Where Linux fails
Posted by multippt
Linux is touted as a possible replacement for Windows. However, with every great thing comes great flaws.
Finding software for Linux can be as difficult as finding a needle in the haystack. Most software on the market are “built for Windows”, probably hampering the adoption of Linux. While Linux recognises Windows executables, Linux cannot run them without an emulator. However, there are some software that can run on Linux without any emulators, like OpenOffice and Adobe software.
Free is certainly great. While this is the main feature of Linux, free does come at a cost. While implementing Linux features, user friendliness was compromised. Tell a person who have no knowledge of computers to use Linux, and you may get unexpected results. Linux is built for those who read manuals, unlike Windows which is built for those who want to get on with it in a hurry. Sure, there is Ubuntu, but Ubuntu isn’t as user-friendly as Windows XP (and can’t be compared to Windows Vista).
Talk about command prompt. Windows users never get to touch that black window until they feel veteran enough. Linux has this great feature as well (a.k.a. command line), though, it is a must for most users to know it while installing some software. In fact, some Linux users may even memorize some commands.
Linux is highly secure, probably may more secure than Windows. However, high security does not mean it is immune. Linux does not support most Anti-Virus softwares, so protection in Linux if a virus does get in is lax. Of course, that is if a virus does manage to penetrate the tough shell of Linux.
Well, that’s some main flaws in Linux, but unlike Windows, open source patch up its quirks quickly.
