Hi guys, read this from the editor od NT vs Linux. Cheers! Moonshi Mohsenruddin Member, Linux User Group Singapore (LUGS) Editor, Singapore Linux Portal (SLP) ___________________________________ Mobile: +(65) 97452310 ICQ: 2595480 mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED] http://linux.com.sg -----Original Message----- From: Rex Baldazo [mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]] Sent: Saturday, June 22, 1999 12:59 AM To: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Cc: [EMAIL PROTECTED] Subject: Re: Reviews and Comments Thanks for your comments (and thanks for using Email.com, a service of Snap.com which is partly owned by CNET :-) A few comments on your comments below: >> Improved Interface >> ------------------ >> [snip ] Unlike its annoying install, Red Hat 6.0's GNOME GUI has >> improved since the last version. It makes a nice alternative to both the >> popular KDE interface and fvwn95, the default window manager that >> shipped with previous versions of Red Hat Linux. Using GNOME, we ran more >>applications simultaneously and switched >> between them more smoothly than with Windows NT. A slow load time >>was our only complaint: Windows starts >> applications such as WordPerfect and Netscape Navigator faster >>than GNOME can with the equivalent Linux >> applications. >> >>My comments >> Nice words for GNOME but how can he compared the slow >>load time unless they are comparing them from an identical system >>configuration? But these were identical systems. In fact, a single system--I used LILO to boot between NT 4.0 SP4 and RedHat Linux 6.0 on the exact same machine. And I used the same software--the latest WordPerfect and Netscape Navigator releases for both Windows and Linux. Load times varied too much to get a truly useful number (I suspect problems with our network, causing timeout problems especially for Navigator). But Windows always loaded Navigator and WordPerfect much faster than Linux did. I actually expected the reverse because my NT partition had not been de-fragmented in over six months while the Linux partition was brand new. Now you could argue that these particular apps were ported from their Windows versions and thus not might not yet be optimized for Linux. But from a user's perspective all they care about is the performance of the application, not whether it is native or a port to Linux. I think it's fair to compare identical apps running on identical hardware but different operating systems, and that's what we did. >> Software Shortage >> ----------------- >> Which brings us to another downside: Red Hat 6.0's lack of >>available software. Even considering the bounty of programs that ship >>with Red Hat (more than 50 programs are included on the companion >>Applications CD) and the Web's bevy of downloadable apps for Linux, >>Windows still supports more--and better--software. For example, while >>there are word processors and browsers for Linux, there are no real >>equivalents to business tools such as Access or Quicken. What's more, >>although Linux will run on all sorts of systems, from beat-up 386 >>laptops to the latest screaming Pentium III, the OS won't always support >>the hardware peripherals tied to those systems. >> >>My comments >> Hmmm, I guess this guy does not know that Linux is only 7 >>years old! Ah, but UNIX is so much older--if the UNIX vendors had all agreed to a binary or at least API standard back when they had a chance, and then worked to make UNIX easier to install and use, we might all be using UNIX boxes today instead of Windows. It took Linus Torvald and his open-source Linux project to really make a widely-distributed UNIX standard. Will Linux ever catch up to Windows in terms of software? Not until it becomes easier to get Linux installed--because then more people will be able to use Linux, which means a bigger market which in turn attracts more software developers. --- Rex Baldazo --- Content Presentation Engineer --- CNET.com: The source for computers and technology --- [EMAIL PROTECTED] --- --- The past is a foreign country; they do things different there.
