I use linux because it provides me with a powerfull shell that enable me to work faster :
How many windows users have I seen doing and redoing the same action sequence in a GUI app.
With linux and bash I just have to think a little about what magical incantation will do the job, type it and it's done.

It crash less often, it works faster because I can make it launch what I need and only what I need (I can't stand all the systrayed apps that use the cpu doing nothing)

well, I find it more suited to my way of doing things.

apt-get (Debian)

Quote: Original post by T1Oracle
KDE looks better than Vista IMO and it is certainly more customizable. It also has virtual desktops which I have grown addicted too because it's almost like having multiple monitors without having to pay for and set up multiple monitors. I only use Vista to play games and use MS Word for documents that I have to e-mail in Word format (ie: resumes).

If you have OpenOffice on your Linux set-up, I believe it can save into the MS Word format.

OpenOffice is horribly slow, imho. I use XFCE (a lightweight linux GUI environment) ithat comes with Abiword...which also reads word documents but loads about 90% faster than OO. Unfortunately, despite being able to save word .docs and so forth -- it is an unfortunate truth that opening your lovely MSword authored doc under Openoffice may not result in it looking how you expected (not just because of font). Same with saving a .doc in Openoffice and opening it on windows msword later...If you have to make .docs for work that everyone else will see like you see them, I guess I couldn't recommend to use Openoffice or abiword. :)

~Shiny, xubuntu user.

p.s. -- Apple has some pretty powerful automation tools in Mac OS X these days -- they're a cunning way to let regular users avoid having to write scripts. Essentially programs fulfil certain interface requirements -- allowing bits and pieces to be run through 'Automator' and voila...workflow.

Quote: Original post by T1Oracle

Quote: Original post by Oluseyi

Quote: Original post by T1Oracle
It also has virtual desktops which I have grown addicted too because it's almost like having multiple monitors without having to pay for and set up multiple monitors.

Windows has had virtual desktops for years, just no UI for it. It's pretty trivial to write your own Panel app.

I've been searching hard for a good virtual desktop for Windows Vista that compares to the ease of use of KDE. Switching desktops with a roll of the mouse wheel, and being able to move windows to other desktops with the roll of a mouse wheel, or the click on a context menu (To Dekstop -> 1/2/3/etc), or by dragging, is far easier on Linux. Of every such product I have tested on Windows alt+tab was easier. Although, alt-tab is obviously not as convenient as having different desktops.

It doesn't seem to be nearly as well integrated in Windows as on Linux. Regardless, that was the biggest motivation for me to move my development to Linux instead of Vista. Although the other part of my motivation was to learn Linux.

Regardless, I like having quick and easy to use virtual desktops and Vista has yet to do that for me. Therefore, I consider virtual desktops as one plus for Linux over Windows Vista.

This is a bit off-topic, but:

VirtuaWin is very good. You can assign custom key presses or mouse behaviors for a wide variety of virtual destkop goodness.

First of all, you can't compare a Unix-like system with a an all-in-one solution. Using a unixoid OS has a complete different philosophy - FREEDOM OF CHOICE. This means you're not bound to a predetermined technology and solution. This goes far beyond separating kernel, modules, GUI, etc. The great thing about Unix is, you've always the same working flow, but you're free to compose your components of demand. And the best thing is, almost all of them are for free. Believe it, it's great not being dependent to priority software (unless you're very, very, very rich), and sooner or later you'll notice how much all these warez shit sucks. All these poor countries on our planet usually don't have another choice than using a Unix-like system.

I have to admit that Unix-like systems not really focus on mainstream users, because it is a minimalistic system with almost unlimited flexibility, and is usually too complicated for girls. But note that Mac OS X, Windows, etc. also have their market, and don't really care about another. If you don't feel comfortable with an OS, because it doesn't target you, don't use it. To my mind, get an Intel Mac, install all operating systems, and use all of them with their strength.

If you think, there are no application, drivers, and beautiful graphics, you're totally wrong. The range of products is very complete.

If you think, you don't pay hidden license fees for a pre-installed operating system, you're totally wrong again. You do.

My reason for using Linux:
1) Stability
2) Choice

in my experience of using OS' on my PC, from most stable to least stable I would say: Linux, Windows2000, WindowsXPPro, Win98SE, Win98, Win95.... XP for me crashes on average once per day, Linux almost never crashes

Quote: Original post by kRogue
XP for me crashes on average once per day, Linux almost never crashes

I never understood how people get XP to crash. I don't think I've ever had any version of Windows crash on me; Debian, on the other hand, would force me to do a hard reboot twice a day (although I switched to Ubuntu, and haven't had any problems since).

Most of the time XP crashes aren't really the fault of XP, but is a result of bad drivers.

Quote:
Most of the time XP crashes aren't really the fault of XP, but is a result of bad drivers.

there is some truth in that, but, the other cause is misbehaving applications and this is where XP/2000 has issues: a misbehaving application (typically games) should not take the whole system with it as is often the case in Windows. In Linux when an application tries to do evil things the application crashes, not the entire OS. Moreover, my system is very stock-ish: nForce2 chipset, nVidia GeForece6600GT, SBLive! and for some games the system loves to go under (the worst so far have been X-Men Legends 2 and Marvel Ultimate Alliance) ... I would not say my drivers are badly done (I hope) ... bad drivers can also bring Linux down badly, but the majority of the drivers in use (except the 3D accelerated video card drivers) are distributed with the kernel and are of pretty high quality in terms of stability and performance.

there are some real beauties of XP buginess: if you check out the readme for nVidia drivers in XP, it cites some issues that XP has and a registry entry to add/set to disable that issue)

the other part I really do not like about Windows is the "reboot" to fix issue... machine crashed, really cannot see why but reboot and hope for the best... but never really get a chance to find out *why* it died and how to fix it.... how many posts have you seen go like this: "try taking out hardware and work your way up until the system crashes"... or "now it works just fine, don't know why though"...

and I probably should not start to rave cruelly about ActiveX or IE... or all the lovely crapware/malware for Windows out there...