But, the problem isn't just zealotry on the user side.
Folks developing (marketing) OS's also seem to think
their "solution" can apply to all problems/applications.
If it can, it does so poorly. If it does so "well",
it is bloated.
Windows as an application layer (NOT an OS in 3.0),
Windows as a desktop OS, Windows as an OS for PDA's
(WinCE), Windows as an OS for phones, Windows as
an embedded OS, etc.
"Well, what is it, guys?"
The RTOS I've developed for my current project would
be piss poor in a desktop environment. It doesn't
obsess over speed, has no notion of disks, or users,
or The Internet, etc.
OTOH, it is designed to be reliable, robust, secure and
seamlessly distributed. The application has no idea
that it is executing on a set of ~100 CPUs vs. "just one".
Nor *which* of those it is executing on at the current time.
On 05/15/2016 07:56 PM, email@example.com wrote:
Chrome OS. I prefer to have more control over my system. For one thing,
I DO NOT want to go through GOOGLE just to print a page to the networked
printer 2 feet away.
BTW, same thing for cloud thermostats, etc.. I'm NOT going to have
something like that controlled only by someone else's server.
Define "user friendly". If you mean you have a buncha Windows users
to give you help/info about yer new system, I agee. I've been using
Linux fer almost 13 yrs and never had anyone to help me, so hadda
solve all problems by myself (anda lotta O'Reilly books). In that
respect, Linux is not real user friendly. OTOH, lotta new Linux
distributions (distros) are VERY user friendly. As I mentioned
before, Mint is specially user friendly.
BTW, I can have most any Linux box fully tweaked and running smoothly
within a week or two. As fer Windows, I barely know how to fly XP,
let alone W7-W10. ;)
Define "fully tweaked".
Windows boxes work "out of the box". You're not busy dicking with the
window-manager-du-jour or the desktop-of-the-month.
Of course, if you're trying to set up IIS on windows, you're in
pretty much the same boat as apache under any of the Eunices.
OTOH, setting up a box to provide *services* (instead of as a
workstation) probably is easier in the FOSS world. At the very
least, you don't have to go chase down vendors of appropriate
"applications" to acquire them! (Though you may have to deal
with a package manager and countless dependencies that you'd
Setting up the Apache HTTP server on Windows isn't difficult. While the
Apache Foundation doesn't release Windows binaries, they are readily
available at sites like ApacheHaus. That avoids CAL hell. Unless you're
a lawyer, the CAL explanations are abstruse. One thing is for sure; if
you ask M$ if you need a CAL, the answer is yes.
But Apache isn't IIS! :> Frankly, I can't see any reason you'd want to run
a web service under windows -- even one of the "server" variants! It
wasn't designed with that sort of application in mind (just like you
wouldn't use Linux for real-time work).
Saying you *can* do <something> isn't the same as saying it's
(I can dig a trench with a shovel. But, I surely wouldn't TRY!)
On 5/14/2016 7:10 PM, firstname.lastname@example.org wrote:
"Real-time" requires timeliness guarantees. Linux was not designed with
that in mind.
What *guarantees* does an application have that it will complete by
a particular deadline? What mechanisms does the OS provide to alert
it to the fact that its deadline has passed?
Ask these questions of the OS each time your application requests
some "service" from the OS -- read a disk file, request a block of
(physical) memory, activate another process/task, etc.
The same is true of DOS/Windows/etc. The "real-time" solution with
these systems is "buy a faster computer -- and HOPE!" (cuz some
other job can get introduced that eats up resources that you HOPED
would be yours!)
I have set up an Apache/PHP server on Windows, but I decided to use
Linux instead, to make it more like the public server I use (Rackspace,
Red Hat Linux). There are several ways PHP is different on Windows.
That, and I often find solutions to my Linux problems on the internet.
in 2010, I heard about he Ubuntu "live CD", and downloaded the ISO,
burned it and booted. I was using Firefox MUCH more quickly than with
Also, I really prefer free software. It's not about the money (despite
how many people make up that stuff), but about the impediments they put
in commercial software because they ASSUME you're a thief.
I don't see that. I can understand them not wanting you to buy
one copy and use five -- regardless of the reasoning that might "sound
OK" (I like Borland's "like a book" analogy -- so its not necessarily
bound to a machine).
Aside from compiler/debugger, most FOSS applications just aren't up to
par, in my opinion. They are missing capabilities and suffer from
user interfaces that "just happened" instead of "being designed".
Too often, the UI is bolted onto something that wasn't designed
with it in mind. E.g., automatically rewriting rc files instead
of abandoning them (will the app crash if I go in and muck up the file
I'm presently drafting a technical letter (no, not an email -- one that
will actually travel on a plane! :> ). I wouldn't even think of
using a "productivity suite" (e.g., MSOffice) -- let alone a crippled
FOSS version of same. I'd spend all my time bouncing back and forth
between applications trying to piece together the various graphics
and inserts that I'll need. Instead, I'll do it all in FrameMaker
and have a polished "product", when done.
The appeal free software has to me is that I can *fix* it without
waiting for the vendor to decide "my problem" is worth their
attention. AND, not have to embrace a bunch of other "fixes"/changes
at the same time (which may or may not actually work!).
I can also verify ambiguities in the documentation: "Hmmm... it SAYS
that it does THIS. But, the code shows it doing THAT!"
Although I had previous computer experience back in the punch card
days...I had gotten out of the field entirely by 1982 and had close to
zero experience at the time. Once I learned Win95 I needed a bigger
challenge and that was Linux.
I was so ignorant at the time, i did not even know what a partition was.
Linux was an excellent learning experience.
Yes, as I mentioned in another thread, I just gave unsophisticated users
Linux machines to use and they needed no special instructions
On 5/13/2016 5:30 PM, email@example.com wrote:
Don't run on PC's.
MP/M, ISIS-II, ZRDOS, ZDOS, VRTX, QNX, FreeDOS, MULTICS, TOPS-10, DG/UX,
AIX, ZCPR3, RTX11, UNIX, MINIX, XENIX, AmigaOS, NeXTSTEP, etc.
It's unfortunate that the one most people think about (Windows)
is probably the most boring...
HomeOwnersHub.com is a website for homeowners and building and maintenance pros. It is not affiliated with any of the manufacturers or service providers discussed here.
All logos and trade names are the property of their respective owners.