Ask HN: How is Linux better than Windows? | Hacker News Reader

Ask HN: How is Linux better than Windows?

11 pointsmomzpie24 comments

I hope the Hacker News community has some real hackers. What I would like to know today is...

Forgetting UI, which is better in terms of security? Linux, Windows 7 or Mac OS X? (If I am not wrong it should be Linux, as it is opensource.)

If Linux is your answer too, which is the best Linux OS? I have heard different names like Ubuntu, CentOS, Red Hat etc. Which is the best one?

UPDATE: For Desktops... Not servers!

View on HN

Package management and repositories are what make linux better than windows from a day to day use perspective. This is really really nice. Ninety nine times out of a hundred, if I need some software.. I can apt-get/yum install and have it within seconds. Then when there is the rare time that I am using something that isn't in the repos, I can compile it within minutes.. apt-get/yum installing dependencies with ease. On windows/osx you are always running into freeware/trial ware/apps that you have to vet, don't always 'just work', and general annoyances.

The security is obviously better as well; and viruses/trojans are aimed at you much less often.

A huge fringe benefit to using Linux as your Desktop, for a hacker, is that you necessarily become more intimately familiar with Linux in general, which is just generally a good thing for general purpose hacking.

Long before I coded for a living; I tried using linux many times for philosophical/wanting-to-be-cool reasons; but kept going back to windows because something or another wouldn't work out of the box and I would give up before getting it fixed.

That problem is almost gone; the winning distros have made HUGE progress in user-friendliness. I finally 'stuck' to Linux around Ubuntu 8.10 when I stuck it on my computer, everything worked but my 5.1-out-of-two-jacks (stereo worked, but I wanted my surround sound goddammit), and after about 12 hours of fighting it, it worked.

To top it off, I was able to play Hon, and having played hundreds of hours of Dota.. that's all the gaming I really needed or wanted.

I was a power user on Windows, but having used linux exclusively for a couple years now I can definitely say I am WAY more efficient. It's a hard benefit to point at, but the linux philosophy of lots of small, specific programs, combined with an semi-efficient user adds up to a lot more productivity than I could get on windows.

As a developer, this goes a long long way. Countless times I have written one liners with find/sed/awk that saved someone else tons (or even just a bit) of tedious and/or time consuming work that while possible on their OS, didn't really occur to them. This probably matters less for OSX and you can definitely get all these commands on both OSes; but just constantly being inside that way of thinking, I think, leads to ever-increasing efficiency.

Wow, nicely said. I really agree with the part about vetting software. The software repositories of most Linux distributions (I use Ubuntu) give me the reassurance that somone who knows more than I do has looked at the software and said, yes, it is good.

Thanks for the wonderful bit.

The repositories are awesome. Especially for programming and stuff.

But.. I hate when I want a beta version of some software and it's not in the repositories. Then it's a bit annoying.

I think a mix of the Windows way and repositories would be the best for the average user.

Yeah; it's a pain, but centos deals with it really well. There are 3rd party repos you can add which specialize in certain software, so you can always have cutting edge lamp stack stuff, for example, updated with yum.

Takes a minor bit of configuration to set up, but once you do it's as transparently beautiful as out-of-the-box yum installing.

Software management through packages is a killer feature. Not having to hunt down installers and keeping track of what was updated and automagically installing those is pure nirvana.

I use Ubuntu on a Desktop PC, and package management really is a huge win. You pretty much say goodbye to those annoying "Next...Next...Next...Next...Finish." installers. Updating installed packages is generally pretty painless too.

I generally build systems with as little as possible installed initially. Then install exactly what I need. With Ubuntu I can't remember if I ever had to hunt down any dependencies. The security updates are non-intrusive and rarely require reboots. Compared to Windows constant nagging about this, that and whatever it is so clean and painless.

A bit more broad than you asked for, and maybe outdated in some respects, but here ya go:

http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/

As to which Linux to use, http://Distrowatch.com is your friend. A few short summaries:

Gentoo or Arch if you know what you're doing.

Ubuntu or Mint for the desktop for noobs or people who want a Windows/Mac desktop replacement (eg just works, drivers easy to get, don't need to configure, etc.)

Fedora or CentOS if you want to start learning the RedHat Enterprise Linux side of things (different package managers, preference for KDE desktop instead of Gnome, etc.)

OpenSuse for... I'm not sure but I like what they're doing with it - good performance (better than Ubuntu if the last benchmarks I saw were any indication), worth keeping on your radar.

Debian and Slackware - old stalwarts, can't not mention them, Ubuntu is built on top of Debian (and Mint on top of Ubuntu).

What else...

Thanks a lot... exact answer to my Q.

I've been wrangling servers for way too long. In my experience it is the many utilities that work together in all nix versions and the scripting that makes routine, repetitious tasks much easier and consistent. So much so that I install CygWin on any Windows boxes that I need to maintain. Point, click, drag 'n drop are a pain when you have to repeat the process a couple of thousand times. Of course, you can download and install specific tools in those cases, but then a slightly different task requires more downloads. With nix you simply edit a script to implement new requirements.

If this will be your first linux setup, I'd be hard-pressed to recommend anything other than ubuntu for day-to-day use, since it really is a lot lower maintenance than most other distros... But what's the fun in just trying out one distro? :)

I suggest also checking out Linux Mint (based off ubuntu), Manndriva, Fedora, and Sabayon just to get a feel for what you like... and if you're looking for a simpler environment for like a netbook or something, be sure to check out jolicloud as well. Also, distrowatch.com is a good resource for comparing and keeping tabs on popular distros.

Ubuntu JeOS is excellent for minimal server installs. Then you add exactly what you require. I prefer LTS editions for all critical servers.

Ah yes. Will start off with Ubuntu and proceed on.

There are less viruses engineered for Linux, so it's safer than standalone Windows (no anti-virus, etc). I use Crunchbang Linux. Check it out. :)

sure. it's in the list.

Linux tops in many fronts when it comes to security, costs and flexibility, etc. Personally I use Ubuntu.

thanks for your opinion

I was tempted to respond with OSX, but then i remembered that I had to explicitly disable single-user mode (and that the question was about security).

You need to be more specific about security (do you mean external methods of compromising the machine, or some sort of in-person hack)

I meant "external methods of compromising the machine" like viruses from internet etc.

You have to be a bit more clear. What exactly will the OS be used for: Desktop or server use? The answers may vary depending on that.

for desktops.

Ubuntu.

Thanks. Ubuntu seems great to start with for a long-time Windows user like me.

Reply on news.ycombinator.com