the benifits (& drawbacks) of linux

**cbergeron** · 02-17-2005, 12:09 AM

Ok guys - please allow me to put the nail in this friggin coffin.

I have a linux install (from scratch) that boots in about 3 seconds. It doesn't have a POST because it's an embedded board. With our app, our DashPC boots in about 7 seconds _flat_.

You can't do that with Windows, without paying out the arse for "wince" licensing and per-unit costs, distribution restrictions (i.e. you can't distribute _your_ windows CE product in certain geographical regions without additional fees, etc).

You can't make windows ME/XP/LongWaitHorn/whatever boot faster. Period. You can make it's "services" start quicker or not start at all, but you can't get around the time it takes for the Windows kernel to load. Period.

You can't run NaviVoice in Linux. We do, however, have SphinxCMU, IBM XVoice etc. No loss there (sorry o33o3lo or whatever). We also have Festival for text-to-speech and Festvoxlite.

You can't script Windows (yet). While it's likely that Longhorn may have this functionality someday in the future (2006?), it doesn't have it yet.
The only reason MSFT is adding scripting support to Windows is because of the popularity of Linux/FreeBSD/MacOS.

There's a reason everyone is moving to Linux. I challenge anyone on here to find me a statistically relevant sample of people that are moving from Linux to Windows. By statistically releveant, I mean people that have given "equal time" to both OS'es. I don't count the average ****head that dumps Linux after his first install because it was too difficult. I'm only counting people that know both OS'es inside and out. You'll be very hard pressed to find people that prefer Windows to Linux. There's a reason for that.

As for the carputer thing, I dare say that there is NOT A SINGLE application/functionality that Linux doesn't have that Windows users do have. In fact, I think there are many things that Linux users have that Windows users just can't - by definition/design of Windows' architecture.

This post isn't meant as flamebait, I just want to end this silly "Linux Sucks Because I'm Afraid of It" ideology.

Either try Linux with enthusiasm or don't try it at all. It's what keeps Linux elite - it survival of the fittest; not the whiningly.

**TheLlama** · 02-17-2005, 10:52 AM

Originally Posted by cbergeron

...

Applause

It all goes back to monolithic closed source versus modular open source. Which sounds more configurable?

**Dj_Aleks** · 02-17-2005, 11:20 AM

Originally Posted by cbergeron

Ok guys - please allow me to put the nail in this friggin coffin.
.

GODDAM! now that´s what i call good argumentation

*applause*

**mespork** · 02-17-2005, 11:33 AM

Originally Posted by cbergeron

Ok guys - please allow me to put the nail in this friggin coffin.
.

Great Post

**Grayscale** · 02-17-2005, 01:41 PM

touche

**rubicon** · 02-17-2005, 03:34 PM

Originally Posted by TheLlama

It all goes back to monolithic closed source versus modular open source.

Actually, the Linux kernel is monolithic. But that's not important right now.

**TheLlama** · 02-17-2005, 03:39 PM

Really? Hum, I must have been misinformed about Linux or the definition of Monolithic.. Got some studying to do I suppose.

**mespork** · 02-17-2005, 05:17 PM

Originally Posted by rubicon

Actually, the Linux kernel is monolithic. But that's not important right now.

I am sorry man but you need to either do some serious research or not post. The linux kernel can be compiled to what ever you want it to be. Yes, you can get in there and change it, and yes you can get it to be really really small if you want it to.

http://www.tldp.org/

Please refer to the linux documentation project before making assumptions.

**cheerio** · 02-20-2005, 09:15 PM

Linux is completely open-source, and very heavily documented.

Windows is completely closed-source and Microsoft has gone under great lengths to keep some of its API hidden(and features (which were probably accidents) too).

Now with that underway, lets talk about some of the programs for linux.

Almost anything that runs under windows, you can get to run under linux with 'wine' the Windows Emulator. So for you people saying xyz isnt out for linux, you may be suprised to find out you can get it to run under linux, while it *thinks* its being run under win32. As for having to pay for software for linux, its about 99% free, and 98.9% opensource, also having to note that my stastistics are about 25-110% made up.

Linux will run on anything, but you may have some driver issues, espcially with win-cards, but with a little elbow greese, and a few broken keyboards(and fingers too) you should be able to get it to work fine.

Now on the downside, linux is free, so you do not get customer support(unless you buy distros of linux that include it, but then that defeats the purpose of all of it doesnt it).

Linux is VERY cryptic at times, and NOT for weak stomachs. You could be crusing along fine and then your X window session close and drop you to a console with some very strange debug messages. Although it tells you exactly what happened, if your computer-illiterate and cant understand the concept of a display driver or a resolution, you may just enjoy having your information stolen from you while your computer sends cryptic UPNP messages to random microsoft servers.

Windows is just better for some people, because it treats every user as if they were morons. On your first linux install you will not be directed to a desktop with a balloon tip that says "This is the start menu you idiot, you can start your programs from here, blah blah blah."

The only REAL way for you to judge which OS you like the most, is to USE it.(Wow, what a concept.)

I use both. With proper configuration, updates, firewall settings, and users, windows isnt THAT bad as a desktop. And linux makes for one bad-assed server.

just my 2cents

**KevinSWAT** · 02-22-2005, 12:09 PM

Hi,

I've seen alot about slow linux boot times etc.. but not too much of how to solve it.

Right now I am using slackware 10.0 and have been using it for years now. I have used other distro's but I am not too familiar with all the init scripts that startup at boot time.

For slackware. in /etc/rc.d you will find most of your startup stuff. Stuff you can disable are:

httpd (don't really need a webserver from your car)
nfs and all the rpc daemons (unless using them to transfer data, but really can be turned on only when needed and not every boot)
bind (don't need a nameserver)
lpd or cupsd (don't need to print)
sshd
yp (NIS)
gpm (unless you use console only)
sendmail (probably aren't running a mail server from your car)
smbd and nmbd (if not running samba)
crond and atd (used for running scheduled tasks)

also, you can thin out your /etc/inetd.conf or xinetd.conf to not include services you don't want like ftp, pop, finger etc...

in /etc/inittab you can remove some of your getty's as you don't really need 6 console's in your car.

kernel:
seriously go through your kernel. remove ANYTHING you don't really need. Don't know what something is? the help is usually pretty good. Also there is the Documentation/ directory in the kernel source that may help out further. All the drivers compiled in the kernel or used as modules take time to startup. If you don't have the hardware, you don't need the driver period.

Kernel tuning takes time, but it is well worth it in the end in bootup time and kernel size. The Kernel-HOWTO can help you as well.

I am sure I am missing a bunch of stuff, but this is a good start.