1. The file structure: In Windows, it is very logical and everything is in one location. You have "Users" for userspecific data, "Programs" for installed application, "drivers" for drivers and "windows" for system/OS related stuff. In linux you have the mess that is pic related because of legacy reasons.
2. Installing software: Unter windows, you open your browser, find the software you want to download, download an installer.exe, go through the wizard and install it. In Linux, you have package managers/repositories. In theory, this seems like a convenient way to install software. However, when I need software to perform a task, I often do not know all the X programs that exist that do said task, nor which is the best suited one among them. So in order to get that information I have to open my browser anyway, google "tool for XY", read some comparisons, before I then switch back to my package manager and install it. Oh, its not in the repo? Well too bad, now it's even more annoying. How is having 31231 different repositories better than having one big repository, which is the internet? Also, dependancy hell.
Face it, autists. Your legacy OS is shitty for normal Desktop use.
>You have "Users" for userspecific data, "Programs" for installed application Lol, everybody who ever used Windows knows this is a lie.
>In Linux, you have package managers/repositories. In theory, this seems like a convenient way to install software. However, when I need software to perform a task, I often do not know all the X programs that exist that do said task, nor which is the best suited one among them. So in order to get that information I have to open my browser anyway, google "tool for XY", read some comparisons, before I then switch back to my package manager and install it. Oh, its not in the repo? Well too bad, now it's even more annoying. How is having 31231 different repositories better than having one big repository, which is the internet? Also, dependancy hell. Most Linux distros have a package manager AND a manual installation process, where you download a eg. .deb and install that, so the complaint is simply invalid. But for very good reason the "package manager" approach has been preferred over the manual installation every single time a company was given the choice. See eg. Android or Apple, which have either totally or partially discarded this approach, even Microsoft is trying to do the same (Windows 10 S), but they are idiots and their store is the most useless repo imaginable.
Joseph Gutierrez
>muh retard friendly back to india
Ethan Morgan
>convenience is bad >people who like it easy and convenient are stupid >I am smart you are dumb fuck off
Jace Scott
Windows isn't "convenient" being retard friendly is the exact opposite of being "convenient", as it prevents you from actually doing what you want to do and forcing you to do dumb shit to be able to do what you want.
Henry Morales
MacOS > Windows. You literally drag and drop Applications to the Trash-Can if you want to uninstall them. Talk about convenience. Also, brew.
Daniel Diaz
Linux isn't windows. Linux cannot directly replace windows Linux is a Unix clone. With Unix and Linux, you will generally find something called a package manager. This is useful because it can help solve file conflicts and prevent programs from having clone libraries and retarded file structures by themselves. You can also generally download a .deb if your repo isn't enough. Here, let me help you with the file structure: 'Users' /home 'Program Files' /bin for binary files /lib for your application's libraries ""Drivers"" /lib/modules are where your kernel modules are 'AppData' /home/$USER/config Things like images and resources from your applications /usr/share 'System32' / This file structure may seem terrible at first, until you start installing a ton of applications. Then it becomes much more scalable and efficient than the way Windows handles applications.
While both aren't perfect you're not assessing Windows correctly. First of all you missed multiple folders, secondly lot's of software does not conform to the standard directory layout and lastly the file hierarchy isn't complete, the registry contains lots of missing things and is a complete mess.
You've also assessed Linux wrong but since I'm short on time I'll leave correcting you to someone else.
Julian Martinez
Latest update is over 2 years old, so yet more reasons for no...
Jaxon Ross
Linux is a kernel.
Asher Thomas
Why do they always try to pretend their wack directory layout is brilliantly designed, when it's the FS equivalent of the blind watchmaker bashing its skull against everything for 50 years?
Luis Gutierrez
The Unix filesystem hierarchy originated out of purely technical limitations. Despite what weenies and Rob Pike have been telling you for years, it was never "designed" to be the way it is: lists.busybox.net/pipermail/busybox/2010-December/074114.html Any "explanation" of the heirarchy (including man hier) is just a rationalization after the fact.
Hunter Perry
>How NONE of you lot even thought of this because not that many people give two shits about this "problem"
Owen Brown
>Then it becomes much more scalable and efficient Does it? Putting binaries in a single directory is useful. But you can use symlinks for that. What's the excuse for mixing all of a package's other files into the rest of the system? Are there any, besides backward compatibility? I don't particularly enjoy having things spread out over /usr/bin, /usr/lib, /usr/share, /etc/something.d, and who knows where. Nix and Snappy both have the right idea when it comes to this.
Eli Adams
Why do wintoddlers constantly make these threads? Does Linux live rent free in your head? You guys look down on what you call "freetards" but you obsess over them.
Juan Kelly
untermensch detected
Xavier Nguyen
didn't read a single word poo in the loo prandesh
Michael Ramirez
You just made Windows sound terrible, well done.
Parker Baker
>In Windows, it is very logical and everything is in one location. Why are you telling lies on an anonymous stone knapping forum?
Hunter Reyes
>haha wintoddlers >gets completly BTFO >lol who hurt you? downvoted
>Oh, its not in the repo? >Well then lets look on AUR This is why Arch is the most based distro.
Wyatt Thompson
I can't say the linux situation is any better. *puts a gazillion dotfiles in your home directory*
Every piece of software not using the .config directory should be purged.
Jace Hughes
Yes gobo is unpopular because the traditional Unix file structure actually makes sense if you think longer than 5 minutes about it. What Windows users are apparently not capable of doing.
Camden Lewis
The traditional Unix file structure makes no sense. Read
Dylan Bailey
Unix is used on a large variety of systems. For a single user Desktop it the FS structure may make less sense but for servers, workstaions, embedded and other systems it makes a lot of sense. It just covers a lot of use cases and is therefore slightly more complicated.
Bentley Butler
1. What is so confusing about /bin /etc /user and /home 2. Appimage
Robert Murphy
He could be from Austria or Switzerland or south Africa
Isaac Cox
I know about this and it's a beautiful idea. Is it capable of getting new software even though it's not updated?
a 1970's proprietary OS's philosophy is holding back Linux's innovation.
Joshua Wright
He's not entirely wrong. All the /bin and /lib splits (except across /home and maybe /usr/local) are retarded.
Blake Ramirez
> a 1970's proprietary OS's philosophy is holding back Linux's innovation. Since the 1970 loads different of things have been tried. Only the best things have survived. One of those things is UNIX and the POSIX standard. Look at gobolinux and you see that your proclaimed "innovation" is possible. But nobody wants it because in practice it make things works.
Imagine being too stupid to be able to use computers
Nicholas Ross
It's not "wintoddlers", it's people from other websites that come here for the sole purpose of degrading the quality of the board. And it works: look at all these replies. I bet you didn't even sage.
Jason Clark
Nothing is preventing someone from making it work more like Windows. I am very happy to see Linux become more Windows like.
Jonathan Bell
> In Windows, it is very logical and everything is in one location Don't even have to keep reading to know your IQ is under 75.
Anthony Anderson
Apple got this right, macOS hides all the Unixy shit from the user and shows him a much more sensible file structure. The system itself goes in /System, programs go in /Applications, you go in /Users, program settings go in ~/Library/Preferences, and so on.
When using Ubuntu 16.04 LTS, I realized half way in it's life software meant for 18.04 LTS added via PPA, sometimes did not work correctly. I was told Linux was not capable of much reverse/forward compatibility outside of appimage, snap and flatpak, and the general rule of thumb is if software is not maintained it will break compatibility every 1-3 Debian Version updates.
Gobo Linux, Nix Guix, Nitrux, or whatever meme distros that can solve this problem are appreciated.
Andrew Young
bnd neger
Gavin Martin
The Internet is the ultimate repository, and reverse, forward and custom software compatibility is an endless word of choice. Common sense is your anti virus.
One thing windows seems to fail at is the standard of where stuff put into the USERS directory should go. Some software puts it in user/documents user/documents/ user/appdata/local user/appdata/roaming user/appdata/locallow.
I have program data in all of those locations.
Xavier Martin
This.
Neck yourself you dumb fucking frogposter.
Asher Gutierrez
Fuck you. I don't accept this piece of trash as a DEUTSCHER!
Jason Sanchez
I'd just like to interject for a moment. What you’re referring to as Linux, is in fact, GNU/Linux, or as I’ve recently taken to calling it, GNU plus Linux. Linux is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another free component of a fully functioning GNU system made useful by the GNU corelibs, shell utilities and vital system components comprising a full OS as defined by POSIX. Many computer users run a modified version of the GNU system every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of GNU which is widely used today is often called “Linux”, and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the GNU system, developed by the GNU Project. There really is a Linux, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Linux is the kernel: the program in the system that allocates the machine’s resources to the other programs that you run. The kernel is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete operating system. Linux is normally used in combination with the GNU operating system: the whole system is basically GNU with Linux added, or GNU/Linux. All the so-called “Linux” distributions are really distributions of GNU/Linux.
Parker Collins
Installing Software in Windows: >look for reputable source and download .msi or .exe >follow a bunch of GUI prompts >make sure it doesn't install bloatware or a toolbar (>sometimes manually install dotnet framework or some crap like that)
Installing Software in Linux: >one line in cli for multiple programs
Jose Carter
Gobo(GNU/)Linux contains propietary malware. Install a freedom-respecting distro instead.
Grayson Collins
You don't install software in Linux. Linux itself is a software package which you install into your GNU system.
Jaxson Campbell
The linux/unix filesystem makes sense when you factor in how to split things across network shares to minimise duplication.
The bin/sbin being separate from /usr/bin makes sense, for example, if you want to put the minimum amount of binaries on a local disk and have the rest being in a network share mounted on /usr, so the bulk of your applications need only be installed once regardless of the number of machines. Constrast this to windows active directory installation, which replicates the executable files on each machine that uses it and has to install everything a user has in their group policy when they log on.
Then there's /usr/share, which is platform agnostic, so you can have a network share there mounted on all different kinds of unix boxes etc.
Similarly, it's sensible to separate /usr and /var, as the var directory is for things that change relatively frequently, so would warrant different storage in a networked environment etc.
Now, the names don't make much sense - that I'll grant. But it's not too hard to remember "programs go in /usr/bin, libraries in /usr/lib, system data in /var and user data in /home"
>And, as an added bonus, you can even save some space by deleting the cd command. The rice we need, but not the rice we deserve.
Jose Roberts
>no convient acces to c:/Users/username folder >appdata roaming/local mess >programs/programs64 mess >Documens vs My Documents mess Yah I prefer linux filesystem layout.
Linux package manager has issues. But not what you wrote.
Blake Parker
The Linux filesysyem layout is very logical and organized You just dont understand it because you have baby duck syndrome
