As I mentioned in a previous post, I grew up using Microsoft products, even from the pre-GUI days. I tried, as far as possible, to learn the ins and outs of Windows operating systems, and even learned a little batch scripting. When I could, I would default to using the command line (cmd.exe), because it made me feel powerful. I felt like I could do anything I wanted to my machine, if I just spent the time to learn how. Unfortunately, as time went on, I found that this wasn't always the case, and as I tried to learn more and more about how Windows worked, it became more and more complex. I also developed a distaste for the number of junk programs and applications I had to install on my machine in order to get it to do exactly what I wanted.
I didn't have as much experience with the development of the Mac OS, and didn't work with it nearly as much as with Windows. It seems from my perspective that the Mac started as a more complex machine to use, and more convoluted than Windows, but that many people would use it because they felt the company had better policies than Microsoft (with the whole monopoly thing that was going on). My first Apple product was an iPod Mini (I think it was 4th generation). I used it because it was what people used as a portable music player at the time. It also seems from my perspective that over time, the Mac OS started to get better, especially once it started using Unix as its base, and my perspective of the product is that it is quite good now. Because of the "full stack" of Apple products (from hardware to software), the products can optimize different parts of the hardware, resulting in better machines. For example, as far as I've seen, battery life on Apple products is far superior to the competition.
The reason I don't use Microsoft products for the most part isn't a result of the company, it's a result of my view of their products as inferior. They give people what the want, but poorly. I don't use Apple products, not because of the inferiority of the product, but because of my dislike of their company policies. They tell people what they want.
I've seen a very distinct difference (in general) between people that use Windows and Mac OS, and people that use Linux. If there is a problem, people that use Windows and Macs will buy a new machine (or take it to a technician). Linux users will try to fix it themselves. Obviously, there are exceptions, but that has been my experience.
Now, the second part of my post: why I use Linux:
It started because I felt it was the best option out there. I didn't like Microsoft and Apple, the two producers of competitors to Linux. At the time, had a product emerged that I thought was better, I would've used it (which is still probably the case). As time has gone on, there have been a couple other reasons for why I stay with it. I will mention two.
1. I like to customize my machine and experiment with it.
As I mentioned, I worked with the command line on Windows. Out of all the options out there, Linux is the most customizable, because it's open source. I can download the source code, edit it, compile it, and then put it on my machine. I'm a fan of the theory of open source, and will perhaps get into it in a different post, but I try to keep posts to the point, so I won't discuss it too much here.
2. It's simple.
I know a lot of people will disagree with me, but I think this is a valid point. Let's say, for example, that I want to connect via ssh to another machine. If I were to use Windows, I would have to find a program that allows it (a common one is PuTTY). But then, I have to worry whether the program I use has all the features I need. For example, what if I want to copy a file from the remote computer? I could use a variety of applications and protocols (ftp, scp), but I have to find a new program (WinSCP?). Or, if I want an extension of the same feature? I have yet to find a program for Windows that has the same functionality as 'ssh -X' using openssh.
Now, I know that Linux also has to download programs to handle this feature, but it's a lot easier to do. Openssh has all the functionality I've mentioned. Also, it's simple to install it. Some distributions even have the program pre-loaded onto the machine, but I use Arch, so I had to get it myself.
Another example is the handling of compressed files. Most good applications on Windows to handle zip, rar, tar, tgz, or any other popular compression method cost money (often with free evaluation periods). The best applications to use these on Linux are open source and free.
Some get around this by using something like Cygwin, but it's another application to install.
In some cases, it's true that Windows and Mac OS X are better at doing certain things (like media editing), but I think there will come a day when this is no longer the case. Again, I will discuss my views on open source software another day, but I feel that eventually there will be open source alternatives that are better than currently used applications.
If you have any questions or comments on this post (or even would like to express your opinion of the situation) please do so. Ad hominem attacks on me (or anyone else) will not be tolerated, and please read other comments before posting, but within those limitiations, post anything you like.
No comments:
Post a Comment