After several re installations of Windows, coupled with being an install tester with Linux, I can give some personal summary as to the difference between Windows and Linux in so far as which is likely more light weight and quicker with the install, and which is likely to contain unnecessary bloat ware.
Hands down, if you were knowledgeable on this subject matter, you'd likely guess right on the issue of Windows being the slower of installation, likely the more cumbersome, and supposedly if you thought it were likely more free of being error prone, in my experience, as of today, really not so true. Especially consider when security updates generating errors on an install means sitting for hours (and these are literal hours) waiting for restore points to be re enacted. For the amount of time spent waiting around, one could have windows re installed to exactly a given restore point several times over! Amazing that re store points take so long!
As to Linux, not that security is necessarily any better, but at least if you are screwed on the issue of security you hadn't need be pre occupied with the computer for hours on end waiting to push the OK button for one security update relative the other.
Typical windows re installation time: several hours minimum when the installation works, this includes waiting around for security updates or any system updates. Much of the time spent waiting is preparing, it would seem the desktop/laptop for updates (as in pre process scanning and deciding which apparent packages were necessary), coupled by an even lengthier process.
Typical time for a linux OS installation: 20 to 30 minutes usually. And maybe another 20 to 30 minutes for package updates....I am not sure if .ISO installers tend to be more current in terms of implemented packages, kernel updates, and/or anything which makes the state of the Operating likely more current relative to the often given commercial ISO on the windows side that tend to be floating out there. While Linux may not out of the box handshake in every possible way with big brother adobe flash (for playing more commonly any videos on YouTube, Amazon Prime streaming, Netflix,or anything like this)...technically Linux mint and Ubuntu variations I believe do up to a point and the usual work around for completely enabling streaming for Amazon prime or I'd imagine Netflix is done (at least for me).
Possible Theory?
Reason all this might matter? Well for most maybe it matters little, I'd suspect most people don't like to touch their computers. And likely why if you were into servicing windows at least from the standpoint of re installing it, such interface is more cumbersome, slow and generally undesirable. On the other hand, the typical linux user learning curve maybe a tad bit more than the average windows user, and then coupling this with software groups actually interested in attracting prospective customers. The quicker, the simpler, the easier it is to get an operating system installed added with any number of points to user experience is likely to resonate with some potential base not only in initially installing but persistently using an operating system. Likely there are plenty of web posts that layout where operating system users dominate, on the other hand, and its generally one product in so far as world wide markets...that's Windows, and not much else. Linux on the other hand accounts for supposedly a share of approximately one percent. While Windows accounts for a bulk majority of users out in the markets. Although some interesting trending appears to be occurring amidst the share of users in this arena. Any persistent number of users now appear to be using, for instance, generally no longer supported (outside of commercial vendor software) legacy Windows XP operating system, considering that this market is something like 14% of a given user share in the total market and tied with a Windows 8 user share market, while Windows 7 dominates the reset of the field.
Part of this could be because for an existing user base, interoperability issues between legacy hardware and newer operating systems tend to be more difficult, although this may not necessarily be true for alternative operating systems outside of Windows XP. The other issue could be a given user demographic, coupled with consumer malaise in certain areas of the computing industry. This may come down to an issue of people are likely to want to upgrade their smart phone before they put another hulking piece of machinery that stays fixed in the living room, and likely serves as another fixture to the family entertainment center. The laptop certainly has lost fashionable attributes, and mostly any other fixture, could be described more likely as specially devoted, outside of the swiss army like utility that a smartphone device might possess, and here Windows is pretty much almost non existent in so far as the common user is concerned.
It seems if one were perusing the arguments for marketing relevance, clear and easy to read screens, coupled with faster potential silent forms of communications (given by keystrokes as opposed to voice command) could be reasons for any technological renaissance. Mostly, however, in terms of productivity needs, in a personal way, any sort of larger scale computing device should have some obvious advantages over the smaller compact stuff out there. If ever cloud computing software usurped this any further, likely the necessity of these more cumbersome pieces of hardware could be relegated to any vast cloud warehouse having sprung up...mainframe models to industries and the personal computer as one should know it a relic.
In the meantime, given to user relevance, I could still argue that Windows might embrace appreciably some models and methods that linux computing should offer. Whether it were ease in installation, simple, more free of bloat ware, were quick, clean, crisp, sharp, leaving users with excellent graphical experience...and I'd say graphical experience were part of this. While I've read some suggesting that graphics rendering should be provisioned at a stage of irking a consumer...it would seem this is the poorer approach to consumer marketing. If it weren't more obvious that some headway were supposedly needed to computational data analytics on things like resource mining, it might seem the share of space on one's computer were devoted to other things that had little to do with a given user. Obviously, for whatever users that have been interested in maintaining a Windows device, it would seem that marketing here has been often times poor enough, and statistics have much to show for this.
Then given the level of user experience, where it seems more commonplace that paying for intrusion should be a pretty masochistic activity in its own right, paying for poorer use of technology, or paying for lower end content suffices?
All of this likely would better work, where any level ignorance abounded, better success would have been had, if, for instance, a government insisted that a technology remain in place as it had, maybe a telecommunications service were ensured up and running to the exclusion of any other service...thus, imprisoning individuals for broad band voip services, but much of this were like providing amply the taste of a forbidden fruit, and playing the role of a serpent all at once. Unfortunately, knowledge of states hadn't aided in this situation, or at least if intending to lord ignorance, it seems one should do a better job at disinformation, or merely all of this suspect claim is more self evident in a government that amply picks up on opportunity at political hand grabs like a *****.
Hands down, if you were knowledgeable on this subject matter, you'd likely guess right on the issue of Windows being the slower of installation, likely the more cumbersome, and supposedly if you thought it were likely more free of being error prone, in my experience, as of today, really not so true. Especially consider when security updates generating errors on an install means sitting for hours (and these are literal hours) waiting for restore points to be re enacted. For the amount of time spent waiting around, one could have windows re installed to exactly a given restore point several times over! Amazing that re store points take so long!
As to Linux, not that security is necessarily any better, but at least if you are screwed on the issue of security you hadn't need be pre occupied with the computer for hours on end waiting to push the OK button for one security update relative the other.
Typical windows re installation time: several hours minimum when the installation works, this includes waiting around for security updates or any system updates. Much of the time spent waiting is preparing, it would seem the desktop/laptop for updates (as in pre process scanning and deciding which apparent packages were necessary), coupled by an even lengthier process.
Typical time for a linux OS installation: 20 to 30 minutes usually. And maybe another 20 to 30 minutes for package updates....I am not sure if .ISO installers tend to be more current in terms of implemented packages, kernel updates, and/or anything which makes the state of the Operating likely more current relative to the often given commercial ISO on the windows side that tend to be floating out there. While Linux may not out of the box handshake in every possible way with big brother adobe flash (for playing more commonly any videos on YouTube, Amazon Prime streaming, Netflix,or anything like this)...technically Linux mint and Ubuntu variations I believe do up to a point and the usual work around for completely enabling streaming for Amazon prime or I'd imagine Netflix is done (at least for me).
Possible Theory?
Reason all this might matter? Well for most maybe it matters little, I'd suspect most people don't like to touch their computers. And likely why if you were into servicing windows at least from the standpoint of re installing it, such interface is more cumbersome, slow and generally undesirable. On the other hand, the typical linux user learning curve maybe a tad bit more than the average windows user, and then coupling this with software groups actually interested in attracting prospective customers. The quicker, the simpler, the easier it is to get an operating system installed added with any number of points to user experience is likely to resonate with some potential base not only in initially installing but persistently using an operating system. Likely there are plenty of web posts that layout where operating system users dominate, on the other hand, and its generally one product in so far as world wide markets...that's Windows, and not much else. Linux on the other hand accounts for supposedly a share of approximately one percent. While Windows accounts for a bulk majority of users out in the markets. Although some interesting trending appears to be occurring amidst the share of users in this arena. Any persistent number of users now appear to be using, for instance, generally no longer supported (outside of commercial vendor software) legacy Windows XP operating system, considering that this market is something like 14% of a given user share in the total market and tied with a Windows 8 user share market, while Windows 7 dominates the reset of the field.
Part of this could be because for an existing user base, interoperability issues between legacy hardware and newer operating systems tend to be more difficult, although this may not necessarily be true for alternative operating systems outside of Windows XP. The other issue could be a given user demographic, coupled with consumer malaise in certain areas of the computing industry. This may come down to an issue of people are likely to want to upgrade their smart phone before they put another hulking piece of machinery that stays fixed in the living room, and likely serves as another fixture to the family entertainment center. The laptop certainly has lost fashionable attributes, and mostly any other fixture, could be described more likely as specially devoted, outside of the swiss army like utility that a smartphone device might possess, and here Windows is pretty much almost non existent in so far as the common user is concerned.
It seems if one were perusing the arguments for marketing relevance, clear and easy to read screens, coupled with faster potential silent forms of communications (given by keystrokes as opposed to voice command) could be reasons for any technological renaissance. Mostly, however, in terms of productivity needs, in a personal way, any sort of larger scale computing device should have some obvious advantages over the smaller compact stuff out there. If ever cloud computing software usurped this any further, likely the necessity of these more cumbersome pieces of hardware could be relegated to any vast cloud warehouse having sprung up...mainframe models to industries and the personal computer as one should know it a relic.
In the meantime, given to user relevance, I could still argue that Windows might embrace appreciably some models and methods that linux computing should offer. Whether it were ease in installation, simple, more free of bloat ware, were quick, clean, crisp, sharp, leaving users with excellent graphical experience...and I'd say graphical experience were part of this. While I've read some suggesting that graphics rendering should be provisioned at a stage of irking a consumer...it would seem this is the poorer approach to consumer marketing. If it weren't more obvious that some headway were supposedly needed to computational data analytics on things like resource mining, it might seem the share of space on one's computer were devoted to other things that had little to do with a given user. Obviously, for whatever users that have been interested in maintaining a Windows device, it would seem that marketing here has been often times poor enough, and statistics have much to show for this.
Then given the level of user experience, where it seems more commonplace that paying for intrusion should be a pretty masochistic activity in its own right, paying for poorer use of technology, or paying for lower end content suffices?
All of this likely would better work, where any level ignorance abounded, better success would have been had, if, for instance, a government insisted that a technology remain in place as it had, maybe a telecommunications service were ensured up and running to the exclusion of any other service...thus, imprisoning individuals for broad band voip services, but much of this were like providing amply the taste of a forbidden fruit, and playing the role of a serpent all at once. Unfortunately, knowledge of states hadn't aided in this situation, or at least if intending to lord ignorance, it seems one should do a better job at disinformation, or merely all of this suspect claim is more self evident in a government that amply picks up on opportunity at political hand grabs like a *****.
No comments:
Post a Comment