Linux and Windows users may be polarised into rival camps, but there is no reason one operating system should not benefit by borrowing from the other, says Jack Wallen.
The battle between Linux and Windows will probably rage on for years. Even when everything has migrated to the cloud, users in both camps will still be screaming the virtues of their preferred operating system.
But setting aside partisanship for the moment, there are a number of features in Linux that would improve Windows. These features include specific facilities as well as systems and philosophies.
1. Compiz
No matter how clean Aero becomes, I am not a fan of the flat, single-workspace desktop of Windows 7. It has improved hugely, but it does not compare with the modern desktop that Compiz offers.
Some argue that Compiz's beauty is only skin deep. But many of the features of Compiz are just as much about usability as they are about aesthetics. Having a 3D desktop that offers you quick access via key combinations to multiple workspaces is handy.
Window switchers cannot be beaten for ease of use. And the attractiveness of the interface is just a bonus. Having Compiz on top of Windows would certainly take the experience to a level few Microsoft users have experienced.
2. Multi-user
You can have multiple accounts on a Windows 7 box, but that does not make it truly multi-user. Can you log on more than one user at a time in Windows 7? Not by default.
To have concurrent user sessions for Windows 7, you have to download a third-party tool. In Linux, you can do this by default. This is a feature that should also be enabled by default in Windows 7.
3. Log files
Windows operating systems have plenty of tools that enable the administrator to read log files. But for system, administration and security issues, the administrator must fire up the tools to see those log files.
However, Linux places all system log files in /var/log and allows the user with the right permissions to read these log files from a simple text editor. And the Linux log files are flexible in many ways.
Christmas Competition
Enter ZDNet UK's Christmas giveaway for the chance to win top prizes
For instance, if I want to follow a system log, I can open that log in a terminal window with the tail -f command and watch as events occur.
4. Centralised application installation
The new paradigm for Linux is a centralised location for installation. The Ubuntu SoftwareCenter is turning out to be the culmination of much of this work.
From one source, you can search from hundreds of thousands of applications and install any one you need. And with upcoming releases of the Ubuntu SoftwareCenter — version 3 to be exact — commercial software will be available.
5. Cron
Cron jobs enable you to automate tasks easily. You can add third-party software to a Windows operating system to help automate tasks, but none will have the flexibility of the Cron job.
Cron allows you to schedule as many tasks as you like, at any time you like, from a simple command-line tool — or a GUI tool, if you so desire. And Cron is available system-wide, for administrative tasks and standard user tasks. Having an automated system built in would certainly be handy.
6. Regular release cycle
Release cycles are one of those areas where Microsoft could learn a serious lesson from the Linux camp. Most Linux distributions release their updated distributions...
Talkback
The aero interface is a farce. Compix is so much more, and runs on less memory.
The one thing I hate about windows is all the "My Documents". I agree that if windows could use the Linux version of Root and user password, it would be so much simpler. I have several games, for my grandson, that has to be played in administrator mode, when all games should be available to all users. Also, after updating win7 part is installed on shutdown, and finished on boot up, plus the time it takes to install updates. If windows was more like Linux, I might not hate it so much.
but the windows "at" tool gives some of the functionality of cron. Of course, adding anacron into the mix makes regular jobs on Linux even more powerful and AFAIK that's not available on Windows either.
(Forgive me if "at" has disappeared from Win7, I haven't installed it yet.)
"The one thing I hate about windows is all the "My Documents". I agree that if windows could use the Linux version of Root and user password, it would be so much simpler. I have several games, for my grandson, that has to be played in administrator mode, when all games should be available to all users."
I totally agree with this, the document & settings is the bane of the windows, I hate predefined folders for both doc's and program files with a passion!
User's should be asked to create there own folders names for both applications and documents during installation process, as to offer that little bit more in security to each operating system instance.
As for 3rd party applications saves they can default back to there home install path's, not buried deep in document & settings where user's can't bloody find them.
Are?
I am surprised that Jack Wallen even mentioned app installation (no. 9). Linux can do that only because it has a miniscule share of the general market.
If MS did it all the regulatory authorities would be on it like a ton of bricks. Just see what happened with the browser.
I can't think of a single Windows *feature" that I would like to see in Linux. But then again, I can't think of a single Windows "feature", period. Just bugs, security holes, and broken releases which I have paid for, and then been expected to pay again for the supposedly "fixed" version. I guess those aren't "features" though, are they?
jw
For those printers that do not have dedicated Linux drivers a generic winprint emulator would be useful!
Otherwise unless you are a masochist and enjoy bugs, security holes and "undocumented features".........
Yes, I do agree. If only there was a way of installing Windows Printer and Multifunction device drivers in Linux, that would be a very useful tool indeed, unless this problem is otherwise tackled by the Linux community. However, I imagine there are considerable proprietary hindrances to the development of such Linux drivers.
For me, the biggest single hindrance to Linux is the problem of printer and multifunction device drivers followed by M$'s proprietary document formats which are (deliberately) obfuscated and difficult to unscramble, which reminds me of the farce(s) with the ISO standards.
It seems you don't really understand the concept of Linux and Free (Open) software.
There is no way that Linux could or would be considered a monopoly because of the freedom and choice that underpins open software. There is, and could not be, any abuse.
Take your quoted example of Internet Explorer. Repositories for Linux contain many choices for Web Browsers. Take your pick, even Internet Explorer, if you wish, courtesy of Wine.
This is in stark contrast to proprietary software whose main interest is market share, by whatever means in certain cases.
This post has been removed by a moderator.
just stick with linux.
1. Shiny desktop-switching effects aside, this argument is simply for adding multiple desktops to windows; tired and old, even if it is valid. Compiz has nothing to do with it, with the single exception of the inclusion of a couple of extra (and personally imo unnecessary) pane switching options like its exposé clone.
2. Enabling multiple concurrent logins is actually quite a simple process and can be done manually, since all you're doing is changing a couple of numbers in existing structures. third-party tools in this case are effectively glorified batch files, since they only need to be actually used once. It's rather like increasing the number of established tcp connections available to XP.
3.
"...But for system, administration and security issues, the administrator must fire up the tools to see those log files..." followed by "...For instance, if I want to follow a system log, I can open that log in a terminal window with the tail -f command and watch as events occur."
I'd also like to add that the system logs, should you actually -wish- to observe them through a terminal instead of an interface designed to streamline the use of tools for the logs, are available for your viewing pleasure in %SystemRoot%\System32\Config with the extension ".log".
4. Windows has the unenviable position of being the focus platform of the vast majority of developers. This means that the vast majority of software (actual packages, not homebrew tools and toys) -for- windows costs, barring the drop in the ocean that is free and/or open source. As wonderful as it would be to have available a single source of software for windows with version maintenance and other useful features built in, it's not going to happen.
That said, googling "windows open source X" for x is your required software is probably about as fast as getting the right linux package compiled for your specific distribution (if it even exists) anyway. The advantage windows has is, if it's for windows, it's for windows; and no compiler is getting in the way.
5. In windows, CRON is referred to as task scheduling. It's a default accessory, and has been a component of the operating system since (at least) as far back as XP, offhand.
http://windows.microsoft.com/en-US/windows7/Schedule-a-task
6. Microsoft doesn't have the luxury of being a 1% desktop market share. While regular release cycles may be feasible for operating systems with a few million users (spread out into camps of a few thousand to a few hundred thousand, each supported by its own group of developers), issues with windows need to be fixed as close to zero day as possible with as little impact as possible, catering to a client base that dwarfs the entire linux community. Each service pack distribution is an up to date baseline install, containing all previous fixes and usually new features as well and, rather than being tick-tock, they're released when there is actually a necessity or reason for them to exist.
7. Windows has contained this feature, again, for a very extended period of time. The root user is called "administrator" (and using net installs with custom parameters, can be renamed "root" if you do so wish), and users are asked, but not required, to make a user account when first installing the operating system that is distinct from administrator.
8. Honestly, I'm not even going to contest this point, since in either camp it's entirely opinionated; suffice to say that breaking up a product into price/feature bands is likely to make the core product (premium) sell better; or garner sales from people unwilling to pay for it and instead get the lite product (home) to keep up with the crowd at least expense.
9. I consider this a feature because I have actual preferences as to what software I make use of. Try http://ninite.com/ if you'd actually like to build yourself a customised first boot software package.
And for the record, windows 7 does contain (effectively) word by default. It just doesn't contain Office.
10. Actually, windows 7 runs most hardware on its baseline drivers without issue; including equipment like graphics cards and sound cards. Beyond that, there is an automatic method that checks your hardware against an online database if it isn't able to run it by default, and downloads appropriate drivers transparently; and frankly, if you're using a personal system you should know what's in it to begin with or, if you're maintaining a business system, read the damned receipt.
This is actually a list of newbie mistakes.
"This is actually a list of newbie mistakes."
In different words, you're saying that there are obscure, complicated, and at times costly ways of working around these issues, while on Linux things just work.
And you'd be right with that observation. Having a Linux and Windows machine sitting on my desk, I have to say, Windows is infuriatingly obscure, unpredictable, inconsistent, and badly designed. If you spend enough time and money on it, you can probably get anything to work, but why would you want to?
If it weren't for a few legacy commercial applications, I'd just ditch it because neither Windows nor Office have anything going for them over Linux.
hi jack you seem versatile i,ve been successfully running ubuntu for 2 years now,their is minor glitches , but nothing as serious as what i had running any windows, now i need a little help? i,ve a great copy of linux/nero 3 and i got it as a freebie, but just recently i,ve upgraded to super ubuntu 9.10 , its brill you can do [virtually] anything, but it keeps upgadeing my nero to a new nero 4? and this new one stops me doing stuff by asking for the code? it doesn,t accept the old code , but the program nero 3 is not that old?[on reflection as ubuntu becomes stronger and more effeicent its getting a little like WINDOWS]ARGGGH I DIDN,T WANT TO SAY THAT lezlow@hackersclub.net
Some great points in this article. Basically it all comes down to this: You have to buy Windows, which comes with a very limited set of software built in. You have to go back out and buy more software if you want the full suite. With Linux, you can download everything and install with one sweep, and it won't cost you anything except your time. What's ironic about this is that Linux is known to be more stable than Windows, yet Windows costs a lot more. The problem is that Windows has dominated the market for a long time since the beginning of the PC boom. Finally though, open source is slowly eating away at this market dominance by Windows, which is promoting freedom, innovation, flexibility, and significantly lowering the cost of the modern PC.
When all is said and done, it is my choice as to what I use. And, I alone am responsible for that decision. I have chosen Linux over windows, and there are too many reasons to list here.
Let us just say I have made the better choice, and there is no turning back.
"...Windows, which comes with a very limited set of software built in...."
Apexwm's comment is the umpteenth repeat of a 'complaint' from someone who either forgets or does not understand the situation. Windows used to come with more applications, but the regulatory authorities in the US and EU have prised them out over time.
I am just waiting for Apple to come under the same or greater scrutiny, what with its controlled, closed systems.
"I am just waiting for Apple to come under the same or greater scrutiny, what with its controlled, closed systems."...
...which will never happen, because apple will forever stay a minority matter, if they ever tried to fight MS over market majority, they'd lose and die. Their winning tactics is to snatch people who don't like windows and for whatever reason they won't have linux. That tactics pays a lot...
I'm using Mac OS X & Linux and I have no troubles whatsoever. For me the question wouldn't be about implementing ten Linux features into Windows, it would be more like this: How to put together in one operating system Windows' compatibility with everything & marketing + Linux's stability, security & freedom + OS X's ease of use & loveability. I'm not sure there is a way...
@46426, I don't recall Windows ever coming with a full set of applications, including graphics utilities, office software, and others. Which version had these tools built in?
The points of this article are right on. Many features of Windows are convoluted and complex, and logging is horribly inadequate. One thing I can say is that open source and Linux specifically, has simplicity. Logs are generated for everything, and kept in plain text. Scheduled Tasks in Windows is more complex than it is with Cron. And application installation in Windows is riddled with problems because of 3rd party intervention, in Linux software installation is greatly simplified to one single engine (RPM) in most distributions.
Forgive me but what is teh value of this post ?
I've worked with a PC for 15 years in management positions at big international companies.
Most of my colleagues and I struggle with 1 workspace so why on earth would I want mutiple ones ?
Multi-user : I cant think of a single instance when I would need multiple concurrent user sessions.
Log-files : This only matters to technical support staff and whilst thats important, whats more important is the whether the software can be used by staff to generate income, reliably.
Centralised Application Installation : This is because there's no Linux software in shops right ?
Cron : Aside from it being a single tool, everything is provides can be done in a windows environment albeit in the logical seperate applications they relate to (schedule email download, in my email client etc / security downloads in the security centre etc).
Regular release cycles : MS have a regular release cycle of product and they release patchs and bug fixs as required. Release cycles are only relevant if you are addiing functionality to a product. MS do this - only of course, they charge for the upgrade. Thus, their model is clear, it just that it involves handing over money which lets be honest, is a totally different argument.
As an observation piece, I'm sure that someone has seen some value in this exercise but then again, one really needs to ask "Why ?" as their a bit weak to say the least.