Runs great, sucks less

Tags:
Linux,
Os,
Apps,
XFree86

Henry Kingman AnchorDesk

Published: 14 May 2001 15:07 BST

For me, the switch from Windows to Linux came two years ago. Meanwhile, ZDNet's main Linux commentator, Evan Leibovitch, has used a Unix or Linux desktop since 1986.

Those who've already made the switch will tell you that, like anything else, it's really just a matter of deciding to do it and then living with that decision.

Every OS has its strengths and weaknesses, but at root, an OS is just an OS. For all its cachet as "a system by and for computer experts," Linux's similarities to Windows or Mac OS are far greater than its differences.

Or, as my MIT pal Richard is fond of saying, "All operating systems suck. Linux just sucks less."

If you've succeeded with the Mac or Windows, in time you'll succeed with Linux too. You'll forfeit familiarity and comfort at first, but soon enough Linux will be second nature and any other system will seem awkward.

Why bother making the switch and mustering up all that extra brain activity?

For me, the most compelling thing about Linux is the pace of innovation.

Mac OS, after revolutionizing desktop publishing in the mid-80s, saw only incremental improvements over the next 15 years. Microsoft, after bouying U.S. productivity and the whole economy with the watershed Windows 95 release, seems to actually lose quality (while gaining in resource usage) with each subsequent consumer OS release.

Now take a look at what's happening with Linux.

Two years ago, desktop Linux really didn't exist other than for zealots like Evan. Linux was a server OS. Servers are pretty simple. They run only a few programs at a time. Things are predictable, controlled and tight.

Desktops, by comparison, are complex and weird -- as varied as the people using them. But Linux users wanted Linux desktops.