Linux and BSD are vastly superior to Windows in every way. Don't believe me? Read on, my friend. Read on and realize the folly of your MS ways.
The top ten list
#10 - Total cost of ownership ranges very low to nothing for Linux.
For that matter, ownership isn't really a term you can apply to your Windows box. M*cro$oft allows you to use their software, for a hefty fee, and you are limited as to how you can use your software and what machines you can install it on. Want to install a new CPU in your Windows box? Sorry, you'll have to "activate" your copy of Windows again. Want to actually be productive with Windows right out of the box? Sorry, it doesn't come with any software, unless you count Notepad and Solitaire. But that's another point entirely...
You can freely download Linux from thousands of different websites. If you don't have a fast internet connection, you can also purchase it for a very, very small fee - usually not much more than the cost of the CD's themselves plus shipping. Even if you purchase a full retail version of a major Linux distro, say Novell's Suse or Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation, you're still far short of the cost of Windows plus the cost of all the software you'll still have to purchase to bring Windows up to the basic usability level as your average Linux distribution.
Bottom line: If you are only considering cost - Linux and BSD will always be cheaper than Windows in every scenario. Game over. Windows cannot compete in cost.
#9 - Linux and BSD distributions give you more complete, usable operating environments out of the box.
Take this test: Download and install any Linux distribution and take a look at all of the applications that come with your new system. Office apps, Web browsers, Chat clients, Programming tools, Network tools, Server software, Games, Administration tools. Now, do a fresh install of any version of Windows and take a look at what you get. Nothing. (maybe some server software, if you installed a "server" version of Windows) But, in order for a Windows system to have the same level of productivity as a Linux system, you must install many, many third-party applications after the install.
Bottom line: If you need to be productive quickly, Linux and BSD distributions are exponentially more capable out of the box. Sorry Windows, can't compete here either.
#8 - Viruses and Spyware are basically nonexistant for Linux and BSD.
There are a handful of Linux viruses, I know, but the difference is, the security paradigm for Linux and BSD is completely different than Windows. You aren't administrator by default in Linux systems. If you do something malicious in Windows, you could wipe out your whole system. In Linux, you'll just destroy your own user files and your system will keep purring along. But if you're still paranoid about viruses on your Linux box, there are excellent free antivirus packages you can download and use on any distribution (ClamAV is an excellent choice).
Bottom line: If you're worried about viruses and spyware, Windows is very susceptible. Linux and BSD are practically immune to all known viruses and your system will continue to perform while all of your Windows friends are overwhelmed. Buh-bye, Windows.
#7 - Linux and BSD systems are more stable than Windows.
Because of the way Unix-like systems are designed and the underlying concepts behind the way they run, Linux and BSD will always be more stable than Windows. In fact, M*cro$oft has "borrowed" parts of BSD in the past to improve versions of Windows.
Think about this: There is a reason why BSD and Linux are used in large supercomputer clusters, datacenters, web server farms, graphics rendering farms, and other areas where Windows simply cannot extend or compete in areas of scalability, performance and stability. The bottom line is, if your business has critical data, don't entrust it to Windows.
#6 - Linux and BSD supports more hardware out-of-the-box.
You may not believe me. You may be scoffing right now, but it's true. Try this: Install any Linux distro. How many drivers did you have to install during the install or after? Maybe graphics and that's it. Now install Windows. After you've installed the base OS, you'll have to install your network card drivers, graphics card drivers, sound card drivers, motherboard chipset drivers, printer drivers and maybe more if you have some specialized hardware.
It's not that Linux doesn't use drivers for your hardware, it's the fact that the Linux kernel source package contains Open Source versions of most of the drivers you'll need. The reasons you might have to install drivers after the install are for proprietary/trade secret things like certain wireless cards (Intel) and nVidia/ATI video cards.
Bottom line: Linux-based systems support more hardware by default and will make you more productive out-of-the-box.
#5 - It's easy and fun to develop high-quality software for Linux and BSD.
The de-facto C/C++ compiler for Linux/BSD is gcc and it's free. Several very good IDE's (Integrated Development Environments) that allow you to quickly and easily develop GUI and CLI applications are also free. The Netwide Assembler (NASM) is free. Python, Ruby, Perl, Java, PHP, Fortran, ADA, Pascal, Prolog, Lisp, Eiffel, ML, Tcl/Tk, Forth - over 183 languages with freely available compilers. You can build everything from mission critical embedded applications to large, distributed simulation apps. Sure, you can develop some good software for Windows, but it will cost you. The best Windows compilers are very expensive.
Do you need to understand how the OS works to hook in your application? Check out the kernel source. Need your own device driver? Not a problem. You've got the kernel headers freely available with plenty of documentation. Want to actually learn how a modern, standards compliant, multi-user operating system works? Check the kernel source! Are you seeing a pattern here? Ask M*cro$oft for a copy of Windows source code for free and see if you get it.
Bottom line: Linux and BSD provide better developer support with a large range of free compilers, IDE's and access to the operating system source code.
#4 - Linux and BSD distributions are more configurable and modular.
Can you strip Windows down to just a command line interface without the GUI for a server? Can you install a completely different shell? Different windowing system? The design philosophy of Unix dictates that tasks be broken into small parts and nothing is overly complex. Small programs can be linked together to perform advanced tasks and as a result those small programs can be replaced with other versions without any harm to the underlying OS. Something as trivial as the directory listing command in a Unix system is it's own program and can be replaced with another, if you wish. The directory listing command in Windows is a function of the shell. This is just one example of the design behind a Linux/BSD system and you can find many more by exploring a little in your favorite distro.
#3 - Linux and BSD perform better on any given platform.
Part of this point relates to the modularity of Unix-like systems, but it's generally true that Linux and BSD perform better on older systems and allow you to extend the life of your hardware investment. Many perfectly fine older machines can be turned into usable Linux desktop systems or servers but are unable to run Windows XP or the upcoming Vista. Companies and Universities are even clustering together many Linux systems for a distributed computing environment and enable supercomputer-class performance for a fraction of the cost.
Some distributions that are compiled from source code, like Gentoo, offer a higher level of performance due to the fact that the software is compiled specifically for your machine, not some laboratory system that is compiling software for the lowest common denominator CPU type. Software optimized for your Pentium 4 system performs better if compiled on your system versus software compiled for a generic i386 target system.
#2 - Linux and BSD don't limit your platform choices.
Windows currently will only run on 32-bit and 64-bit Intel-compatible processors. M*cro$oft had produced Alpha, MIPS, and PowerPC ports of Windows NT at one time, but they have been discontinued for quite some time. Linux and BSD, on the other hand, run on dozens of different architecture types ranging from your normal Intel-compatible desktop system to mainframe systems. In fact, NetBSD is the most portable operating system in the world supporting the following architectures: acorn26, acorn32, algor, alpha, amd64, amiga, amigappc, arc, arm32, atari, bebox, cats, cesfic, cobalt, dreamcast, evbarm, evbmips, evbppc, evbsh3, evbsh5, ews4800mips, hp300, hp700, hpcarm, hpcmips, hpcsh, i386, ibmnws, iyonix, luna68k, mac68k, macppc, mipsco, mmeye, mvme68k, mvmeppc, netwinder, news68k, newsmips, next68k, ofppc, pc532, playstation2, pmax, pmppc, prep, sandpoint, sbmips, sgimips, sh3, sh5, shark, sparc, sparc64, sun2, sun3, vax, x68k, xen
While you may not know what half of the architectures NetBSD supports are, they might be found all over the world in businesses, schools, hospitals, retail industry, factories - NetBSD can be used anywhere. You may have even used a NetBSD-powered machine today!
#1 - Linux and BSD give you complete freedom to do what the hell you want with your system.
Have you read M*cro$oft's End User Licensing Agreement? I didn't think so, not many people have. It's the software agreement you have to accept in order to use M*cro$oft's products but most people just click the "I ACCEPT" button and move on. The EULA limits your rights to use your software and your system in any manner that you wish. In fact, you don't own the copy of Windows on your system - M*cro$oft is merely granting you use of Windows: "The Software is licensed, not sold."
Some of Microsoft's EULA limitations that you must agree to include:
"[you] may not without Microsoft's prior written approval disclose to any third party the results of any benchmark test"
Do you own a dual core or multiprocessor system? You are in violation of Windows XP Home's EULA:
"The Software may not be used by more than one processor at any one time on any single Workstation Computer"
Want to sell your computer to someone else? The new owner can't sell it again:
"The initial user of the Software may make a one-time permanent transfer of this EULA and Software to another end user, provided the initial user retains no copies of the Software."
Now take a look at the software license that governs Linux systems:
" The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to make sure the software is free for all its users. This General Public License applies to most of the Free Software Foundation's software and to any other program whose authors commit to using it. (Some other Free Software Foundation software is covered by the GNU Lesser General Public License instead.) You can apply it to your programs, too.
When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things.
To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.
It protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software.
Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations.
Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all."
Upon reading the software license for both Windows and Linux you can see the philosophical standpoint of both software systems. Windows wants to limit you and treat you like a criminal. Linux wants to give you the freedom to use your system how you want to use it, give it away and copy it as often as you'd like. This is the bottom line:
The top ten list
#10 - Total cost of ownership ranges very low to nothing for Linux.
For that matter, ownership isn't really a term you can apply to your Windows box. M*cro$oft allows you to use their software, for a hefty fee, and you are limited as to how you can use your software and what machines you can install it on. Want to install a new CPU in your Windows box? Sorry, you'll have to "activate" your copy of Windows again. Want to actually be productive with Windows right out of the box? Sorry, it doesn't come with any software, unless you count Notepad and Solitaire. But that's another point entirely...
You can freely download Linux from thousands of different websites. If you don't have a fast internet connection, you can also purchase it for a very, very small fee - usually not much more than the cost of the CD's themselves plus shipping. Even if you purchase a full retail version of a major Linux distro, say Novell's Suse or Red Hat Enterprise Linux Workstation, you're still far short of the cost of Windows plus the cost of all the software you'll still have to purchase to bring Windows up to the basic usability level as your average Linux distribution.
Bottom line: If you are only considering cost - Linux and BSD will always be cheaper than Windows in every scenario. Game over. Windows cannot compete in cost.
#9 - Linux and BSD distributions give you more complete, usable operating environments out of the box.
Take this test: Download and install any Linux distribution and take a look at all of the applications that come with your new system. Office apps, Web browsers, Chat clients, Programming tools, Network tools, Server software, Games, Administration tools. Now, do a fresh install of any version of Windows and take a look at what you get. Nothing. (maybe some server software, if you installed a "server" version of Windows) But, in order for a Windows system to have the same level of productivity as a Linux system, you must install many, many third-party applications after the install.
Bottom line: If you need to be productive quickly, Linux and BSD distributions are exponentially more capable out of the box. Sorry Windows, can't compete here either.
#8 - Viruses and Spyware are basically nonexistant for Linux and BSD.
There are a handful of Linux viruses, I know, but the difference is, the security paradigm for Linux and BSD is completely different than Windows. You aren't administrator by default in Linux systems. If you do something malicious in Windows, you could wipe out your whole system. In Linux, you'll just destroy your own user files and your system will keep purring along. But if you're still paranoid about viruses on your Linux box, there are excellent free antivirus packages you can download and use on any distribution (ClamAV is an excellent choice).
Bottom line: If you're worried about viruses and spyware, Windows is very susceptible. Linux and BSD are practically immune to all known viruses and your system will continue to perform while all of your Windows friends are overwhelmed. Buh-bye, Windows.
#7 - Linux and BSD systems are more stable than Windows.
Because of the way Unix-like systems are designed and the underlying concepts behind the way they run, Linux and BSD will always be more stable than Windows. In fact, M*cro$oft has "borrowed" parts of BSD in the past to improve versions of Windows.
Think about this: There is a reason why BSD and Linux are used in large supercomputer clusters, datacenters, web server farms, graphics rendering farms, and other areas where Windows simply cannot extend or compete in areas of scalability, performance and stability. The bottom line is, if your business has critical data, don't entrust it to Windows.
#6 - Linux and BSD supports more hardware out-of-the-box.
You may not believe me. You may be scoffing right now, but it's true. Try this: Install any Linux distro. How many drivers did you have to install during the install or after? Maybe graphics and that's it. Now install Windows. After you've installed the base OS, you'll have to install your network card drivers, graphics card drivers, sound card drivers, motherboard chipset drivers, printer drivers and maybe more if you have some specialized hardware.
It's not that Linux doesn't use drivers for your hardware, it's the fact that the Linux kernel source package contains Open Source versions of most of the drivers you'll need. The reasons you might have to install drivers after the install are for proprietary/trade secret things like certain wireless cards (Intel) and nVidia/ATI video cards.
Bottom line: Linux-based systems support more hardware by default and will make you more productive out-of-the-box.
#5 - It's easy and fun to develop high-quality software for Linux and BSD.
The de-facto C/C++ compiler for Linux/BSD is gcc and it's free. Several very good IDE's (Integrated Development Environments) that allow you to quickly and easily develop GUI and CLI applications are also free. The Netwide Assembler (NASM) is free. Python, Ruby, Perl, Java, PHP, Fortran, ADA, Pascal, Prolog, Lisp, Eiffel, ML, Tcl/Tk, Forth - over 183 languages with freely available compilers. You can build everything from mission critical embedded applications to large, distributed simulation apps. Sure, you can develop some good software for Windows, but it will cost you. The best Windows compilers are very expensive.
Do you need to understand how the OS works to hook in your application? Check out the kernel source. Need your own device driver? Not a problem. You've got the kernel headers freely available with plenty of documentation. Want to actually learn how a modern, standards compliant, multi-user operating system works? Check the kernel source! Are you seeing a pattern here? Ask M*cro$oft for a copy of Windows source code for free and see if you get it.
Bottom line: Linux and BSD provide better developer support with a large range of free compilers, IDE's and access to the operating system source code.
#4 - Linux and BSD distributions are more configurable and modular.
Can you strip Windows down to just a command line interface without the GUI for a server? Can you install a completely different shell? Different windowing system? The design philosophy of Unix dictates that tasks be broken into small parts and nothing is overly complex. Small programs can be linked together to perform advanced tasks and as a result those small programs can be replaced with other versions without any harm to the underlying OS. Something as trivial as the directory listing command in a Unix system is it's own program and can be replaced with another, if you wish. The directory listing command in Windows is a function of the shell. This is just one example of the design behind a Linux/BSD system and you can find many more by exploring a little in your favorite distro.
#3 - Linux and BSD perform better on any given platform.
Part of this point relates to the modularity of Unix-like systems, but it's generally true that Linux and BSD perform better on older systems and allow you to extend the life of your hardware investment. Many perfectly fine older machines can be turned into usable Linux desktop systems or servers but are unable to run Windows XP or the upcoming Vista. Companies and Universities are even clustering together many Linux systems for a distributed computing environment and enable supercomputer-class performance for a fraction of the cost.
Some distributions that are compiled from source code, like Gentoo, offer a higher level of performance due to the fact that the software is compiled specifically for your machine, not some laboratory system that is compiling software for the lowest common denominator CPU type. Software optimized for your Pentium 4 system performs better if compiled on your system versus software compiled for a generic i386 target system.
#2 - Linux and BSD don't limit your platform choices.
Windows currently will only run on 32-bit and 64-bit Intel-compatible processors. M*cro$oft had produced Alpha, MIPS, and PowerPC ports of Windows NT at one time, but they have been discontinued for quite some time. Linux and BSD, on the other hand, run on dozens of different architecture types ranging from your normal Intel-compatible desktop system to mainframe systems. In fact, NetBSD is the most portable operating system in the world supporting the following architectures: acorn26, acorn32, algor, alpha, amd64, amiga, amigappc, arc, arm32, atari, bebox, cats, cesfic, cobalt, dreamcast, evbarm, evbmips, evbppc, evbsh3, evbsh5, ews4800mips, hp300, hp700, hpcarm, hpcmips, hpcsh, i386, ibmnws, iyonix, luna68k, mac68k, macppc, mipsco, mmeye, mvme68k, mvmeppc, netwinder, news68k, newsmips, next68k, ofppc, pc532, playstation2, pmax, pmppc, prep, sandpoint, sbmips, sgimips, sh3, sh5, shark, sparc, sparc64, sun2, sun3, vax, x68k, xen
While you may not know what half of the architectures NetBSD supports are, they might be found all over the world in businesses, schools, hospitals, retail industry, factories - NetBSD can be used anywhere. You may have even used a NetBSD-powered machine today!
#1 - Linux and BSD give you complete freedom to do what the hell you want with your system.
Have you read M*cro$oft's End User Licensing Agreement? I didn't think so, not many people have. It's the software agreement you have to accept in order to use M*cro$oft's products but most people just click the "I ACCEPT" button and move on. The EULA limits your rights to use your software and your system in any manner that you wish. In fact, you don't own the copy of Windows on your system - M*cro$oft is merely granting you use of Windows: "The Software is licensed, not sold."
Some of Microsoft's EULA limitations that you must agree to include:
"[you] may not without Microsoft's prior written approval disclose to any third party the results of any benchmark test"
Do you own a dual core or multiprocessor system? You are in violation of Windows XP Home's EULA:
"The Software may not be used by more than one processor at any one time on any single Workstation Computer"
Want to sell your computer to someone else? The new owner can't sell it again:
"The initial user of the Software may make a one-time permanent transfer of this EULA and Software to another end user, provided the initial user retains no copies of the Software."
Now take a look at the software license that governs Linux systems:
" The licenses for most software are designed to take away your freedom to share and change it. By contrast, the GNU General Public License is intended to guarantee your freedom to share and change free software--to make sure the software is free for all its users. This General Public License applies to most of the Free Software Foundation's software and to any other program whose authors commit to using it. (Some other Free Software Foundation software is covered by the GNU Lesser General Public License instead.) You can apply it to your programs, too.
When we speak of free software, we are referring to freedom, not price. Our General Public Licenses are designed to make sure that you have the freedom to distribute copies of free software (and charge for this service if you wish), that you receive source code or can get it if you want it, that you can change the software or use pieces of it in new free programs; and that you know you can do these things.
To protect your rights, we need to make restrictions that forbid anyone to deny you these rights or to ask you to surrender the rights. These restrictions translate to certain responsibilities for you if you distribute copies of the software, or if you modify it.
For example, if you distribute copies of such a program, whether gratis or for a fee, you must give the recipients all the rights that you have. You must make sure that they, too, receive or can get the source code. And you must show them these terms so they know their rights.
It protect your rights with two steps: (1) copyright the software, and (2) offer you this license which gives you legal permission to copy, distribute and/or modify the software.
Also, for each author's protection and ours, we want to make certain that everyone understands that there is no warranty for this free software. If the software is modified by someone else and passed on, we want its recipients to know that what they have is not the original, so that any problems introduced by others will not reflect on the original authors' reputations.
Finally, any free program is threatened constantly by software patents. We wish to avoid the danger that redistributors of a free program will individually obtain patent licenses, in effect making the program proprietary. To prevent this, we have made it clear that any patent must be licensed for everyone's free use or not licensed at all."
Upon reading the software license for both Windows and Linux you can see the philosophical standpoint of both software systems. Windows wants to limit you and treat you like a criminal. Linux wants to give you the freedom to use your system how you want to use it, give it away and copy it as often as you'd like. This is the bottom line:
Linux offers freedom.
No comments:
Post a Comment