Windows or something else....
Moderator: General Moderators
Windows or something else....
I am noticing more and more that there are a good number of Windows users. I'm not sure why this suprises me, but I though it might be interesting to see just what the percentage of users are on windows as opposed to the various 'nixes.
Sorry
To be honest with you Volka, I never considered a multi option. I'm sorry. I guess I'm just narrow minded.
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
- Sevengraff
- Forum Contributor
- Posts: 232
- Joined: Thu Apr 25, 2002 9:34 pm
- Location: California USA
- Contact:
SunOS
Hey Volka,
Let's make sure we are on the same page here. When you say SunOS, are we talking about Solaris? If not, what are the differences?
I had Solaris 2.6 (I think it was) back in '98 and '99 when they gave it away for free for a limited period of time. I didn't really like it that much I seem to remember. However, at that time, I was still cutting my teeth with the Unix way of doing things. Windows was a habit that died hard.
later on,
BDKR (TRC)
Let's make sure we are on the same page here. When you say SunOS, are we talking about Solaris? If not, what are the differences?
I had Solaris 2.6 (I think it was) back in '98 and '99 when they gave it away for free for a limited period of time. I didn't really like it that much I seem to remember. However, at that time, I was still cutting my teeth with the Unix way of doing things. Windows was a habit that died hard.
later on,
BDKR (TRC)
The current version is 9 (I think). You may use it for free (at home for sure, at work I don't know). There has been a free download for it, but I'm not quite sure if it wasn't for SPARC only - got my copy from one of our university admins 
The thing that impressed me most was that feature I need least (lack of hardware): processor hot-swap
The thing that impressed me most was that feature I need least (lack of hardware): processor hot-swap
Windows
I guess windows has won!
Resume: This platform is easiest of all for programming... or not?
And the winner is....?
To be honest with you, i don' t think Windows has won. As for the user base of this community, in spite of how few people bothered to vote, I would say yes. But overall, I'd say otherwise.
And that's why I was suprised about continuing to hear from so many that are having troubles while using Windows.
If Windows is easier to program on, what makes it easier? Some of that may be that it's an easier to use platform. However, if you want real power and flexibility, Windows is not the OS to rely on.
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
And that's why I was suprised about continuing to hear from so many that are having troubles while using Windows.
If Windows is easier to program on, what makes it easier? Some of that may be that it's an easier to use platform. However, if you want real power and flexibility, Windows is not the OS to rely on.
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
'Nix
Hey Mikeq,
That question is tough to answer because I don't know where to start.
I'll just mention some of the things that can be done with Linux as an example. Much of these same things can done with FreeBSD as well. I will leave out the commercial Unixes since they want you to pay big money and don't offer as much right out of the box so to speak.
:: Network routing and packet filtering built in to the Kernel.
:: I built multiple redundant FLOPPY based firewalls using FloppyFW for my companies back end using old as dirt IBM 133Mhz workstations. Got rid of the hard drives and put in two network cards and I was off to the races.
:: I got around the issue of only being able to have one default gateway by using the NAT capabilites built in to the 2.4 NetFilter package on the firewall side and static routes on the cluster manager side using a 2.2 kernel.
:: Packet forwarding to particular services in the backend based on entry port.
:: Cluster management and load balancing using 2.2 kernel. This stuff can be had for nothing using the LVS project or with support and for very cheap using TurboCluster from TurboLinux.
:: Everything needed to build routers as opposed to paying Cisco big dollars can be used right out of the Linux Kernel. Check freesco.org. You may still need hardware based on your provider. Being down in Venezuela, building our own routers is something we are seriously considering due to power issues, lack of support and parts (for our cisco stuff), the expense of support and parts (for our cisco stuff), and the fact that with the right cards (cyclaces.com), we could provide our own solutions without being slaves to someone else. Thanx again Tux!
:: IP aliasing. I can do tons of wonderful things with this one.
:: TCP splicing. Tough to explain. Google is your freind.
:: A well thought out architecture that doesn't crash as a result of a buggy program. A process may go stupid on you, but it seldom affects the kernel, and thereby the system.
:: GCC (a compiler) and tons of libs with support for what seems like every language on the face of the earth. Even VB is being ported to it (not by Microsoft I might add).
:: The ability to run as a Windows logon server / domain controller / or to control a Windows network in general using SaMBa. Windows has tried to break this a couple of times as if the SMB protocol was originally theres. It isn't!
:: Support for what seems like every disk format on the face of the earth. I can fire up my machine and mount any Micorosoft, Apple, or a whatever drive type that I want. Read and write to them: the whole nine yards.
:: Journaling file system support via Rieser and ext3.
:: Not married to an interface. What does that mean? It means that when that pretty Windows 9x/NT/2000/XP front end crashes, it often affects the kernel as well. At that point, you are more than likely going to have to reboot. In Linux, if X or a window manager goes south, so what!. The kernel is a couple of layers below and never feels the pain.
:: I don't have to restart the machine to update environment variables. This may not seem like a big deal, but at the enterprise level, this can cost tons of money!
:: And the worst thing in the world to a mouse user: the command line!
I can go on and on, but I don't see the point. Unix, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris are all a bit tougher to learn, but once learned, the flexibility and power is mind boggling compared to Windows. The time I spent banging my head against the wall learning LInux is paying off (literally) in a multitude of ways.
And yes, many of the above things can be done with Windows, but at what expense?
Or, "but how effecient is it?" Probably not very.
I could never do the routing stuff (as an example) I've been able to do with windows unless someone ports the linux stuff over, and even then, there is still the overhead of the user interface. The system would instantly be far less effecient as a result of all that overhead. Somebody make some software, but then I prolly have to pay a grip for it. And if I can have it for free, then why?
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
That question is tough to answer because I don't know where to start.
I'll just mention some of the things that can be done with Linux as an example. Much of these same things can done with FreeBSD as well. I will leave out the commercial Unixes since they want you to pay big money and don't offer as much right out of the box so to speak.
:: Network routing and packet filtering built in to the Kernel.
:: I built multiple redundant FLOPPY based firewalls using FloppyFW for my companies back end using old as dirt IBM 133Mhz workstations. Got rid of the hard drives and put in two network cards and I was off to the races.
:: I got around the issue of only being able to have one default gateway by using the NAT capabilites built in to the 2.4 NetFilter package on the firewall side and static routes on the cluster manager side using a 2.2 kernel.
:: Packet forwarding to particular services in the backend based on entry port.
:: Cluster management and load balancing using 2.2 kernel. This stuff can be had for nothing using the LVS project or with support and for very cheap using TurboCluster from TurboLinux.
:: Everything needed to build routers as opposed to paying Cisco big dollars can be used right out of the Linux Kernel. Check freesco.org. You may still need hardware based on your provider. Being down in Venezuela, building our own routers is something we are seriously considering due to power issues, lack of support and parts (for our cisco stuff), the expense of support and parts (for our cisco stuff), and the fact that with the right cards (cyclaces.com), we could provide our own solutions without being slaves to someone else. Thanx again Tux!
:: IP aliasing. I can do tons of wonderful things with this one.
:: TCP splicing. Tough to explain. Google is your freind.
:: A well thought out architecture that doesn't crash as a result of a buggy program. A process may go stupid on you, but it seldom affects the kernel, and thereby the system.
:: GCC (a compiler) and tons of libs with support for what seems like every language on the face of the earth. Even VB is being ported to it (not by Microsoft I might add).
:: The ability to run as a Windows logon server / domain controller / or to control a Windows network in general using SaMBa. Windows has tried to break this a couple of times as if the SMB protocol was originally theres. It isn't!
:: Support for what seems like every disk format on the face of the earth. I can fire up my machine and mount any Micorosoft, Apple, or a whatever drive type that I want. Read and write to them: the whole nine yards.
:: Journaling file system support via Rieser and ext3.
:: Not married to an interface. What does that mean? It means that when that pretty Windows 9x/NT/2000/XP front end crashes, it often affects the kernel as well. At that point, you are more than likely going to have to reboot. In Linux, if X or a window manager goes south, so what!. The kernel is a couple of layers below and never feels the pain.
:: I don't have to restart the machine to update environment variables. This may not seem like a big deal, but at the enterprise level, this can cost tons of money!
:: And the worst thing in the world to a mouse user: the command line!
I can go on and on, but I don't see the point. Unix, Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris are all a bit tougher to learn, but once learned, the flexibility and power is mind boggling compared to Windows. The time I spent banging my head against the wall learning LInux is paying off (literally) in a multitude of ways.
And yes, many of the above things can be done with Windows, but at what expense?
Or, "but how effecient is it?" Probably not very.
I could never do the routing stuff (as an example) I've been able to do with windows unless someone ports the linux stuff over, and even then, there is still the overhead of the user interface. The system would instantly be far less effecient as a result of all that overhead. Somebody make some software, but then I prolly have to pay a grip for it. And if I can have it for free, then why?
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
Sort of an odd poll. People may develop (code) on Windows, but then upload the script to a Linux server. Are you developing on Windows or Linux? Honestly, for me, the editor location isn't important, but where you run the results from in the end.
BDKR: While all those reasons are valid, they are almost moot because there are things that Windows is doing that Linux doesn't. Honestly, the ability to interface with all the MS products together is very nice, and Office will be tough to beat (And no, I don't think Open Office is there yet, I used some of the more poweful features in Word, and I miss them in OO).
However, before you go thinking I am an MS weanie, let me say this: MS licensing is horrible, and yes, the fact that the interface is tied to the kernel is disasterous.
For me, those two reasons are the big reasons, the big problem areas. Massive licensing restrictions and crashes are just a problem.
Mac OS X looks like a goodl alternative to those that don't want to loose the ease of use, but I dont want to loose all my PC equipment, which is why I keep considering Mandrake as a good entry Linux distro.
BDKR: While all those reasons are valid, they are almost moot because there are things that Windows is doing that Linux doesn't. Honestly, the ability to interface with all the MS products together is very nice, and Office will be tough to beat (And no, I don't think Open Office is there yet, I used some of the more poweful features in Word, and I miss them in OO).
However, before you go thinking I am an MS weanie, let me say this: MS licensing is horrible, and yes, the fact that the interface is tied to the kernel is disasterous.
For me, those two reasons are the big reasons, the big problem areas. Massive licensing restrictions and crashes are just a problem.
Mac OS X looks like a goodl alternative to those that don't want to loose the ease of use, but I dont want to loose all my PC equipment, which is why I keep considering Mandrake as a good entry Linux distro.
Oddities and moot points
Hi Jason,
I'm not too sure that the poll is so strange. I've allways believed (and been told) that the development environment should match, as closely as possible, the user, business environment. And the more you delve into some of PHP's lesser used functions (PCNTL as an example), the more important this kind of thing becomes. Some things with PHP just can't be done on a Windows platform.
You could also de-bug each new change to your script by uploading it to your host. LOL! Thats a
and less than effecient way to get down the road.
As for those reasons I noted to justify what I said about Linux, I'm not too sure that moot is the word. Perhaps as a comparison, but that wasn't really what we were after anyways. However, I do hear and acknowledge what you are saying.
But honestly, who wants to interface with all the MS products?
Now the above is a rhetorical question. There are those that do and others that don't. I don't particulary care about it. There are some progs that I feel are extremely powerful in Windows, and allmost all of them have their equivalents in Linux. As for Open Office, it's far too new on the scene to even be considered. Same with KOffice. Star Office on the other hand is every bit as tough and stronger in some areas.
I'll back up some of what I said above and a lot of what you said in your post and say that it makes more sense for small and medium (and perhaps even large) businesses to keep an OS like Windows on the desktop simply becuase of it's ease of use and hand holding. It als makes a ton of sense to go in the back room with the other propellor hat wearing poindexters and replace all the servers with Linux or FreeBSD. That's an extremely sane (from a cost point of view) way of looking at it as opposed to pimpin' out your secretary and kids to pay Bill Gates.
It seems to me that Windows is a great work station and poor for much else. I include the server products in that as well. On the other hand, Linux can be a great work station and great at a good deal of other things too if you learn it.
And no, I don't think you are an MS:puke or weanie. Besides, if I ever get back to doing some gaming (and I really want the new Jedi Knight using the q3 engine), I'll be making space for a Winthroes, err..., Windows partiton.
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
I'm not too sure that the poll is so strange. I've allways believed (and been told) that the development environment should match, as closely as possible, the user, business environment. And the more you delve into some of PHP's lesser used functions (PCNTL as an example), the more important this kind of thing becomes. Some things with PHP just can't be done on a Windows platform.
You could also de-bug each new change to your script by uploading it to your host. LOL! Thats a
As for those reasons I noted to justify what I said about Linux, I'm not too sure that moot is the word. Perhaps as a comparison, but that wasn't really what we were after anyways. However, I do hear and acknowledge what you are saying.
But honestly, who wants to interface with all the MS products?
Now the above is a rhetorical question. There are those that do and others that don't. I don't particulary care about it. There are some progs that I feel are extremely powerful in Windows, and allmost all of them have their equivalents in Linux. As for Open Office, it's far too new on the scene to even be considered. Same with KOffice. Star Office on the other hand is every bit as tough and stronger in some areas.
I'll back up some of what I said above and a lot of what you said in your post and say that it makes more sense for small and medium (and perhaps even large) businesses to keep an OS like Windows on the desktop simply becuase of it's ease of use and hand holding. It als makes a ton of sense to go in the back room with the other propellor hat wearing poindexters and replace all the servers with Linux or FreeBSD. That's an extremely sane (from a cost point of view) way of looking at it as opposed to pimpin' out your secretary and kids to pay Bill Gates.
It seems to me that Windows is a great work station and poor for much else. I include the server products in that as well. On the other hand, Linux can be a great work station and great at a good deal of other things too if you learn it.
And no, I don't think you are an MS:puke or weanie. Besides, if I ever get back to doing some gaming (and I really want the new Jedi Knight using the q3 engine), I'll be making space for a Winthroes, err..., Windows partiton.
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
Mandrake
Oh..., err.... , one more thing Jason. Mandrake is a wonderful distribution! It's easily the most beautiful of them all. Also has the best out of the box support for various fonts and possibly the most mature hardware configuration of the bunch (that's an SuSE strong point too). There are those that knock it (Hard core Red Hat pukes), but for me, there is nothing like an eye pleasing user enviorment sitting on top of the Linux Kernel.
If you've got horsepower, and who doesn't these days, use Enlightenment as the Window Manager. Blows doors on the Windows interface!
(That reminds me. Why does it take a PIII 1Ghz workstation 5+ minutes to boot Windows 2K Professional?)
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)
If you've got horsepower, and who doesn't these days, use Enlightenment as the Window Manager. Blows doors on the Windows interface!
(That reminds me. Why does it take a PIII 1Ghz workstation 5+ minutes to boot Windows 2K Professional?)
Later on,
BDKR (TRC)