5 ways Linux is better than windows

[timurs022]

Here are 5 ways Linux is better than windows!

1. smaller ISO files
2. A lot of distributions to choose from depending on your needs.
3. A LOT less bloatware.
4 (obviously) a better command prompt.
5. Actually good forums.

LINUX PLEASE MAKE EXE FILES EXECUTABLE PLEASE

 

[wendy-lebaron]

LINUX PLEASE MAKE EXE FILES EXECUTABLE PLEASE

This is a pun, right?

Point (1) is not necessarily true in Ubuntu's case, as the Kylin and Studio ISO's could indicate, and the "average" eventually will become 4GiB, ie. one file too large to fit into a "fat32" partition while all distros go 64-bit only (eg. Debian perhaps beginning in v13 "Trixie"). A few people actually prefer IMG files such as how EasyOS is distributed... much easier to install. The MX Linux and Puppy Linux trick to "remaster" ISO requires running in live mode all the time which could get tiresome after a while.

Point (2) doesn't matter a lot since a lot of distributions look and feel alike, especially those based on Arch Linux. There are many more based on Debian which suffer the same disadvantages such as very slow "dpkg" and related utilities. Even worse a few are trying to cater to users who expect Linux to behave like MacOS or Windows as much as possible, see elementary OS, Kumander, LinuxFX and a few others. Finally a few independent operating systems like Solus and Void just aren't getting a lot of attention, will always be for the challenge lovers and the elite intellectuals.

Point (3) is just not true. "systemd" is a very good lasting example of what makes people angry about Linux. Windows and MacOS could only get ahead but Linux isn't doing much better about this because people don't want to sacrifice their comfort. FreeBSD and its act-alikes are becoming winners at killing the bloat, that's why more purists are migrating to them and away from Linux, willing to sacrifice convenience.

Points (4) and (5) are subjective. Which forums? I agree this one, for example.

 

[Aristarchus]

ad 1) does not matter
ad 2) annoyance. Why so many distros with negligible differences. The only thing is that one can (make own distro).
Mainy there is RH, Debian/Ubuntu, Slackware, OpenSuse, and newer Arch and Gentoo, LFS. The rest is just a noise.
ad 3) installed by default? Depends on distro
ad 4) I don't have experience with MS Windows prompt. I don't have windows at home. At work system is locked.
ad 5) see ad 4
For me important is:
ad 6) better security (to configure, defaults may not be that great).
ad 7) better privacy oriented design (with some exceptions in the past)
ad 8) open source
ad 9) customization
ad 10) free? Personally I don't mind paying for someone's effort.

 

[wendy-lebaron]

(6) and (7) are subjective too, depends too much on the user because "I don't want to be locked out of my own stuff". (Wanted to use a 4-letter word in place of "stuff" to indicate the "ah-tee-tood".)

(8) and (9) are not advantages anymore by this time. How many projects on Github and Sourceforge are unfinished, are abandoned, do not compile, do not work because "your GLIBC is too old"? Once I downloaded a music plug-in file supposedly for Linux, in LV2 format, the container had a DLL- not a SO-suffix file inside! The ugly side of Github sometimes. :/

(EDIT: I might add I checked out that DLL file with "od" utility. It started with "MZ" which is on every Windows EXE file including nearly all 32-bit DLL's at least. I didn't dare touch it. A Linux "elf" executable file has "ELF" near the beginning of it.)

(10) a few corporations which don't understand (8) and (9) are trying to do something about that, which is sad.

 

[Aristarchus]

ad 6 better security (to configure, defaults may not be that great): I have hardened kernel with all options that I need and can handle enabled, configured apparmor, tomoyo. True separation of root and user privileges.
ad 7) I doubt that one can compete with Microsoft in terms of intrusion into user's privacy. If you want extreme privacy oriented OS try Qubes (Fedora based). No such thing in MS world.

In general linux, BSD expect some knowledge. This is the reason I don't suggest linux/BSD to anyone unless asked. And then with reservations: in mid 90' internet was slow and scarce. OpenBSD was asking to configure disk slices on black screen without any help. RedHat was not better But I wanted to learn.
Linux does not provide all I need so I use my wife's macbook. But no OS does. So the choice is a compromise: what is that you need and what makes you comfortable.

 

[The Duck]

3. A LOT less bloatware.

Most Linux distros come with to much default software bloat that will never be used.

All that needs to be installed by default is the bare minimal for a user to get started.

Let the user install only the software the user wants and needs.

I only want software on my hard drive that I use.

Fortunately I can safely remove most of the default software bloat from my installs.

Bare minimal iso from the git-go is the way all OSs should come by default imo.

And we all know what is said about opinions.

 

[wendy-lebaron]

One more thing about bloatware.

Many people like me, must have at least two Linux installations going. Because one might be a bit behind in technology according to libraries. The other day I tried to open a pluggable disk in the file manager and it outright refused, forwarding the error message from "mount" utility. When I tried to repair with "fsck" it came back with "Get a newer version of fsck!" Boy this message so peaked me off which made me fail installing Linux at least twice. I was forced to go into a different Linux OS (I have up to 20 to choose from but wizardfromoz is the grand winner around here) which had a later GLIBC and other things to fix that disk so I could see the files with a file manager.

The thing was, I plugged that same disk into one of the different Linux OS's, into the same file manager and it produced no problems. Before I fixed it.

Some people cannot afford two computers and insist in having one operating system they are constantly going into. MacOS and Windows cost money because it has to work this way and if it doesn't, well, give up and try to do the same thing with portable phone or with iPad descendant. With Linux we have a bunch of cute flightless birds which aren't perfect and that's why each of us demanding users might have to keep more than one. <3

 

[MikeRocor]

Most Linux distros come with to much default software bloat that will never be used.

All that needs to be installed by default is the bare minimal for a user to get started.

Let the user install only the software the user wants and needs.

I only want software on my hard drive that I use.

Fortunately I can safely remove most of the default software bloat from my installs.

Bare minimal iso from the git-go is the way all OSs should come by default imo.

And we all know what is said about opinions.

What you said! I shake my head when I read about a "light" distro that comes in a 500 MB ISO.

Give me the bare minimum and I'll install my own bloat, thank you very much! At least then it's my bloat. I install this iiiittty biiittty little OS, then drop in stuff like libreoffice and the gimp, even though I very rarely actually use either of those. The whole mess occupies about 720 MB on disk now, not counting my day-to-day data, but all the apps are there because I want them there.

 

[bob466]

I know there's thousands more reasons why Linux is so much better than windoze.

LINUX PLEASE MAKE EXE FILES EXECUTABLE PLEASE

Really...do you know why Linux doesn't have .exe flies...it's all about security...something m$ doesn't care much about.

 

[Condobloke]

@timurs022, By now you will no doubt have realised that .exe files have no place in Linux.

Why? ....the answer can be a bit complex......but put simply different architectures stop it happening.
You can execute them in things like Wine and various other "compatibility layers"....which make the magic happen...hopefully.
WIne etc are not as good as they are cracked up to be....no doubt you will experiment with them....personally I leave that until you have the basics somewhat mastered.

Linux and Windows executables use different formats. Linux uses the ELF format on most architectures, while Windows uses the PE format. ELF is better suited to the way Linux manages shared libraries, and PE is better suited to the way Windows manages shared libraries, but there's no fundamental reason why Linux couldn't execute PE executables or Windows ELF executables. In fact Linux can execute PE executables, through Wine.
The difficulty is that Windows and Linux have completely different APIs: they have different kernel interfaces and sets of libraries. So to actually run a Windows application, Linux would need to emulate all the API calls that the application makes. That's a lot of work. Wine does it to some extent, but it's very hard, especially since the maker of Windows doesn't cooperate. You can compare it with, say, learning English when your native language is Chinese: the executable format is the alphabet (not that hard to master), the API is the vocabulary (takes years to get to a level where you can start reading literature).

In the blue print is a blurb i pulled from a search engine....there are 100's of answers similar to that....and all confusing in their own way.

Please....ignore the die hards and just concentrate on learning the simplicity of Linux.

Please.....Just use Linux on a usb stick on your pc/laptop in what is called a LIVE environment. It will NOT do any harm to whatever windows you have installed

The possibility of running an exe in Linux does exist...but it is way too complicated for someone just starting out.
For now...leave it alone and learn the simple basics

You probably/definitely have apps you use in windows that you want to use in Linux.

There is a site : https://alternativeto.net/
It has long, long lists of apps that substitute for just any other app out there. Each one is marked as being suitable for Linux, Mac, windows etc etc...
BUT....start at the beginning
1. Download Linux Mint 21.2 and learn how to ""burn"" it to a usb stick (4gb or better still 8gb)....the burn' is carried out using balena etcher
2. Learn how to boot your pc to that usb stick.....sometimes a bit tricky, but definitely can be done. You will need to tell us th emake and model of your pc/laptop for us to help with that
3. TRY Linux Mint out (this called a LIVE environment....it is exactly the same as a proper install EXCEPT it does NOT run on the hard drive or SSD)...explore it....do not be afraid to click and click and do whatever comes to mind.
If by some miracle you manage to BREAK linux mint....don't panic...just take the usb stick out, (properly).....put it back in and reboot to boot to the stick again.

Note that if you download anything to the Live environment, it is totally usable....but.....if you reboot of turn the pc off etc.....when you reboot to the usb stick that downloaded material/app etc will not be there !
Also note that the Live environment is a trifle slower than a full install
DO NOT double click on the icon on the desktop called ""INSTALL LINUX MINT".....that is for much later.

Questions?

Fire away.

 

[redcrazykid]

As we all know, Linux was created to stop Monopoly. Microsoft and Apple were the only original companies to create software for a "computer machine". Linux challenged the idea that they are the only people who know how the machine works. Since then, Open Source Software for free, has been available. Linux has since then, created millions of users that want to build their own way to make machines do calculations. This open source software program, has led to debt.

 

[Condobloke]

This open source software program, has led to debt.

And this one of the ways that Linux is better than windows?

Debt for who ?

 

[redcrazykid]

And this one of the ways that Linux is better than windows?

Debt for who ?

Oh I mean, if they were the first two companies, Apple and Microsoft, won't they always be one step ahead in one way? I like linux because it really is a place where people work together to make better software, but that doesn't mean all Linux developers know how machines work.

 

[Brickwizard]

won't they always be one step ahead in one way

But are they!!!,
Did you not know that in house Microsoft development don't use windows, they use CBL-Mariner Linux, WSL2 has a Linux kernel, and they chose to use Linux for their cloud service and not Windows server, Doesn't sound like they are ahead at all.

 

[Brickwizard]

if they were the first two companies

Which they were not,
Prior to all 3 was the daddy of them all, IBM OS [IOS] and several different versions of DOS [disc operating systems]

 

[GatorsFan]

1) you can revive older computers
2) customization
3) wide variety of desktops/distro's
4) free to use
5) better privacy