Windows .vs Linux

**BlizzHaX0r** · 09-17-2003, 02:30 PM

Hey all, I'm building my own custom system, and I need everyone's opinion. All my previous computers in the past have had Windows, but for my new build, I'm considering RedHat too. Which is better? What are the pros/cons of each?

Thanks!

**Nightlord** · 09-17-2003, 03:55 PM

Linux is STABLE as hell. Linux is FAST. Linux can DO anything a Windows system can... only better.
The Cons? No support. By that I mean you can't play most games on it without a Windows emulator (which sucks) or if the game itself is ported to Linux.
THUS, if gaming isn't your thing (IE: Half-life 2, online role-playing games, ect.) then Linux rocks. Note the learning curve though if you've been using Windows for a long time. Linux is more like DOS than Windows.

**Nick_B** · 09-17-2003, 04:56 PM

I would suggest that you stick with what you know. If you are curious about linux, try it out, but I wouldn't try to go in head first, because I suspect you'll come out with a sour taste.

Personally, I run Gentoo Linux on my main desktop machine (soley Gentoo, no windows) and on my colocated web-server (again, only Gentoo--though when I upgrade the hardware, I may switch this to FreeBSD). I don't play too awful many games. Mainly just Urban Terror, anymore. As far as other functionality goes, my productivity has increased a bunch since I switched.

You have to keep in mind that it isn't necessarily easy. To get my system to the point where it is took me quite a few hours of configuration and tweaking. Now that I have it there, I'm very pleased, though.

**Tekime** · 09-17-2003, 10:18 PM

Gentoo takes considerably longer to install and configure than Red Hat. GNU/Linux takes some more work than Windows, so I agree with your general point; just that with Gentoo you need to compile everything yourself. It literally took 2 days to compile KDE on my dualie PII Gentoo box

**Nick_B** · 09-17-2003, 10:59 PM

True, but you can always do a Stage 3 install and install X and your window manager with binaries. This takes less than an hour for me. Once you have it up and running with a web browser and such, you can emerge sync && emerge -uD in the background to gain the full benefits of a source-compiled system.

**BloodRed** · 09-17-2003, 11:16 PM

IMO, the only real deciding factors between Linux and Windows today are A) You use your system mainly to play games, or B) You don't have time to invest in learning a new OS. If either of those are true in your case, stick with the Windows OS you're use to. If neither of those are true, give Linux a shot and you'll find that you can do pretty much everything you're use to doing under it, and in a lot of cases, you can do more.

**Nick_B** · 09-18-2003, 03:41 AM

I think that's a good way to sum it up, BR.

Though, if you are very anti-B (ie you have all sorts of time to dedicate to a different OS) and you are really, really persistent you can still run quite a few games.

Whatever the case, the gaming situation is improving IMO. I haven't been screwed out of any games i really wanted to play lately. Granted, I'm pretty casual about gaming and usually just hit the big titles. In our LANs we mostly play Urban Terror and/or Starcraft.

**BlizzHaX0r** · 09-18-2003, 01:56 PM

Thanks for the advice guys. Gaming is going to be about, 1/4 of what I use the computer for. Based on what you guys said, I guess I'll just stick to the familiar Windows for now. I don't exactly have that much time to set up/learn a new OS...football, soccer, school, homework...that's pretty much my whole day right there, from 5:30 A.M to 11:30 P.M.
Thanks for the advice though.

**Sandro** · 09-18-2003, 09:49 PM

There's always the possibility of setting up a dual-boot to learn Linux in whatever meager spare time you can get.

**BlizzHaX0r** · 09-18-2003, 10:12 PM

Dual boot....what OS would control what? Would I have to have x2 separate HD's to do that?

**Nick_B** · 09-19-2003, 12:25 AM

Originally posted by BlizzHaX0r
Dual boot....what OS would control what? Would I have to have x2 separate HD's to do that?

No, you wouldn't need two harddrives, you'd just need 2 or 3 partitions. No OS would really control different things. Rather you'd boot into one or the other. The space would be split however you decided when you partitioned, and one system or the other would control a bootloader (ie you could use the NT loader or the [vastly superior] grub bootloader).

**BlizzHaX0r** · 09-19-2003, 03:49 PM

I think I'll just stick to Windows :P
I don't really have time to figure all this dual boot stuff out

**Jo-Jo_Fine** · 09-20-2003, 07:02 AM

Dont say that, configuring dual boot for xp/2000 is as simple as pressing the 'install onto master boot partition' radio button rather than 'install onto master boot record'. Red Hat does the rest for you.

**BlizzHaX0r** · 09-20-2003, 09:49 AM

Nah, I think I'll just stick to Windows, I already know a lot about it, and that way there won't be any compatablity issues.

**PDR60** · 09-20-2003, 01:59 PM

Well I am a Linux convet. I do everything I used to do in windows.... including gaming. That is not really an excuse any more for not choosing Linux. I recommend Mandrake over other distros for new guys only because its the easiest to learn and also does the most complete install.

A default install will net you an Office suite, tons of Multimedia and a great browser. Then you could cruise over to Transgaming and pickup Winex for your gaming. It works very well.

Try it you won't be disappointed!!!

Thread: Windows .vs Linux

Thread Tools

Display

Windows .vs Linux

Posting Permissions