The [Main] 'Why did YOU choose Linux?' Thread - Page 12


Page 12 of 13 FirstFirst ... 28910111213 LastLast
Results 166 to 180 of 193

Thread: The [Main] 'Why did YOU choose Linux?' Thread

  1. #166
    Join Date
    Sep 2005
    Posts
    681
    because i can and most stupid people can't use it......


    I also use it because opensource is the way to go when you need to run stable servers......


    and its stable , stable , stable.......


    and because its close to UNIX which is computer history on its own........ !!!
    "Software is like sex: it's better when its free."
    -LINUS TORVALDS

  2. #167
    Join Date
    Jul 2002
    Location
    Vladivostok, Russia
    Posts
    9,054
    I chose it because I couldn't pronounce BSD.
    "I was pulled over for speeding today. The officer said, "Don't you know
    the speed limit is 55 miles an hour?" And I said, "Yes, but I wasn't going
    to be out that long."

    How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
    COME VISIT ME IN RUSSIA NOW!!

  3. #168
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Concord, NH
    Posts
    66

    Liked the feel - almost like a return to yesteryear

    Quote Originally Posted by ions
    This is the ONLY 'Why did you choose Linux?' on the forum now. Post here the myriad of reasons why you chose Linux. Whether it was to be 1337, licencing, or whatever reason, (cough)Windows sucks(/cough) share why here!

    This is a popular topic and in the interest of providing info as clearly as possible on the topic we think one cetral thread is a good idea. So, all new threads that should have been posted in this thread will be locked from now on.
    Way back when I started using computers in 1973, there was such a thing as a microprocessor, but microcomputers had not yet become common.

    By the time I was nearing the end of my undergraduate university studies in the late seventies, microprocessors were beginning to come out in computers that were sold. Apple and Franklin computers were two of the popular ones. DEC also put its PDP-11 minicomputer on a chip and I got to use one in a Heathkit H-11 computer in one of my computer labs. That gave me more of an itch than the stuff I had used before, clunky teletypes with minicomputers, card readers with mainframes, and low speed acoustic couplers attached to green cathode ray tubes, remotely connected to some distant computer lab that I could not touch.

    I wanted more.

    By 1981, IBM saw the success of Franklin and Apple and wanted a bite for themselves. IBM took a research project to Boca Raton, Florida, way out of their usual New York and North Carolina digs, picked up a rebadged renegade operating system called QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System) from a small software company who had experience with BASIC interpreters, a young, entreprenurial company called Microsoft, which rebadged this system as MS/DOS. IBM did not have cheap microprocessors, they had expensive, high end stuff, so they bought into another technology from a company bleeding red ink, an unknown called Intel. IBM put BOTH companies on the map for good.

    In 1982, I was working at General Motors, and I had just stopped working for the telecommunications arm of the company and had joined an hourly personnel systems group. I did COBOL maintenance programming for eight months, then decided I'd had enough.

    I found a cool position in a small R&D group, who were assessing the client/server model of computing, using minicomputers and microcomputers (now known as PCs). The PCs mostly ran MS/DOS, though some of the latest ones also ran XENIX - what people today know as SCO UNIX - XENIX was Microsoft UNIX, if you can believe it!

    I liked the feel of the PCs but I liked the flexibility and performance of the minicomputers more, particularly those running a system I had been introduced to in a lab at Michigan Tech - the UNIX operating system.

    I did not like the usability factor of UNIX - seemed powerful but clumsy. I did not like the lack of features and flexibility with MS/DOS, which was very limited in the early days - few applications, very weak scripting language, no multitasking, no hierarchical directories. Nah, I'd go with UNIX and work on improving the interfaces.

    I ended up being the designer of some of the early gateways that connected UNIX Email systems to those of other systems. (I did not invent Sendmail, but when it finally came out, it sure helped my cause, as did the emerging popularity of TCP/IP networks, which put UUCP networks to bed in a hurry).

    I was still looking for something better.

    After nearly twenty years in the business, I came across it in 1995, a few years after it had first emerged - the Linux distribution of the Linux kernel, a collection of GNU utilities, and various other programs. The first Linux system I tried was familiar - Slackware, because it had packaging elements very similar to the BSD UNIX systems that I tended to use most often.

    I loved it. At last a computer was useful enough that I would consider getting one for home use, something I had avoided for many years. Now I take it for granted.

    Linux had the feel of the PC with the stability and features of UNIX. Out of the box, it was definitely a geek tool but I saw the potential. I decided to go to graduate school - twenty years after entering software - and started to expound upon the virtues of developing openly shared operating system kernels and utilities so that more interesting tools and components could be built upon them.

    Nearly fifteen years later, the vision is STILL not fully realized. I'd like to see a whole new generation of computer appliances with a cheap, free, commodity kernel beneath, layers of efficient system interfaces tightly coupled on top of that, with interfaces to a full range of electronic devices - phones, cameras, radios, televisions, computers, heating and cooling, refrigerators and stoves, and whatever else can be dreamed up to be computer controlled, accessed, and monitored in controlled ways. Home security?

    Of course, we STILL have to solve issues of SYSTEM security. Current systems have not been designed from the ground up with security in mind. Mainframe systems come closer. By default, you can't access anything on the mainframe; you need explicit permission. Computers and networks of the future need a reasonable compromise between that and wide open access.

    Linux comes closer that Microsoft, though both have gotten better.

    SELinux starts to implement the kind of access control that IBM mainframes running MVS (or whatever the current name of their general purpose multitasking mainframe OS is called), OpenVMS, with its multi-node clusters of tightly coupled systems with Access Control Lists and tightly threaded process management, or even the descendants of MULTICS - the "castrated" UNIX or the evolved Linux, which is probably getting closer to the original ideas that were in MULTICS than the early UNIX kernels were ever able to achieve.

    So for me, Linux puts me on a course that is the closest I've seen to the model of computing I have always envisioned. I am not smart enough to BUILD it myself, but I am smart enough to have a vision of what it might become.

    Meanwhile, desktop Linux is simply the most usable environment I can get at any price. It is more flexible than a Mac, even if only now approaching its sex appeal. It is more stable, flexible, and extensible, not to mention more secure, than any Windows OS, including Vista. It is much cheaper than UNIX systems and arguably just as flexible. Hardware vendors have resisted having Linux get too good, fearing loss of their cash cows. However, even high end features are creeping into Linux. IF the hardware vendors won't put the features there, others will and have done so. Linux runs some of the fastest supercomputer clusters in the world, used for weather prediction and oil exploration.

    Linux runs on some of the smallest systems, including a futuristic "Dick Tracy-like" watch-computer, and certainly in miniature cell phone and PDA devices.

    Linux runs well on desktop systems.

    Linux runs well on server systems.

    I envision Linux systems being the glue that allow us to connect all these different kinds of things together. That's why I use it - I like it very much, but I also see a future for it that we are only beginning to imagine - an environment that will scale WAY past anything Microsoft can do with their crippled QDOS, even if it HAS been rewritten.
    Brian W. Masinick
    Masinick at Yahoo Dot Com

  4. #169
    Join Date
    Dec 2001
    Location
    Concord, NH
    Posts
    66

    Not QUITE right but almost

    Quote Originally Posted by Parcival
    Umm, no. Unix (simply put) is the big father that started it all.
    Actually, in the interactive, hierarchical, ASCII, evolved to UNICODE space, it was MULTICS, not UNIX, that started things off. UNIX is a castrated version of MULTICS. Modern Linux kernels actually have more of the features found in the original MULTICS kernel in terms of dynamic shared libraries, advanced virtual memory techniques, and job scheduling algorithms, than the original UNIX system did, but Linux is playing catchup with today's high end hardware because hardware vendors want to maintain their own cash cows for as long as they can do so.

    But give credit to MULTICS for the vast majority of really cool innovations that were actually invented in the sixties by the MIT, AT&T, and GE joint research project. XEROX and IBM each had their own important contributions, too. Unfortunate that NONE of those companies knew what to do with them!

    At least IBM is around to benefit somewhat, and has hopefully learned the value of the great work. Actually, of all of those companies, IBM has the best ratio of stuff that actually goes into products. They are great with memory, processor, and disk hardware innovations that actually become real products. Their virtual machine idea is what everyone uses for "virtualization" today - IBM had it years ago with VM/CMS, and they could run their monster OS on top of it. Today, they can run 1,000 instances of Linux in these monsters!
    Brian W. Masinick
    Masinick at Yahoo Dot Com

  5. #170
    Join Date
    Mar 2004
    Location
    Harford County, Maryland
    Posts
    135
    Quote Originally Posted by The Mas
    Way back when I started using computers in 1973...

    I envision Linux systems being the glue that allow us to connect all these different kinds of things together. That's why I use it - I like it very much, but I also see a future for it that we are only beginning to imagine - an environment that will scale WAY past anything Microsoft can do with their crippled QDOS, even if it HAS been rewritten.
    A very interesting and informative narrative...from the trenches, as it were.

    Thank you for sharing this 'insider' view of history with us.
    Success isn't measured by how high you fly: Success is measured by how high you bounce!

  6. #171
    Join Date
    Jan 2004
    Location
    boston, mass USA
    Posts
    1,880

    Wasnt sure where to put this, but thought it was funny

    m1ke_l
    Lenovo x120e (gave my wife the Asus 1015N)http://justlinux.com/forum/showthrea...hreadid=153955
    Fedora 16 (but I haven't settled yet)
    8gigs of RAM (in a NETBOOK!!)
    Boston, MA USA/Wondering

    My dad's website (he'll love the traffic) http://www.cafephotos.net/

  7. #172
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    3

    Plain Curiosity

    I started looking at Linux a couple of years ago and was disappointed by it's refusal to accept most if not all of my hardware. ( Something I also hated windows for ). I've kept an eye on some of the free distros for a while and as they seem to be getting faster and more friendly, I've decided to have a serious look at them. It's a completely new ballgame for me which makes it quite a challenge and I'm looking forward to learning about Linux.

  8. #173
    Join Date
    Mar 2003
    Posts
    119

    Converting one person at a time

    Its a hard job, but eventually M$ screws themselves with their own stupidity.

    My chiropractor is not a computer savvy person. He knows how to surf the web, and read his emails, and a few months ago his XP Home system was grinding down to a halt, infected with spyware, malware and other garbage that was just making working impssible. So I backed up his data, re-installed his computer , restored his stuff and gave him a clean copy XP, that was pure like mountain spring water. After a few months of use, he called me asking me to check his computer. Same scenario, spyware, malware, trojans. I've scanned his system and there was 78 instances of some kind of malicious software.

    I suggested he goes with Ubuntu. Not knowing anything about it, he OKed the decision. I've installed Feisty Fawn on his desktop, migrated all his data and now he's happy, and free of the BS that most computer users have to deal with. He loves linux and I've given him a bunch of PDFs about linux and ubuntu. He's now learning about computers! Something he didn't want to do cause he was affraid messing his XP, which he did anyway...

    So why did HE choose Linux? He'll never need to worry about spware, malware, trojans or any of the nonsense windows users have to deal with.
    Registered Linux User # 394318

    Some random rant from Slashdot that made me laugh:

    When Microsoft releases security updates, it's cuz the software is crap. When others do it, it's cuz the software rocks. No double standards here. Maybe it's like when girls get naked. If she's good looking, it makes it better. If she's ugly looking, its much worse. Microsoft may be bloated, but needs love just like everyone else.

  9. #174
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Posts
    2
    It started when I first of it and decided to try it. Never worked for me. But that was about one or two maybe three years ago. Toward the beginning of the year, I had decided to download a 200mb ISO file of NimbleX over a dialup connection. Good thing I had all this planned out early. I had a download manager for Windows that let me pause my downloads. So I only downloaded at night. I burned it and started to explore it from the disk. I fell for it instantly. Couple days later, Windows XP refuses to be seen by my PC. So needles to say that I was stuck with Linux. I couldn't figure out how to install it 'till the guy that put NimbleX together created an installer module for it. I downloaded the installer a couple days ago and installed NimbleX to my HD. Worked well for me. Now I had to get on the net. Good thing my mom had a computer with Windows 98 SE on it. I looked around slax.org just to see if I could find any sort of module for a win-modem driver. I got extremely lucky. Now I'm using my PC to the fullest. Free is great. I only miss some of the cool games that ran only on Windows. But I used the internet more often. LINUX BRINGS ME FREE CONTROL OVER MY PC! Now I just need a new keyboard to replace the one I'm using. Damn keys are wearing down.

  10. #175
    Join Date
    Aug 2007
    Location
    uk
    Posts
    5

    Smile

    i chose linux because you get free software, and you have less security issues than you do in windows...plus it's open source...i started using linux only a cuple month ago...i am still young and hopefully after i mastered linux i will move on to learn about bsd's and openSolares.

  11. #176
    Join Date
    Jun 2007
    Location
    London
    Posts
    10

    Why I chose Linux

    I'm one of the rare users who didn't switch from Windows. At work I went straight from MSDOS to Linux. At home I had a QL running QDOS, like Linus. That gave way to a Q60, with QDOS and (very slow) Linux. Finally I built myself a PC and installed version 1 of Fedora. I just never had any reason to consider Windows.

    Not that I would have considered giving my money to such a racket. Think about it. The Justice Department decides that Microsoft is to be broken up in the public interest. Then comes an election in which Microsoft is the largest single contributer to Geroge W's compaign fund. He wins. A judge pops up and quashes the breakup plans, and the Department make no appeal. Far be it from me to use the word bribe ...

    P.S. I also love using it.

  12. #177
    Join Date
    Nov 2007
    Location
    Lancs, England
    Posts
    4
    The main reason? Because it's a hell of a lot more interesting than Windows. I was dual booting (XP Pro, various distros - settled on Slackware), but got rid of XP last Wednesday. I ain't missing it at all.

  13. #178
    Join Date
    Sep 2007
    Posts
    9
    I started using linux after a Windows crash on my computer, a few months ago. I've lost all my documents and settings - no backup - and I could not re-install Windows 98, which I still had on that computer, so I had to buy a brand new Windows XP cd. Very, very expensive and I paid for nothing, because it was too slow on my old computer. So I searched on the internet to see what linux was and if I could install it by myself. In the first time I downloaded Damn Small Linux embedded and I saw linux running for the first time. After that, linux made me learn a lot about computers and, even if I made a lot of mistakes - because of all my experiences, I could not give up linux and I know more even about my windows Xp system. I bought a new computer and I testes a lot of live cd's to see which distribution works best for me and now I have a few preferences: Mandriva, PCLinux, Ubuntu, Zenwalk and Puppy Linux.

  14. #179
    Join Date
    Dec 2007
    Posts
    7
    I started using linux at the same time I started using windows... means... I came to know about Linux since I started using computer.. earlier I never understood that why people are so much afraid of linux.. but then I realized that thing which you know least... scares you most.

    Anyways... Why I use linux is because.. with linux I know everything is under my control ...unlike windows.. where they tend to hide...
    Linux ~!~
    Linux Forums

  15. #180
    Join Date
    Jan 2008
    Posts
    3
    I switched to Linux four years ago from Windows 2K. I started with Suse and then tried Ubuntu to see what the hype was. Being a Musician I searched for the distro that would best suit the needs of a recording environment and finall settled on 64 Studio (which is debian based).

    After almost two years of using 64 Studio and producing some pretty damn awesome tracks and songs with a Linux Based distro...I have NEVER looked back...My wife and son are now on linux and the house and security updates have never been so peaceful!! My Wife uses Ubuntu 7.10 with Crossover Office Pro for her ability to do docs from work and such..

    Linux Rocks and I spend the word...People are growing tired of high priced software that just plains disappoints...Time for change and the world is catching on.

    cheers MiCK

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •