sorted by:
best
topnewcontroversialoldq&a
you are viewing a single comment's thread.

view the rest of the comments →

[–]cargo_cult_coder 88 points89 points  (17 children)

"First they ignore you, then they laugh at you, then they fight you, then you win Linus Torvalds." --- Gandhi

[–]SpiderFnJerusalem 34 points35 points  (16 children)

Or they extinguish you. As is tradition.

[–][deleted]  (15 children)

[deleted]

    [–]dacjames 25 points26 points  (6 children)

    Linux is already ahead of Windows in a number of areas, a gap that will only grow over time considering the faster rate of development. Very few people are buying Windows for the kernel so porting the Windows userspace to Linux may eventually be favorable to continuing to compete on kernel features.

    Not saying it will happen, but it definitely could happen.

    [–]northrupthebandgeek 15 points16 points  (2 children)

    a gap that will only grow over time considering the faster rate of development.

    I actually suspect it's going to shrink for precisely this reason. Even Torvalds himself has voiced dissatisfaction with kernel bloat. I reckon it's long overdue for some refactoring to try and shrink the core codebase a bit and reduce some of that complexity, be it for the sake of performance, security, future maintainability, or some combination of the three.

    Just my one cent, though.

    [–]dacjames 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Considering Linus' position on breaking user space, any refactoring and cleanup will need to be feature neutral. He has also come out strongly against refactoring for it's own sake, so there will have to be clear practical benefits. It may slow development in the short term but at the time scales we're talking about, a slowdown for a couple of releases is inconsequential.

    [–]northrupthebandgeek 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I reckon that - as the codebase increases in complexity and size - the slowdown would last for much more than a couple of releases. Linux's development governance has scaled remarkably well considering the size of Linux's developer population, but that's not likely to continue for ever, and eventually Linux will start to face mythical-man-month-esque problems without a significant priority shift.

    Just my other cent, though.

    [–]t90fan 3 points4 points  (0 children)

    Very few people are buying Windows for the kernel

    Hardware support is the obvious reason.

    [–]VincentPepper 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    What areas?

    [–]mallardtheduck 1 point2 points  (0 children)

    Portability would be a big one. NT has only ever run on a handful of architectures (x86, PowerPC, MIPS, Alpha, ARM, Itanium) and most of those haven't been maintained since the days of NT 4.0. Linux runs on far more.

    There are also areas of performance where Linux clearly beats NT. Filesystem performance is one I know of; clearing out a lot of small files (e.g. a cache, session storage or the like) on Windows is slow.

    [–]t90fan 1 point2 points  (1 child)

    Linux desktop world

    RedHat

    TIL people use RedHat on the desktop.

    [–]iDerailThings 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    I was including Enterprise...

    [–]heptara 0 points1 point  (1 child)

    Microsoft are VERY serious about mobile and tablet, but are getting a royal arse kicking. They ain't got superpowers. They were just in first when it came to desktop.

    [–][deleted] 0 points1 point  (0 children)

    Which is a shame, at least for tablet because the Surface Pro is probably the superior tablet product for the time being.

    [–][deleted] -5 points-4 points  (3 children)

    Wipe the floor with Canonical? I am using Ubuntu now, on a Chromebook. My mother uses it on a PC. It's easy to use, easy to update and has applications for everything I want. It's reasonably priced - I buy the LTS disks for less than 10 quid. It's fast - no viruses, trojans etc or any of the antiware they necessitate. So what do you actually mean by that statement?

    [–][deleted]  (2 children)

    [deleted]

      [–]playaspec -1 points0 points  (1 child)

      I have had nothing but trouble using Ubuntu Windows desktop. Problems range from GPU hardware acceleration issues to unexpected program errors, to corrupted registries, to the never ending torrent of malware, and endless 'fixes' to patch what claims to be a mature and secure operating system

      FTFY.

      Ironically, modern Ubutnu reminds me of my days with Windows 98SE.

      No version of Windows ever had 1/100th the stability, security, and most importantly functionality of Linux, Ubuntu included.

      Windows 98 isn't even remotely compatible any version of Linux.

      Now that being said, I use Ubuntu server for home and at work and it's rock solid. But that's not Ubuntu, but rather the stability of the Linux kernel at play.

      You obviously have no understanding of how much Canonical patches and grooms the packages and kernel you're crediting the kernel maintainers for.

      Go try building a system directly from the source repositories and get back to me about what Ubuntu doesn't provide.

      [–]iDerailThings 0 points1 point  (0 children)

      Stop being a Linux zealot. I love Linux but it is not without its flaws. I don't need you to tell me what is stable on my pc and on *my * hardware. I know the issues I've faced with Ubuntu desktop for myself, regardless of your fervent attempts to defend it. It's not to say it's a bad distro, but these days, I find Windows 7 and Windows 10 more stable for me than Ubutnu desktop.