Of course, choosing an OS is, afterall, a matter of context (server? Desktop? Enterprise? Home user? Beginner? American? Chinese? Rich ? Poor ? etc.) and subjective preference sometimes linked to biological constraints (Artist? Scientist? child? Adult? Teenager ? Gamer ? Programmer, etc. etc.).
But, contrarily to Gothi[c], I think that comparing OS is very feasible. The only problem in “sloppy comparisons” is that the rules, the context, the limits are usually not well defined. Comparisons are only valid if the study protocol is well defined — as f0dder suggested, parameters need to be much more precise (whether it’s the context type, the time frame, the # of individual involved in the experiment, the usage type, etc. etc. : it’s endless and, of course, depends on the study). If the parameters are not strictly defined, and if the evaluation criterias are not clearly delimitated, well, yes, sorry... than it’s not possible to make any valid objective comparison. Anyway.
So, let’s be rather subjective here.
*To me*, “Linux” (I use the term Linux loosely, as a generic term encompassing more than only the kernel, but also the open source and collaboration philosophy behind it) is great and fun because :
1- it’s a very open (!) “OS project” — more than MS Windows, that’s for sure
: it allows almost anybody competent to collaborate (in different ways), transform, apply differently, etc. Nobody can argue with that. “More open” means of course “more freedom”, more
divergence. Freedom can often (but not always) be detrimental to productivity and order, but freedom is also very exciting in a world where centralization and homogenization is still often the only way. Because of that freedom and divergence,
2- “Linux” is able to change rapidly and constantly, in different directions, with the result that there are tons of different distros or flavors available (some of them being upgraded multiple times a year), destined to be applied in multiple contexts (Windows is more monolithic and has a more foreseeable evolution). These factors —
“newness” “variety” and even… “unpredictability” — are closely linked to the fun factor, partly because they stimulates curiosity and attention. (I also believe that the multiple faces of “Linux” will even change more radically in the next few years because of "emerging" superpowers like China and India — but that’s another sotry) ;
3- it’s possible to configure or change more aspects of the system -- as I already suggested in point 1 -- at a very “deep” level. It’s incredibly customizable. More so than windows. Because of that, it
stimulates the geek inside, the creative or engineer part in the computer user. It can even give a sense of purpose. Hum...
Of course, it’s also more secure, the community sense is great, it’s usually free (talking about the distros here), yadayadayada, etc. etc. But I won’t go into that without defining precise parameter !
I like “Linux”.
But, you know what ? Even though I’ve been chronically obsessed with the Linux beast since 97, I still use Windows everyday — there are too many things I can’t do as well with the software available in Linux. The stuff I need to do for my PhD. thesis (in French, ,don’t worry…) is just... not negotiable.
(I must say that the DonationCoder way of doing stuff is one thing that keeps me attached to Windows !
)
(edit : just added a few words to add clarity -- wrote too quiclky)
Show Posts
So I'm not the only parnoid soul around...
