gamer_extreme_101
Level: Smitemaster
Rank Points: 1939
Registered: 03-07-2004
IP: Logged
|
Re: Windows vs. Linux (+4)
As a user of both (And an installer of Gentoo, which itself was a quite tedious task), I can share a bit of my wisdom on the matter.
Truth be told, unlike all the rumors floating around in the technology world, a Linux box can perform essentially any task a Windows box can. However, there are a lot of reasons that can sway you either way.
Windows will always have Microsoft's power behind it. The vast majority of all program will at one point be ported to Windows. Even the large majority of Linux apps have a Win32 version or an equivalent of it. Chalk one point up for Windows.
Linux, however, has a more stable platform. In all the times I fiddled with a Linux machine, I have only made it crash once, but that was because I was compiling a large packages and a heat issue struck it. If you plan on running the thing 24/7 and coding large amounts at a time, Linux will save a lot of worry about wondering when it will crash. Linux ties it up.
Windows has an easier install process. Yes, you can buy a user-friendly distro such as Debian or Mandrake (There are more), but they do ultimatly require a lot of configuration to get the graphical environment up and running, configuring the kernal, and configuring X and a whole bunch of other text files can be a real PITA. With Windows, you select a couple options, leave for 45 minutes, select a couple more options, and you're pretty much good to go aside from driver updates. 2-1 for Windows.
However, Linux strikes back with a cleaner platform. The amount of viruses and other crapware hitting a Linux box are low, and that could be important when a Windows network gets struck down by a simple trojan or worm. My dad had that happen at his work: A virus hit one computer, infected the network, but the three RedHat boxes on the network were still happily running. Linux ties it up.
As Matt mentioned, hardware support can be iffy on Linux. Most notable, I had problems with an Audigy soundcard and a D-Link network card. Windows does all the dirty work for you, and all hardware made is made to work on Windows. 3-2.
Linux does have something that Windows will never have - a good learning experience to how an OS works and a better understanding of how your computer works. As a Software Engineer, that could come in very handy when porting apps and even creating them.
Well, looks like a draw, doesn't it? It all comes down to the stability versus the common and the known solution. Remember that Linux does have a Windows emulator (WINE) and an emulator that can be used on some DirectX Windows programs (Cedaga, I think). If you want to jump in as soon as you can, I would probably go with Windows simply because you are used to it.
Also remember that you can dual-boot Windows and Linux together happily. Pick a distro(version) that has a graphical installer and will do the majority of the work for you. Debian is nice in the fact it will handle dependencies(Programs/libraries that are required for a program to run) for you by downloading and installing them from the internet. It will take a lot of the confusement out of Linux. For more information on installing/dual booting, look on the distro's main site. They'll have a handbook up to help you through the process and let you understand how it works.
If you want to dual boot Linux with a NTFS Windows partition, I highly reccomend that you create a seperate FAT32 partition, as Linux can only safely read from NTFS, and writing is iffy at best.
*Phew* That was a long speech. Just remember that whatever you choose isn't 100% permanent. It isn't that hard to install another OS alongside the one you are using right now and go back and forth between coding and installing.
-Patrick, who's hands are very sore right now.
____________________________
--That guy with a million different aliases since he doesn't like this name anymore.
|
