Would you still use Linux if you didn't have to pay for Windows?

RockLobster · 6 Apr 2010 at 18:13

A question out there for you guys. Personally, I don't have to pay for Windows because of my job but I'm still thinking of Linux. Don't get me wrong Windows 7 is great but the threat of viruses, etc annoy me. I don't run any antivirus software now so I might have a virus and not know about it. With Linux you don't have to worry. I was thinking about getting a Mac but it seems any bit of software you want, you have to pay for. There isn't much freeware about.

tntcoder · 6 Apr 2010 at 18:20

Yes

I have never had to buy a Windows license either, get it free from MSDNAA. I always keep it installed as a VM inside Linux though, mostly for MS Office & Visual Studio. For non-gaming use though I have used Linux for years as a primary boot OS

craptakular · 6 Apr 2010 at 18:35

Yes, linux is so much more customisable.

@tntcoder, I have now fully switched over to Arch

. I used my crossover licence that they gave away a couple of years ago to get MS office working.

Having to pay for turboprint to get my Canon IP4700 fully operational like it is in w7 :/

Using Devede to make DVD's for my grandad to watch and using avidemux-gtk to merge avi's together.

I think after 5 years of dual booting I don't need windows for anything anymore

meaty · 6 Apr 2010 at 18:57

When it comes down to free as in speech and free as in beer, the former is more important for me. Even without significant coding skills it takes nothing to get down to the nuts and bolts of the thing which lets you know your computer is truly yours, not leased to you by Microsoft or Apple et al.

tntcoder · 6 Apr 2010 at 19:24

Oxy said:
@TNTcoder, I have now fully switched over to Arch . I used my crossover licence that they gave away a couple of years ago to get MS office working.

Awesome

good choice! I remember using every distro under the sun for years and not finding one that I could settle with. Then I met Arch

PermaBanned · 6 Apr 2010 at 21:37

Probably, but Windows wouldn't be the same. It would have to be in the same situation that Linux is in that the developers are making it because they want to and not because they get money from it, and so would probably be far better. But if it was the same and free then definitely Linux.

JC · 6 Apr 2010 at 22:53

I use linux and I pay for windows, I prefer using the software that best suits my needs.

Moeks · 7 Apr 2010 at 07:56

I use both, but for my server, HC/Media computer and 90% of the stuff I do on my desktop I use Linux ...because I genuinely prefer the experience, and I like a lot of the software better to.

The only machine I have which I use Windows on most of the time is my laptop, as using Linux on it cuts my battery life almost in half ...no matter what I fiddle with. It's a culv Acer that I can get 7-8 hours out of in Windows but 4-4.5 is my lot in Linux ...and that's being 'careful'.

So yes I would still use Linux if I didn't have to pay for Windows. I have an awful lot to learn with Linux though (which I like) ...where as I know Windows very well indeed.

The one thing about my setup that continues to bug me somewhat is that I can't get vsync to function with Eve in Wine, so it's constatnly running 130-170fps ...causing the fan on my graphics card to compensate and bascially running hotter and noisier than it does on Windows.

JHeaton · 7 Apr 2010 at 09:57

Yep, I'd still use Linux if Windows didn't cost me a penny.

tntcoder said:
Awesome good choice! I remember using every distro under the sun for years and not finding one that I could settle with. Then I met Arch

Same here

Outcast · 8 Apr 2010 at 16:05

Oxy said:
Yes, linux is so much more customisable.

@TNTcoder, I have now fully switched over to Arch . I used my crossover licence that they gave away a couple of years ago to get MS office working.

Having to pay for turboprint to get my Canon IP4700 fully operational like it is in w7 :/

!snip!

I bought TurboPrint for my Canon IP5300 but never used it.

I found the standard driver Ubuntu installs to be plenty adequate. Is it worth installing ?

BigglesPiP · 8 Apr 2010 at 16:26

I'd continue using both.

I currently dual boot none of my machines (except an old XP install on the W7 box).

I like each machine to be focussed at the moment.

Edward78 · 8 Apr 2010 at 17:05

I am getting where I don't trust Windows, all the things that can go wrong. Malware, Viruses, Keyloggers, etc. Plus, windows rot the 6 month reinstall cycle is a bit old. I just use Windows to game, if I could get games & install them in Linux as easy as Windows (all games, not through wine but native) I would ditch windows, take my CD & burn it.

Spike_UK · 8 Apr 2010 at 17:07

Even though Linux is free I still choose to use Windows. Sure I can technically do everything I want in Linux, but I always feel like I'm jumping through hoops to do the simplest things.

Windows 7 was cheap enough that it really didn't bother me to pay for a copy.

Are we all really that tight that £70 for a Home Licence is too much?

JHeaton · 8 Apr 2010 at 17:12

Spike_UK said:
Are we all really that tight that £70 for a Home Licence is too much?

£70 is an awful lot of money for something you don't like and don't agree with. I wouldn't use Windows even if the price tag was £0, because it isn't free.

Outcast · 8 Apr 2010 at 17:24

I don't mind paying for anything I find useful.

My grip with Ms is Ethics.. or lack of tbp

craptakular · 8 Apr 2010 at 17:55

Outcast said:
I bought TurboPrint for my Canon IP5300 but never used it.

I found the standard driver Ubuntu installs to be plenty adequate. Is it worth installing ?

Theres two issues with the standard driver it doesnt' support full resolution printing and has pap driver options when printing.

Turboprint has full resolution printing, with a magnificient plugin for gimp so I can do borderless printer etc etc

Also as I am running Arch linux I can not install the .deb or .rpm anyway and the source files gave me a headache as they have no instructions :/

Spooter · 8 Apr 2010 at 18:18

Oxy,

I just looked at installing arch linux (from the weekly build iso) and it looks pretty complicated from the guides..

Maybe you can advice?

I booted it on my netbook and got to the terminal where I could ping google thats it lol.

I have installed ubuntu, debian, linux mint plenty of times but this maybe out of league?!?

craptakular · 8 Apr 2010 at 18:32

Spooter said:
Oxy,

I just looked at installing arch linux (from the weekly build iso) and it looks pretty complicated from the guides..

Maybe you can advice?

I booted it on my netbook and got to the terminal where I could ping google thats it lol.

I have installed ubuntu, debian, linux mint plenty of times but this maybe out of league?!?

nah it's not dude. I no expert either really.

Have you found the beginners guide?

If you haven't it is your new bible.

http://wiki.archlinux.org/index.php/Beginners'_Guide

Just follow it word for word, slowly.

It will give you a default system. Then you install you programs, mouse themes, window themes etc etc on top of that.

Keep plugging away at it, Arch is really quick!

JHeaton · 8 Apr 2010 at 19:33

Spooter said:
Oxy,

I just looked at installing arch linux (from the weekly build iso) and it looks pretty complicated from the guides..

Maybe you can advice?

I booted it on my netbook and got to the terminal where I could ping google thats it lol.

I have installed ubuntu, debian, linux mint plenty of times but this maybe out of league?!?

As Oxy said, the beginner's guide is the place to be starting. Just like the rest of the wiki, it's absolutely packed with information. #archlinux is full of helpful people, so you can always go in there to request help. And if you need someone to walk you through the process then you can IM me, if you like.

craptakular · 8 Apr 2010 at 19:40

Arch wiki is so much better than any other linux wiki in my opinion. Truely awesome!