I can't list all the things that don't work in Linux, there are too many differences. Same as I couldn't list all the things Windows can't do that Linux can. It depends what you use your computer for. Cloudane's rundown of the apps you listed is accurate.Originally Posted by Loony BoB
Windows is the best operating systems for running Windows programs. If you don't want to use alternative Linux versions of anything, then there's no point ever using Linux.
In a sense. You can deny people permission to view your folders or files. File permissions part of the filesystem (i.e. they are an integral, unavoidable part of how the computer works). You can see files or not depending on what user you are logged in as, so in that sense it is sort of password protected (via your login password).Is it possible to password protect folders? Always was interested in that possibility.
[qq=Cloudane]No matter what the GIMP evangelists say, it will not touch Photoshop - it doesn't even come close.[/qq]
VMWare works pretty well for this.
[qq]But you just wait until you want an unusual app (seemingly, RAW processing apps are still often considered 'unusual') that's not part of the package repository, or you need the latest version that supports 'x feature' and the binary package hasn't been updated for 6 months, or you want to use an unusual piece of hardware. Now you need to compile it yourself, and in my experience it's very rarely a simple matter of "./configure; make; make install".[/qq]
This is also a problem with Windows, except in Windows you can't even try to compile it yourself.
[qq]Multiple standards. How ironic. I've got a choice of about 50 half-baked apps that do the same thing, when all I want is one decent one.[/qq]
Valid argument in some cases. FTP clients in Linux are one example of having 100 really sucky apps and not a single really killer one (unless you like the command line, which has some really nice apps like ncftp).
[qq]Or you have a choice of about 100 different distros that are all based on the same OS but do things ever so slightly differently. This is a nightmare for non-geek developers. Where should they put file soandso because each distro puts the file in a different place? Result - they have to provide versions for Ubuntu, SuSe, Redhat, Mandriva, Debian, blah blah blah... so they get annoyed at the whole process and don't maintain a Linux version of their software.[/qq]
This is still a problem, but much less a problem nowadays than it used to be. There are tools for example that convert RPMs to debs. As the community grows, more and more volunteers are around to port apps to their distros as necessary. I can't remember the last time I couldn't find a package for something, or find an explanation online for how to install something manually very easily.
But I am not a normal user, so you may be right, it may be hard for people.
[qq]Don't even get me started on KDE and GNOME competing. Developer: "Yes, of course you can have a system tray icon - but only if you're using KDE. I don't know how to do one for GNOME." - grrreat.[/qq]
I have not experienced this in a very long time. There is a lot of movement to standardize desktop-related things like this. When an icon is added to the "start menu" for example, it pretty reliably appears in Gnome and KDE both. Icon themes for both DEs are very nearly the same format. System tray seems to always work for both or neither.
[qq]I guess the bottom line is, like everything else there are pros and cons and you have to make a decision on what to use depending on what you need.[/qq]
This is entirely true.
[qq=Mirage]It simply doesn't have what I need on my desktop and laptop[/qq]
Like what, aside from gaming?
Reply With Quote