what is it you dont like about linux

we ve heard enough about windows this and windows that, now lets look at th e draw backs in linux that often frustrate us.

I like office 2007 features and I use track changes alot which I dont get when I am on linux box. the problem of compactibility is making linux like.. oh shit !! why now


pls share your experince

note
sose doesnt belong to any school of thougt regarding operating systems

We'll never hear enough about Windows. Face it, Windows runs the business and they always will.

Don't compare Linux and Windows, collaborate and use them together for an even more powerful tool.

Stupid analogy:

You have apple juice, orange juice, and a number of fruit juices. When they start mixing them and creating this odd concoctions, they taste super good. Its no different in the gEEk world, just be careful around your keyboard. :lol:


Cheers,

ZiPPy

good point zippy

just want to hear from some ardent followers of lord Linux maybe they can make some confess I guess.

Office 2007 has good features and maybe its user interface from usability stand point is great, but can we just take one product and compare it to Linux?

it is not the Open Source Developers fault if they don't have any documentations, API, or what it needs to make what they code 100% compatible with Windows Product.

For Business I think you can replace windows and start using Linux as Business environment Solution, it is just people feel reluctant to make the move and switch into products other than Microsoft.

OpenOffice is a good product has the features for business use and it is compatible with MS office other than 2007. I know you will not get the look and feel the same when you make something in OpenOffice and open it in MS Office like advance table structures, but still it is not their fault in such issues.

how about Evolution or Thunderbird, they are great and do the job as MS outlook can do, and evolution has some great features Outlook don't have. have you tried recently in outlook 2007 when you got this big mail full of replies and you want to print just a paragraph or some selected lines and you only have the Memo Style feature so you can only print the whole 30 page instead the ones you only need.

How about Vista, it has a nice GUI but it crashes often, a memory hunger, and once you install applications and start using it for a couple of months it starts getting slower and slower just like that. although you have did nothing big.

Vista Repair! have anyone notice that we cannot repair vista, only the boot loader and if you delete the boot folder and related files it doesn't recreate them and re-install the boot from scratch.

not to mention booting from Linux-based distro to Clean windows from viruses and make repairs

As a System/Network technician, Linux is doing a nice job for me, I have all the applications I may need for troubleshooting for free and they are powerful enough, while on windows I would have to look around and try to find simple and free tools that wold do the same job.

we have been facing problems with ISA since ever, and we are currently doing our plans to start deploying IPCop instead.

so I guess for IT people they would prefer Linux in their troubleshooting and in their servers deployment.

My fears have been colmfirmed. I was hoping that Mr Linux protagonists like sys-halt will not hijack this trend wi th Linux is better than windows in a thousand ways. what I wanted was that linux users should realistically tell us short comings in linux OS that bugs them as compared to other OSes


sys-halt though you are making a point

thanks

Hoping that I don't get bashed or get another "welcome to Linux" lecture for this, I'll tell you what I don't like about Linux :evil:! Note that "don't like" != "refuse to learn or accept." I embrace, learn, and understand different technology. If I find that the technology has the potential of improving my productivity, enjoyability, or overall lifestyle, I adapt to the difference and use the technology with other technology to get TWICE the benefit, as ZiPPy said. If the different technology has no benefit, I absorb what it has to teach me and then I put the technology away.

Here are a few things:

-File system organization -- I'm still having a hard time adapting to it. Some of the names of the folders are just not as intuitive as those in Windows LOL. How am I supposed to instinctively know that the /etc directory is where configuration files are stored? Or that built-in system programs are in /sbin and /bin? The names seem arbitrary. You can't get any more intuitive in folder names than "System32" and "Program Files."

-Installing programs -- Numerous steps involved in installing a program (i.e.: uncompressing, installing dependencies, installing development environment to be able to compile application, configuring the app, etc). Thankfully, this is slowly diminishing as a problem.

-Having to run certain apps as a root user -- My school of thought is as follows: The user should be the one that is responsible and intelligent about "restricting" himself/herself from system components and functions that can potentially break the system. If I built and configured a Linux box, and I'm the only user on it, I don't need it to tell me that I need to run something as root and enter a secondary password (which I defined when I built it) to run certain programs. Note that I also dislike UAC in Vista. I can understand this extra layer of security being beneficial in a domain environment if you're a domain admin, but in a standalone PC? It's more of an inconvenience than a security risk. I know I can just run as root the whole time, but it's just not the same.

-System hardware devices being represented as system files (inside of /dev) -- can it get any weirder?