like real player and amatrok. The only thing you can't run in linux is games.

I have been using ubuntu studio which worked great, for a month, since I installed ubuntu on my laptop, when it started losing drivers, like the wifi driver, that wouldn't reinstall, I had to reinstall XP. I still like the OS but they need to get the bugs worked out of it before I consider going back to it. Other then the drivers, everything else worked flawlessly, as it had all the media programs working, without having to look for and audio / video codecs, and Open Office well its free and works with my MS files. If I had a spare desktop I would like to set it up as a media server/or media pc, using myth tv or media portal, which I use now in windows, I think linux would be better suited for desktop pc's, its still kind of wonky with laptop wifi (broadcom) drivers.

Windows is completely useless. It is an abysmal operating system, but this doesn't make it useful.

I used XP until the point that I finally told myself "why am I using this useless operating system?". It's completely and utterly useless. It pretty much defines the word useless. Windows is about as useful as a watch with no battery in it.

If I wanted to run a slow and unstable OS (which would run mediocre software), I'd go with Windows. But a slow and unstable OS + mediocre software = cash for MS. Linux may cost no money (none of it), be more resource-friendly and be comfortably user-friendly, and it runs software that is 100x better than the mediocre stuff that's available for Windows. Sure, there's Wine, with hardly any compatibility issues, but it's better to stick with the Linux native stuff.

Time will tell when these Windows-lovers will decide to get the most potential out of their systems and use Linux instead. Most of the software that is developed for Windows is laughable, that's how bad it is. I can't believe that anybody would choose to use such poor software just so they can use an OS that is huge amount slower than Linux.

Words of advice: Quit being conned and use Linux because better software will never be developed for Windows. You're only making yourselves ill by using your mediocre software and choosing to get the least out of your system.

Remember my formula: A slow and unstable OS + mediocre software = cash for MS

That formula might come in handy for some of you people.

Yes the operating system is more resource demanding. However is very compatible with any kind of hardware. 75% of the time your running off of generic hardware drivers in linux. Which by the way won't get full potential out of your computer. The only company that even makes drivers for Linux is Intel.

Secondly it has taken one of my friends hours to find a valuable flash player and pdf plug-in for linux.

Maybe Win9X was unstable but Windows XP is far from unstable. I've never seen the BSOD in any XP computers i have worked on in my life. Also if a program does make your computer slow as molasses you can close out of it.[You just mad that it takes 3-5 Minutes to close out of a unstable program.] You don't even have to reboot your computer to close out of a bad program.

Also for all you Beryl fans out there XP has a customizable GUI Too. What do you think the new XP UI was all about. To make it easy for you and developers to visual tweak your desktop the way you want it.

Oh and about the resource demands. XP will run fine on your old, rusty 300Mhz Celeron Box w/ 192MB PC100 Memory and 6.4GB HD. You just have to know how to take care of your computer. I don't want to here any complaints from morons clicking on any random e-mail attachment possible. Also if you use ccleaner and defrag once a week you won't have a problem even with a computer that old. Did i forget an actual antivirus program.

Yes. No. So? So? No.

What did he pay for them?

No. You are phenomenally blessed, or were not looking, or have not lived very long. No. [Still no]. Yes you do, often.

Beryl? (What, from 18 months ago? There hasn't been a Beryl since then.) I've no idea why MS bothers. Developers, not users?

Massive. Pathetically, for a month, until the registry dies. I do. Complaints? You know what ccleaner means, and why you need a defragmenter, and what does that have to do with age, anyway? Yes you forgot that you also need a virus.

Only zealots bash people for criticizing their favorite OS; and as much as I dislike M$, I have to say the Linux and Mac zealots are far, far worse than any M$ fanboi. Just using Linux for the sake of using Linux is, well, a zealot thing.

CCleaner means crap cleaner i know. CCleaner also wipes out your registry and checks for registry issues and fixes them. [If you want firefox or ie to remember a website bookmark it.]

About age, All these Linux nerds are talking about a modern OS running on their 10-Year Old 300Mhz Pentium II w/ 192MB Memory and small 6.4GB Hard Drive. XP can do the same if you set the services you don't normally use to manual.[Which can be easily explainable to a computer illiterate person. Done it before with my 1.5 Year Old Tech Buisness and 3 Year Tech Coordination Position]

Vista maybe a resource pig but its not as bad as what people think. Heck i can run it comfortably on a 1.3Ghz AMD Duron w/ 768MB Memory and a 40GB Hard Drive. What i mean be comfortably is being able to run Doom 3, Quake 4, Openoffice, Mozilla Firefox and watch dvds. Have 7 Windows open at a time with no slowdown and a visually appealing operating system.

I also have a computer sitting around that i bought in late 2001 that came with Windows XP. I have been running off the same XP installation for 7 Years. The computer also upgraded to both Service Pack 1, 2, and just recently 3 with no problems. The computer is almost always on and now i use it as a server for my home network as well as a firewall. I also store all my music on and use the computer as an expensive sterio system. I also occasional use the computer as a dvd player.[I hook it to a projector]

Obviously you've never tried BeOS, now known as Yellow Tab. It was an absolutely fantastic OS that could very well have been the future OS for Macs, had it not been for Steve Jobs' return to Apple, and not releasing the specs to G series CPU's, and the subsequent development of NeXT into OSX.

The BeOS was subsequently ported to x86 CPU's, and was incredibly fast, light on resources, and would boot fully into the operating environment much faster than Windows, Mac OS, and any of the *nix flavors, including Linux. --On an AMD K6 233 It would function approximately 25 seconds after system POST. On a PII 400, that time was down to 15 seconds after system POST.

Sadly there were hardly ever any apps ported to run on it, and the apps for Be were limited at best.

Linux, as well as many of the other *nix flavors have a whole plethora of apps available for free, though admittedly many of them have limited commercial appeal outside of acedemia.

It's nice to see that you haven't criticized any of my favourite operating systems.