7 ms·

Sorry I disagree, first many people who work in IT are _forced_ to use Windows as their primary host at work. Next, even if you install a Virtual Machine it mig

Sorry I disagree, first many people who work in IT are _forced_ to use Windows as their primary host at work. Next, even if you install a Virtual Machine it might not work as seamless as having an Unix shell natively, thus some use Cygwin. Regarding poor students, would you prefer to commute daily with multiple laptops? One for Linux one for Windows? I doubt so. Other than that, if your work is not just coding but doing _anything_ apart from code itself, word processing, spreadsheets, graphic design, cad and you still need to run something from Linux ecosystem the WSL is currently probably your best option.

ChristianGeek 9y ago
You would presumably remote in to the second computer. I do this from my MacBook Pro to my Windows desktop using TeamViewer, and also into native Linux boxes using ssh.
sinh 9y ago
> Sorry I disagree, first many people who work in IT are _forced_ to use Windows as their primary host at work. I would consider it a bad use of my experience to develop on Windows. The market agrees with me, experienced Linux developers are much better paid. > Next, even if you install a Virtual Machine it might not work as seamless as having an Unix shell natively, thus some use Cygwin. I would not call cygwin a native Unix shell. > Regarding poor students, would you prefer to commute daily with multiple laptops? One for Linux one for Windows? I doubt so. I don't use Windows for personal stuff. Apart from that, VirtualBox would still be a better solution if it was necessary to use Windows. For example, updates on a Windows machine which is rarely used can easily take hours. One does not want to have his work machine blocked for so long. Apart from that, abandoning Windows is just a matter of leaving old habits. For me, using exclusively Linux for my personal stuff has worked excellently in the last 20 years. > Other than that, if your work is not just coding but doing _anything_ apart from code itself, word processing, spreadsheets, graphic design, cad and you still need to run something from Linux ecosystem the WSL is currently probably your best option. Libreoffice or Softmaker office is available, but LaTeX is much better for reports and articles, and wikis and Markdown is better for documentation. MS Word is a usability nightmare. Also, I do not use spreadsheets for myself, I use Python scripts - it's more efficient, and ledger-cli for accounting stuff. Inkscape is much better than MS Visio. I am physicist and developer, I do not use CAD, but if I had to use a CAD program on Windows, I would use a separate Windows machine, as explained before. You sound like you are just used to do everything with Windows and never have considered seriously to use Linux software, I guess you don't know most of what exists there. Also, I'd appreciate it if people would not call areas where some software vendors have managed to create a lock-in an "ecosystem". An ecosystem is a scientific concept from biology. Using that for proprietary software environments is simply marketing BS bingo.
- NiveaGeForce 9y ago
  Only feature updates, (which come twice a year) can take hours to install. Cumulative updates (typically monthly) only take single digits minutes on most machines. How well do LibreOffice and Softmaker Office work with pen & touch in tablet mode?
- toyg 9y ago
  Linux developers might be better paid simply because there are fewer of them. Run of the mill “enterprise” developers are on Windows and they make up the bulk of the workforce (in any country, afaik). This creates economies of scale that incentivise companies to continue standardising on Windows, because it makes it easier and cheaper to hire people.
  - cat199 9y ago
    yes yes, but free market, supply/demand, downward wage pressure, blah blah blah prove you incorrect, no?
  - rejschaap 9y ago
    Microsoft has successfully created an environment where people with little training are able to add business value. The average Windows developer is not at all comparable to the average Linux developer.
  - sinh 9y ago
    Well, if Linux developers are better paid this will naturally increase supply. And this happens, of course. But why should pay companies more for Linux when they can develop stuff on Windows, and pay less? Wouldn't it be dumb to use the more expensive resource, and have less gain? The reason is that Linux developers are more productive - they create more value, and the decision of companies to pay them more is all rational. Of course the detail picture is more nuanced - it makes a difference if one develops a boring PHP app, or makes complex embedded systems for sectors like HFT, defense, embedded medical devices, or similar. But chances are that a lot of the latter use Linux, too. They just don't advertise jobs on HN.
- rejschaap 9y ago
NiveaGeForce 9y ago
There are also many developers who are forced to use GNU/Linux dev tools, while prefering to use Windows. Not to mention that Windows has better support for most hardware and modern form factors, such as pen & touch enabled 2-in-1s. If you're buying something like a Surface Pro or Surface Book, the last thing you want to do is cripple its functionality, ease of use, performance and battery life by installing GNU/Linux. But the fundamental reason for why I avoid it, is best explained in this video. https://youtu.be/rmsIZUuBoQs https://youtu.be/rmsIZUuBoQs
- jenscow 9y ago
  The type of developer who prefers Windows wouldn't get a job in a place that uses GNU/Linux. The rest of the things you mention doesn't really apply to developers (when developing, at least).
  - NiveaGeForce 9y ago
    Some developers like me need to do a lot of pen & paper math. It's also much easier to brainstorm and draw diagrams using a pen.
- ahartmetz 9y ago
  Regarding drivers and general hardware support. If you buy hardware that doesn't work well with Linux, you will have to deal with hardware that doesn't work well with Linux. But I get it, you don't like Linux.
- sinh 9y ago
  I replicate my answer to a different comment here because it applies identically to this one. There is a number of issues with Surface and touchscreens. First, my impression is that Microsoft Surface hardware is, too, heavily advertised in developer forums and social media. Again, one needs to discern the desired association which that PR effort wants to create, from the actual qualities and disadvantages of the product. For example, the surface laptops have earned some negative reputation for lack of durability. Anybody who would consider to buy such a device would surely be well advised to do a web search whether such problems are more frequent, a thing of the past, or a rare exception. But that's a digression. You mentioned touchscreen support as important quality and I am zooming in on that. Surface books and touchscreens are discussed here in the context of a software developer system. I am however really a bit puzzled by that. What does it mean to have touch on a software developer system? I understand surely that Microsoft does not want to lose a generation of developers, and that it considers them as trend-setting or even required to create gazillions of fantastic future Windows apps which will populate the Microsoft app store with killer apps for the Surface tablet. Microsoft marketing surely wants to sell the surface (if I were them, I'd probably hire some PR agencies to flood Reddit and HN with positive comments about it). Also, Microsoft still seems to live the dream - in the face of all these failures such as Windows Phone - that desktop software, tablets and mobile apps shall be, will be, must be convergent and that desktop and mobile will have a common UI. Which is touch. I won't comment more on that. If you ever tried, it is hard to shatter someone else's dream, even if those wishes might not entirely based on experience. But now, let's come to real life, and let's become a little, just a little, practical. As a first, consider that software developers are people which handle program code. In most cases, lots of program code. In many cases, quite complex program code. The code is displayed on the screen. Developers have to remember many things, and the more code you have on the screen, the less you have to remember while working on one thing. They say that we can only remember seven to nine things in short-term memory, for more things we have to memorize. Memorizing costs a lot of time. That has a simple consequence: The larger the screen is, the more text it displays, the better. Just let's take my home PC which I mostly use for hobby programming. It is a 43 inch Philips BDM4350 with 4K resolution. It is glare but I can live with that - the room it stands in does has usually no direct sunlight, I can use shutters, and I have happily exchanged non-glare with that amount of screen estate. For me, it is an absolute dream. I just say, as a professional software developer, you will want a screen that large. A smaller screen is a waste of time, and therefore a waste of the company's money. If you own an IT company and your developers have smaller screens, ask yourself why. So, I ask you to do a little experiment. Not a thought experiment, but a real-live experiment. Imagine you have a 43 inch touch screen in front of you. Sit at a proper ergonomic distance. Now, lift your index finger and point it at the height of your chin in that ergonomic distance. Now, keep your finger still for one minute. Just one minute. Do that now. You note something? It is hard. It requires a lot of effort. Doing that all day will be very, very tiring. If you want a high-precision graphical input for a large screen, you will not want a touchscreen. You will want a graphics tablet and stylus flat on your desk. In addition to your 43 inch monitor, of course. Good news! You can buy a high-quality Wacom graphics tablet at Amazon, even refurbished for less than $100. And Wacom tablets have excellent Linux driver support since a long, long time. They are very fine for drawing artwork. I am not going to recommend drawing software since that's not my realm of expertise. However, as a software developer, especially with more experience, you will normally want to use your screen to display text. As much as possible. With as little waste as possible. Which leads quite naturally to text-oriented, keyboard-oriented work flows, tiling window managers (like i3), and text editor like vim or Emacs, which among other things, do one thing really well: They don't waste screen space. Of course, learning a tiling Window manager requires a little bit of dedication (you have to memorize key chords, duh), but it pays off after one or two days, switching between terminals and windows is not more a matter of a second like when doing it with the mouse, but of a single key combination which does it in a tenth of a second. And this does not only save time, this makes it much easier to keep the flow, to stay focused on what you were working on.

ChristianGeek 9y ago

You would presumably remote in to the second computer. I do this from my MacBook Pro to my Windows desktop using TeamViewer, and also into native Linux boxes using ssh.

sinh 9y ago

> Sorry I disagree, first many people who work in IT are _forced_ to use Windows as their primary host at work. I would consider it a bad use of my experience to develop on Windows. The market agrees with me, experienced Linux developers are much better paid. > Next, even if you install a Virtual Machine it might not work as seamless as having an Unix shell natively, thus some use Cygwin. I would not call cygwin a native Unix shell. > Regarding poor students, would you prefer to commute daily with multiple laptops? One for Linux one for Windows? I doubt so. I don't use Windows for personal stuff. Apart from that, VirtualBox would still be a better solution if it was necessary to use Windows. For example, updates on a Windows machine which is rarely used can easily take hours. One does not want to have his work machine blocked for so long. Apart from that, abandoning Windows is just a matter of leaving old habits. For me, using exclusively Linux for my personal stuff has worked excellently in the last 20 years. > Other than that, if your work is not just coding but doing _anything_ apart from code itself, word processing, spreadsheets, graphic design, cad and you still need to run something from Linux ecosystem the WSL is currently probably your best option. Libreoffice or Softmaker office is available, but LaTeX is much better for reports and articles, and wikis and Markdown is better for documentation. MS Word is a usability nightmare. Also, I do not use spreadsheets for myself, I use Python scripts - it's more efficient, and ledger-cli for accounting stuff. Inkscape is much better than MS Visio. I am physicist and developer, I do not use CAD, but if I had to use a CAD program on Windows, I would use a separate Windows machine, as explained before. You sound like you are just used to do everything with Windows and never have considered seriously to use Linux software, I guess you don't know most of what exists there. Also, I'd appreciate it if people would not call areas where some software vendors have managed to create a lock-in an "ecosystem". An ecosystem is a scientific concept from biology. Using that for proprietary software environments is simply marketing BS bingo.

NiveaGeForce 9y ago
Only feature updates, (which come twice a year) can take hours to install. Cumulative updates (typically monthly) only take single digits minutes on most machines. How well do LibreOffice and Softmaker Office work with pen & touch in tablet mode?
toyg 9y ago
Linux developers might be better paid simply because there are fewer of them. Run of the mill “enterprise” developers are on Windows and they make up the bulk of the workforce (in any country, afaik). This creates economies of scale that incentivise companies to continue standardising on Windows, because it makes it easier and cheaper to hire people.
- cat199 9y ago
  yes yes, but free market, supply/demand, downward wage pressure, blah blah blah prove you incorrect, no?
- rejschaap 9y ago
  Microsoft has successfully created an environment where people with little training are able to add business value. The average Windows developer is not at all comparable to the average Linux developer.
- sinh 9y ago
  Well, if Linux developers are better paid this will naturally increase supply. And this happens, of course. But why should pay companies more for Linux when they can develop stuff on Windows, and pay less? Wouldn't it be dumb to use the more expensive resource, and have less gain? The reason is that Linux developers are more productive - they create more value, and the decision of companies to pay them more is all rational. Of course the detail picture is more nuanced - it makes a difference if one develops a boring PHP app, or makes complex embedded systems for sectors like HFT, defense, embedded medical devices, or similar. But chances are that a lot of the latter use Linux, too. They just don't advertise jobs on HN.
rejschaap 9y ago

NiveaGeForce 9y ago

There are also many developers who are forced to use GNU/Linux dev tools, while prefering to use Windows. Not to mention that Windows has better support for most hardware and modern form factors, such as pen & touch enabled 2-in-1s. If you're buying something like a Surface Pro or Surface Book, the last thing you want to do is cripple its functionality, ease of use, performance and battery life by installing GNU/Linux. But the fundamental reason for why I avoid it, is best explained in this video. https://youtu.be/rmsIZUuBoQs https://youtu.be/rmsIZUuBoQs

jenscow 9y ago
The type of developer who prefers Windows wouldn't get a job in a place that uses GNU/Linux. The rest of the things you mention doesn't really apply to developers (when developing, at least).
- NiveaGeForce 9y ago
  Some developers like me need to do a lot of pen & paper math. It's also much easier to brainstorm and draw diagrams using a pen.
ahartmetz 9y ago
Regarding drivers and general hardware support. If you buy hardware that doesn't work well with Linux, you will have to deal with hardware that doesn't work well with Linux. But I get it, you don't like Linux.
sinh 9y ago
I replicate my answer to a different comment here because it applies identically to this one. There is a number of issues with Surface and touchscreens. First, my impression is that Microsoft Surface hardware is, too, heavily advertised in developer forums and social media. Again, one needs to discern the desired association which that PR effort wants to create, from the actual qualities and disadvantages of the product. For example, the surface laptops have earned some negative reputation for lack of durability. Anybody who would consider to buy such a device would surely be well advised to do a web search whether such problems are more frequent, a thing of the past, or a rare exception. But that's a digression. You mentioned touchscreen support as important quality and I am zooming in on that. Surface books and touchscreens are discussed here in the context of a software developer system. I am however really a bit puzzled by that. What does it mean to have touch on a software developer system? I understand surely that Microsoft does not want to lose a generation of developers, and that it considers them as trend-setting or even required to create gazillions of fantastic future Windows apps which will populate the Microsoft app store with killer apps for the Surface tablet. Microsoft marketing surely wants to sell the surface (if I were them, I'd probably hire some PR agencies to flood Reddit and HN with positive comments about it). Also, Microsoft still seems to live the dream - in the face of all these failures such as Windows Phone - that desktop software, tablets and mobile apps shall be, will be, must be convergent and that desktop and mobile will have a common UI. Which is touch. I won't comment more on that. If you ever tried, it is hard to shatter someone else's dream, even if those wishes might not entirely based on experience. But now, let's come to real life, and let's become a little, just a little, practical. As a first, consider that software developers are people which handle program code. In most cases, lots of program code. In many cases, quite complex program code. The code is displayed on the screen. Developers have to remember many things, and the more code you have on the screen, the less you have to remember while working on one thing. They say that we can only remember seven to nine things in short-term memory, for more things we have to memorize. Memorizing costs a lot of time. That has a simple consequence: The larger the screen is, the more text it displays, the better. Just let's take my home PC which I mostly use for hobby programming. It is a 43 inch Philips BDM4350 with 4K resolution. It is glare but I can live with that - the room it stands in does has usually no direct sunlight, I can use shutters, and I have happily exchanged non-glare with that amount of screen estate. For me, it is an absolute dream. I just say, as a professional software developer, you will want a screen that large. A smaller screen is a waste of time, and therefore a waste of the company's money. If you own an IT company and your developers have smaller screens, ask yourself why. So, I ask you to do a little experiment. Not a thought experiment, but a real-live experiment. Imagine you have a 43 inch touch screen in front of you. Sit at a proper ergonomic distance. Now, lift your index finger and point it at the height of your chin in that ergonomic distance. Now, keep your finger still for one minute. Just one minute. Do that now. You note something? It is hard. It requires a lot of effort. Doing that all day will be very, very tiring. If you want a high-precision graphical input for a large screen, you will not want a touchscreen. You will want a graphics tablet and stylus flat on your desk. In addition to your 43 inch monitor, of course. Good news! You can buy a high-quality Wacom graphics tablet at Amazon, even refurbished for less than $100. And Wacom tablets have excellent Linux driver support since a long, long time. They are very fine for drawing artwork. I am not going to recommend drawing software since that's not my realm of expertise. However, as a software developer, especially with more experience, you will normally want to use your screen to display text. As much as possible. With as little waste as possible. Which leads quite naturally to text-oriented, keyboard-oriented work flows, tiling window managers (like i3), and text editor like vim or Emacs, which among other things, do one thing really well: They don't waste screen space. Of course, learning a tiling Window manager requires a little bit of dedication (you have to memorize key chords, duh), but it pays off after one or two days, switching between terminals and windows is not more a matter of a second like when doing it with the mouse, but of a single key combination which does it in a tenth of a second. And this does not only save time, this makes it much easier to keep the flow, to stay focused on what you were working on.