Li*ux Lies Analysis
[ Home ] [ Up ]

(SC)    Why do they use lies?

    The Li*ux so-called "operating system" is a pile of mostly independently developed software with minimal integration. The Li*ux community itself is also anarchic, without determined goals, set purposes or defined standards. In order for the half-products made by such a community to be accepted by the masses, the community must go to an extent of using false promises, lies, unproven comparissons, and, most of all, spreading bad word about the competiting products and companies. In case of Li*ux, the product is Windows, and the company is, of course, Microsoft. I am sure that you have heard or know what Li*uxers say when comparing Li*ux to Windows. There is no respect for competition there and very weak or no grounds for basing the allegations.

(SC)    To what extent should they be believed?

    Very, very small to none. If you want to know the whole truth about Li*ux, the best sources are those from outside the Li*ux community, which includes books written by known true professionals. Note that there are a few so-called professionals who are nothing more than Li*ux zealots who will say/write anything to make Li*ux seem better than it is. Information written by Li*uxers is mostly biased, and distorts the true perception of Li*ux and its competition. Exceptions to this rule naturally exist, but it is safer to go with other sources of info than looking for them. Li*ux's competition will, among others, mostly provide true assessments of its quality and abilities.

(SC)    What are the fundamental lies?

Li*ux is faster than Windows NT. The Open Benchmark, PC Week and PC Magazine tests are solid proof against this.
Li*ux is more stable than NT. There is no proof to support this. It is a mere assumption based upon the experiences of a Li*ux zealot who's perception is inclined. Experiences from non-inclined users reveal approximately the same level of system stability in NT and Li*ux. Windows 2000, however, seems to surpass both.
Li*ux is more secure than NT. Li*ux is not only less secure than NT, but also one of the least secure "operating systems". Besides inheriting typical Unix weaknesses, it adds its own in the form of poorly written applications and services, and sometimes the kernel itself.

(SC)    What are other typical ones?

Li*ux protects information better. Anyone with experience and professionalism wouldn't trust Li*ux with critical data storage. The ext2 filesystem used is very fragile and prone to frequent errors. It also lacks ACLs and most important of all - journaling - which is the reason why data loss isn't at all uncommon.
Li*us uses less system resources. This is true to some extent, but not to the extent Li*uxers want you to believe. When configured as similarly as possible (NT with all standard services and applications, Li*ux with standard daemons + X w/ WM that is closest to Windows + standard applications), NT uses the similar amount or even less system resources than Li*ux. The conclusion is that Li*ux's and its application's code is less optimized than that of Windows NT, so Li*ux is, in fact, generally more resource-intensive.
Li*ux uses the newest technologies. The technology used as a foundation for Li*ux is Unix, which is some 30+ years old. Other than code optimizations and adding support for various hardware, very little has really changed since the first "stable" release of Li*ux. POSIX compliance is a roadblock for Li*ux because of which it will never be able to match the capabilities of new systems. Therefore, speaking of Li*ux in the context of new technologies is completely absurd.