PPPDUD wrote:

Debate about OSes here.

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better.

Last time I asked that question:
*on a project about Linux*

End of thread, they didn't have a reason.

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better.

Last time I asked that question:
*on a project about Linux*

End of thread, they didn't have a reason.

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft. Windows is way less command-line focused. Windows is older. Windows has less distributions.

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better.

Last time I asked that question:
*on a project about Linux*

End of thread, they didn't have a reason.

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft. Windows is way less command-line focused. Windows is older. Windows has less distributions.

1. Less vunrebelities: No. Thats 100% lies. I don't even need proof, but here it is: https://medium.com/codex/5-reasons-why-linux-is-more-secure-than-windows-1d036c3d3324 (and there is no way you can say this source is biased, unlike *according to windows*

2. Less command line focused: fair enough, this *can* be better for new users, but: 1. For power users (like most devs) it's actually bad, rather than good. 2. As distros are getting better at hiding the command line so only people who want to use it need to, this point becomes nothing.

3. Windows is older: That on it's own means nothing. Sometimes you could say it's older so it has less bugs and stuff, but this isn't true for windows.

4. Less Distributions: Similar to point 2, this is good for power users, but some work needs to be done to help new users easily and quickly pick a distro that is good for them.

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better.

Last time I asked that question:
*on a project about Linux*

End of thread, they didn't have a reason.

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft. Windows is way less command-line focused. Windows is older. Windows has less distributions.

1. Less vunrebelities: No. Thats 100% lies. I don't even need proof, but here it is: https://medium.com/codex/5-reasons-why-linux-is-more-secure-than-windows-1d036c3d3324 (and there is no way you can say this source is biased, unlike *according to windows*

2. Less command line focused: fair enough, this *can* be better for new users, but: 1. For power users (like most devs) it's actually bad, rather than good. 2. As distros are getting better at hiding the command line so only people who want to use it need to, this point becomes nothing.

3. Windows is older: That on it's own means nothing. Sometimes you could say it's older so it has less bugs and stuff, but this isn't true for windows.

4. Less Distributions: Similar to point 2, this is good for power users, but some work needs to be done to help new users easily and quickly pick a distro that is good for them.

Have you even seen how much Microsoft updates Windows? They do it because they care about their userbase.

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better.

Last time I asked that question:
*on a project about Linux*

End of thread, they didn't have a reason.

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft. Windows is way less command-line focused. Windows is older. Windows has less distributions.

1. Less vunrebelities: No. Thats 100% lies. I don't even need proof, but here it is: https://medium.com/codex/5-reasons-why-linux-is-more-secure-than-windows-1d036c3d3324 (and there is no way you can say this source is biased, unlike *according to windows*

2. Less command line focused: fair enough, this *can* be better for new users, but: 1. For power users (like most devs) it's actually bad, rather than good. 2. As distros are getting better at hiding the command line so only people who want to use it need to, this point becomes nothing.

3. Windows is older: That on it's own means nothing. Sometimes you could say it's older so it has less bugs and stuff, but this isn't true for windows.

4. Less Distributions: Similar to point 2, this is good for power users, but some work needs to be done to help new users easily and quickly pick a distro that is good for them.

Have you even seen how much Microsoft updates Windows? They do it because they care about their userbase.

How much do they? I rarely see the updates. One poplar Linux tool, called vi updates EVERY SINGLE DAY. Beat that windows.

As for OS's, I always see software updates like every few days so….

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better.

Last time I asked that question:
*on a project about Linux*

End of thread, they didn't have a reason.

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft. Windows is way less command-line focused. Windows is older. Windows has less distributions.

1. Less vunrebelities: No. Thats 100% lies. I don't even need proof, but here it is: https://medium.com/codex/5-reasons-why-linux-is-more-secure-than-windows-1d036c3d3324 (and there is no way you can say this source is biased, unlike *according to windows*

2. Less command line focused: fair enough, this *can* be better for new users, but: 1. For power users (like most devs) it's actually bad, rather than good. 2. As distros are getting better at hiding the command line so only people who want to use it need to, this point becomes nothing.

3. Windows is older: That on it's own means nothing. Sometimes you could say it's older so it has less bugs and stuff, but this isn't true for windows.

4. Less Distributions: Similar to point 2, this is good for power users, but some work needs to be done to help new users easily and quickly pick a distro that is good for them.

Have you even seen how much Microsoft updates Windows? They do it because they care about their userbase.

How much do they? I rarely see the updates. One poplar Linux tool, called vi updates EVERY SINGLE DAY. Beat that windows.

As for OS's, I always see software updates like every few days so….

Feels like they do it weekly. They also supply tools that allow for people to remove rootkits, while Linux has literally no obvious recovery tool to fight rootkits.

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better.

Last time I asked that question:
*on a project about Linux*

End of thread, they didn't have a reason.

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft. Windows is way less command-line focused. Windows is older. Windows has less distributions.

1. Less vunrebelities: No. Thats 100% lies. I don't even need proof, but here it is: https://medium.com/codex/5-reasons-why-linux-is-more-secure-than-windows-1d036c3d3324 (and there is no way you can say this source is biased, unlike *according to windows*

2. Less command line focused: fair enough, this *can* be better for new users, but: 1. For power users (like most devs) it's actually bad, rather than good. 2. As distros are getting better at hiding the command line so only people who want to use it need to, this point becomes nothing.

3. Windows is older: That on it's own means nothing. Sometimes you could say it's older so it has less bugs and stuff, but this isn't true for windows.

4. Less Distributions: Similar to point 2, this is good for power users, but some work needs to be done to help new users easily and quickly pick a distro that is good for them.

Have you even seen how much Microsoft updates Windows? They do it because they care about their userbase.

How much do they? I rarely see the updates. One poplar Linux tool, called vi updates EVERY SINGLE DAY. Beat that windows.

As for OS's, I always see software updates like every few days so….

Feels like they do it weekly. They also supply tools that allow for people to remove rootkits, while Linux has literally no obvious recovery tool to fight rootkits.

What are rootkits? They sound like something silly which windows has which linux doesn't have.

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better userbase.

How much do they? I rarely see the updates. One poplar Linux tool, called vi updates EVERY SINGLE DAY. Beat that windows.

As for OS's, I always see software updates like every few days so….

jellyfishfisher56 wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

applejuiceproduc wrote:

So windows users, why is windows better userbase.

How much do they? I rarely see the updates. One poplar Linux tool, called vi updates EVERY SINGLE DAY. Beat that windows.

As for OS's, I always see software updates like every few days so….

Well they're probably just those unofficial buggy “fork updates” which do basically nothing.
No popular distros of Linux have supported software updates. Most just have a major one every 1/2 years, and Windows can do it in weeks.

PPPDUD wrote:

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft.

Windows is way less command-line focused.

Windows is older.

Windows has less distributions.

ScratchCatHELLO wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

Microsoft Windows NT has less vulnerabilities than Linux, according to Microsoft.

microsoft is not biased towards windows at all

Windows is way less command-line focused.

it’s not really that bad to use the terminal, and if you don’t want to you don’t really have to, provided you install a decent distro.

Windows is older.

so?

Windows has less distributions.

that’s not a benefit. it limits choice. regardless, there are only a handful of distros worth installing, and it’s not that hard to figure out which by looking at popularity.

ScratchCatHELLO wrote:

as for updates, my linux mint install receives incremental updates all the time. it tells me there’s updates with an icon in the corner, and it only takes two clicks and a password prompt to make my system up-to-date. better yet, the update manager has (I’m pretty sure) a phased release process so that usually updates that move to it are safe.

PPPDUD wrote:

Less distros = less hard descions

PPPDUD wrote:

ScratchCatHELLO wrote:

as for updates, my linux mint install receives incremental updates all the time. it tells me there’s updates with an icon in the corner, and it only takes two clicks and a password prompt to make my system up-to-date. better yet, the update manager has (I’m pretty sure) a phased release process so that usually updates that move to it are safe.

Windows does it in three clicks without a password prompt. Much more convenient.

ScratchCatHELLO wrote:

PPPDUD wrote:

ScratchCatHELLO wrote:

as for updates, my linux mint install receives incremental updates all the time. it tells me there’s updates with an icon in the corner, and it only takes two clicks and a password prompt to make my system up-to-date. better yet, the update manager has (I’m pretty sure) a phased release process so that usually updates that move to it are safe.

Windows does it in three clicks without a password prompt. Much more convenient.

the password prompt takes like three seconds and is to make sure that you actually want to go ahead and do it. mint also has much better driver management than windows. but we’re splitting hairs at this point.