We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.
I like Linux and use it for day to day tasks. That being said, I use it in a VM (I actually run several simultaneously), which allows me to make backups, snapshots and whatnot easily. My VMs are hosted on Windows 10.
While it's nice to read about people switching to Linux, that article is full of inaccuracies. Windows supports the same programming languages and Linux for example. MSI and EXE installers are actually better than rpm, Deb, pkg and odd tar.gz in the sense that there's a single format.
Windows is more automated than Linux. Install Go on Linux for example and you still have to edit your .zshrc or .bashrc, etc.
Linux is great, but clearly you don't know what you are talking about.
I think package manger in linux is way superior than windows, many times i try to remove a program in windows even after removing program icons are still on my taskbar, after installing or removing programs windows ask for restart
That's not a problem with the installer. If you install a program that requires a device driver, you will need to reboot, although this has become a lot better. In that regard, Linux is vastly superior and the whole reboot thing is really aggravating on Windows. I honestly seldom have issues with things staying in the taskbar or icons remaining etc... that usually happens if you create links yourself. The windows installer isn't perfect, but to me, it's pretty much the same as the package manager.
Then again, I usually install programs from the terminal on Linux anyway.
One problem I had is, sometimes applications wouldn't show up in the control panel which would mean I have to uninstall them manually. So in that case, I would be at the mercy of the developer being thoughtful enough to provide an uninstall.exe.
If you install some freeware or more esoteric software, you may end up with it not showing up in the control panel. For the most part, programs will show up in there. Same thing on Linux, if you install stuff like dbeaver, it won't show up in the app panel and you need to run it either from the terminal or create a soft link.
Thank you, I'll take your criticisms into consideration
Classy reply :)
Exe installers are the very definition of 'a shot in the dark'. You've completely missed the point of a package manager. Whether your go installation requires extra steps depends on if the installer holds your hand or not. Windows is great but clearly you don't know what you are talking about. But I'm sure we can agree, from the author's response to your claim they don't know what they're talking about, that they're classier than either of us!
LOL, "a shot in the dark", really?
Let's take a look at Go:
If you have a previous version of Go installed, be sure to remove it before installing another.
Download the archive and extract it into /usr/local, creating a Go tree in /usr/local/go.
For example, run the following as root or through sudo:
tar -C /usr/local -xzf go1.15.2.linux-amd64.tar.gz
Add /usr/local/go/bin to the PATH environment variable.
You can do this by adding the following line to your $HOME/.profile or /etc/profile (for a system-wide installation):
Note: Changes made to a profile file may not apply until the next time you log into your computer. To apply the changes immediately, just run the shell commands directly or execute them from the profile using a command such as source $HOME/.profile.
Verify that you've installed Go by opening a command prompt and typing the following command:
$ go version
Confirm that the command prints the installed version of Go.
What package manager? Hand holding?
Install of Go on Windows:
Open the MSI file you downloaded and follow the prompts to install Go.
Now, which is simpler? y'all are so obtuse it's not worth spending time to try an explain simple things.
Again, I am not saying that Windows is better or superior. The examples that the author picked just aren't the best, that's all. Nothing else to it.
I don't know about you, but for me it was # pacman -S go.
# pacman -S go
Me too! Hahahahaha ever since I installed Arch my life became easier
You can install exes with package managers. I install most things on Windows with Scoop or Chocolatey.
Running a single command is way easier than remembering the download location of every single piece of software you need.
Agree with you... Although writing this on a Linux laptop the article is super inaccurate. Windows also has package management apps like chocolatey.org if that's the way you want to go. Linux the kernel might be lightweight for server but most Linux desktops are not. I currently run out of 12GB of RAM running Ubuntu 20, Windows 10 actually runs faster on this laptop. Linux is developer friendly but so is Windows especially if you've been using Visual Studio and .Net the last 20 years like many companies!! The development mentioned mostly JS runs great on Windows. I like both operating systems for different reasons, if writing an article they should at least do a little research first...
Indeed. Actually, a lot of people (including where I work) use Visual Code as an IDE for their projects (Java, Python, NodeJS). I use it as well for other stuff I do using NodeJS, Go and Rust. If I wanted to do C++, I'd just have to install a plug-in (LLVM, GCC are both available).
Guess who came up with Visual Code? That's right, it's Microsoft. It was made for people who didn't want to buy (or couldn't afford) Visual Studio. That stuff is cross platform and super easy to use.
One doesn't necessarily needs to quit an OS for another cold turkey. With Hypervisors the way they perform nowadays (I use VMWare Workstation) I get to enjoy both Windows and Linux at the same time. No point in bashing one or the other.
"MSI and EXE installers are actually better than rpm, Deb, pkg and odd tar.gz"
.rpm and .deb files are not "official" ways to install software. This is a perfect example of someone claiming Windows superiority while demonstrating their lack of understanding on the Linux ecosystem. rpm and deb files should only be used in very specific circumstances (as in, you have a specific need and understand what you're doing). Otherwise you should only be using the respiratory. If you really need to install software that's not in the repos then you can download the AppImage or Flatpack for the program you need. Most applications are available in those formats also and they are universal among the major distributions.
"Windows is more automated than Linux. Install Go on Linux for example and you still have to edit your .zshrc or .bashrc, etc"
This is a joke, right? So the install script you used for Go didn't update the environmental variables on your system and somehow that means "Windows is more automated"?
"clearly you don't know what you are talking about." -> ditto
Not a joke Bud. Try installing stuff like Rust, Node etc. For the most part you will have to modify your .bashrc.
Don't even get me started with all the software that doesn't even have an install (those tar.gz ones for example).
Not sure how does one use a "respiratory"... maybe you meant a repository? Do you actually even understand how apt, yum, zipper et al. actually work? Try installing chrome with apt... or things like Redis-insight. RPM and DPKG are hard??? Now that has to be a joke.
Looks like someone peed in your cereals, and maybe before blowing a fuse, you may want to read the whole thing. I did say that I use Linux for day to day tasks. I only use Windows to host my VMs. Am I bashing Linux? no. Am I stating Windows is superior? no, despite what you're imagining.
"Try installing stuff like Rust, Node etc."
I have both of those installed on multiple systems and I've never needed to mod my .bashrc file.
"Don't even get me started with all the software that doesn't even have an install (those tar.gz ones for example)."
You mean software distributed as source code only? Yes, those can be annoying for the average user, and even the experienced one. But that's entirely on the dev.
"Not sure how does one use a "respiratory"... maybe you meant a repository?"
Yes, I was on mobile.
"Do you actually even understand how apt, yum, zipper et al. actually work? Try installing chrome with apt... or things like Redis-insight. RPM and DPKG are hard??? Now that has to be a joke."
Yes, I do understand how package managers work. I'm guessing you want to make a dig at the fact that under the hood apt and yum (dnf) work with deb and rpm files respectively. The point is that for the most part, a user shouldn't be downloading .deb/rpm files from websites and installing that way. An application should be installed from the distros repository via the package manager. Granted, Chrome doesn't exist on the Debian/Ubuntu repos, and you do need to install the deb file from Google. But this isn't a random application from a random website. And once do you install the Chrome deb, you actually can install Chrome (and Chrome Beta and Chrome Dev) from the repos.
You can even see it gets upgraded with an apt upgrade.
And if you're installing something like RedisInsight then you should know how to install things from outside the repo and understand the risks. 99.9% of everything else you need will be in the repo.
We're a place where coders share, stay up-to-date and grow their careers.