Why program on Linux?

[Zonked]

I am aware that some of you program on Linux, so I was just wondering why? What benefits does it offer over Windows?

 

I use Ubuntu for my HTPC but it just seems kind of unpolished to me and not as good as Windows 7.

 

If there are any inherent benefits to programming on Linux, I may give it a go.

 

Thanks

[Darkfeign]

Definitely right with your main statement about Linux being entirely unpolished. It really is.

However most compilers run well under linux, I mean it's open-source like the majority of software out there now so it encourages a lot of community development and support. The terminal (bash) is really powerful and so it's great to use for interacting with a compiler that doesn't tie you into Microsoft's versions of software like C++. Most compilers are also available as a GNU port (such as GCC) so you can often get the standard implementation of your language's compiler rather than a platform-specific version like you would find with Visual C++. This makes porting code from linux to windows easier than the reverse.

 

That's my reasoning anyway. There are a lot of things I've grown to enjoy using linux for revolving around programming. The free software that supports most aspects of work is a real bonus.

[Spartan-S63]

One thing to note is that you stated that Linux is unpolished. What you really mean to say is that the GUI shell is unpolished. Linux itself is a more stable kernel than Windows and it's more polished. However, it's the desktop environments that may appear unpolished to you. Depending on what version of Ubuntu you have, Unity (the desktop environment for Ubuntu) may not be as mature as other versions. The main difference between Windows and Linux is the fact that the Linux kernel and the desktop environment are two separate pieces of software. And since they're separate, you're free to replace it with a more polished looking desktop environment.

 

The reason why I do a lot of programming on Linux is because a lot of the languages and development environments out there were written to run in Linux. If you look at the Git for Windows software, that's a port by GitHub, but if you want the true command-line Git client on Windows you have to install MsysGit which is a Unix port to Windows. Git itself runs slower on Windows because it's a port to the Windows libraries. Also, GCC (the GNU C and C++ compiler suite) only runs natively on Linux there are ports like Cygwin or TDM GCC for Windows, but it has to set up special paths to emulate a Unix environment and folder structure. The biggest advantage to using GCC over Visual C++ is that your code will still remain portable (and compilable on a Windows machine), but GCC supports more C++11 features than Visual C++ does.

 

Another reason I like Linux better than Windows is because of its package manager. Instead of always having to go out on the internet and search for a download, the package manager makes it easy with a unified repository of available packages (and you can go out to the internet to find more software not in the official repositories). If you wanted to build PHP 5.5 RC3 from source, you'd run a command to install all the dependencies whereas on Windows, you'd have to hunt and peck to find all the dependencies.

[alpenwasser]

Note: Been using Windows since Win 3.11, and Linux since ~ 2005. Not a programmer by trade,

but I do use my machine to code quite a bit when I get the time (mostly C/C++, PHP, Perl at

the moment). Current main distro is Arch Linux.

 

I am aware that some of you program on Linux, so I was just wondering why? What benefits does it offer over Windows?

 

I use Ubuntu for my HTPC but it just seems kind of unpolished to me and not as good as Windows 7.

The one main benefit I have come to love about GNU/Linux and other similar UNIX-like

operating systems is that they are inherently designed with tinkering and writing

software in mind. They are operating systems by developers for developers.

The thing that gets on my nerves the most about Windows is that while I don't

necessarily consider it to be a bad product it has so obviously been designed

with average Joe in mind that it's been dumbed down a lot and lots of choices

and options have either been removed completely or made extremely cumbersome

to achieve/set/change.

Now, that in and of itself is not necessarily a bad thing, and a completely

legitimate strategy (tbh I think it's a much more viable strategy for broad

marketing and getting computers to the masses), but it does make Windows and

its underlying philosophy less suited to my personal preferences and tastes.

The major example about this would be the extremely tight integration between

the operating system and the graphical shell (the overall Windows GUI) in Windows.

In Linux and similar operating systems the command line interface carries a much

greater importance than the GUI, and in fact you are not even required to run

a GUI.

And when you do, you have a plethora of different desktop environments and window

managers to choose from, and most of them can be quite extensively configured to

suit your individual tastes (personally, I usually prefer a tiling window manager

for work, for example).

While you do of course have the powershell in Windows, the fact that it's more

of an add-on to the GUI than the other way around clearly shows, and makes live

quite a bit more complicated for a CLI lover like myself.

Another thing which I much prefer in Linux than Windows is that configuring the O/S

and its components is much more transparent; usually it's achieved by editing pure

text files rather than ticking boxes in a dialog window. Of course, many prefer the

latter way of doing things, but personally I find it very convenient to be able to

edit a machine's configuration in a text editor on another machine and then configure

a system simply by copy-pasting a few text files onto it.

Anyway, as for programming itself, here's what I personally appreciate about coding

on Linux/UNIX-like systems:

• Since the system is very configurable and those configurations are very easily

  portable, I can set up a machine exactly the way I like it and port that config

  to other machines on which I'm doing work. This results in better work flow and

  higher productivity.

• The inherent design principle that the system is supposed to be easily

  tinkered with also adds to that flexibility.

• The open source culture makes acquiring and modifying existing code, whether

  that be for satisfying personal curiosity or to actually achieve something

  productive, easy and dependable.

• In the years I've been running both Windows 7 and Linux on our household

  machines, I have found Linux to be more stable. I wouldn't consider Win 7

  to be an unstable system (at least not for me), but I have had noticeably

  more issues with it than with any of my Linux setups. Not that Linux is 100%

  stable or completely free of other issues, of course. This is just a personal

  observation from a very small test sample though.

• Centralized software repositories with signed packages. No downloading

  software from different websites. It's all right there, verified and secure.

I'm sure there are others, but that's what comes to mind at the moment.

 

Definitely right with your main statement about Linux being entirely unpolished. It really is.

I'd say this very much depends on what aspect of the O/S you look at. Desktop

environments and integration with other devices is definitely easier on

Windows, but from what I've used myself, that has often been more of an issue

of vendors not properly supporting Linux rather than an inherent fault of Linux

itself (getting pictures off my Canon Eos 600D is quite a bit more convenient

in Win than in Linux, and don't get me started about scanners and printers...).

Same thing with office documents. The open document standards are quite mature

at this point, the problems I've seen in my personal use have almost exclusively

been related to Microsoft's proprietary document standards not being properly

translated/converted.

But for programming, I have found Linux to be much more polished and convenient

than Windows, at least for the languages in which I've written software. And the

fact that I encounter many fewer stability issues with my Linux machines than with

their Windows counterparts makes me think much more highly of its kernel than of

the Win kernel.

Overall I do agree that there are many small niggles in Linux that still need

to be fixed. But I wouldn't call the O/S unpolished in its entirety, just certain

parts of it.

 

However most compilers run well under linux, I mean it's open-source like the majority of software out there now so it encourages a lot of community development and support. The terminal (bash) is really powerful and so it's great to use for interacting with a compiler that doesn't tie you into Microsoft's versions of software like C++. Most compilers are also available as a GNU port (such as GCC) so you can often get the standard implementation of your language's compiler rather than a platform-specific version like you would find with Visual C++. This makes porting code from linux to windows easier than the reverse.

 

That's my reasoning anyway. There are a lot of things I've grown to enjoy using linux for revolving around programming. The free software that supports most aspects of work is a real bonus.

Indeed a very valid point. Vendor lock-in is one my my major pet-peeves when

it comes to using MS or other proprietary products. And the power of the

command line is really something I've come to appreciate.

Overall, it's maybe not so much about which O/S is inherently and objectively

superior in its entirety, but it depends a lot on your personal preferences

and what language you write software in. For somebody who's scared of the

command line, programming on Linux is probably not really something I'd

recommend, but then again, such a person maybe shouldn't be programming in the

first place. :lol:

EDIT: Ninja'd :lol:.

Spartan's opinions seem to follow a similar pattern though, I agree with his

post.

[Darkfeign]

Nice in-depth post alpenwasser, covered pretty much what I was trying to say, but put it better! I'm interested in looking at C# and how Microsoft's CLI works but at the same time Microsoft are often tying down developers and forcing the use of their platform that I really dislike learning languages designed for the developer's O/S only (I know you can get linux versions of C# but it shouldn't have to be a port).

Primarily, on my point about linux being unpolished, proprietary drivers for things like graphics cards are still very limited. In particular, for my Nvidia, watching films and any form of video really bugs me, as horizontal frame-tearing is horrendous on all the linux distributions i've tried.

I also had a nightmare trying to install Arch Linux, as attempting to manually boot to the drive never works for me.

[alpenwasser]

Thanks, I just kept typing and suddenly there was a wall of text. :lol:

Definitely agree about MS tying down devs to their platform, I absolutely despise that.

I understand of course why they do it, but nonetheless I very much dislike it.

Haven't personally had Nvidia driver issues yet, no tearing and stuff like that.

So far all my Arch installs have been quite painless, never really had a problem, but

maybe I'm just lucky. :)

[rashdanml]

Personally, I love linux because of how it uses resources more efficiently, leaving more free resources for your own programs. In a way, it encourages programmers to write code that is also memory efficient.

 

That and the fact that everything is open source. And sometimes, the remote possibility of being able to use proprietary languages (objective-C, .NET, etc) through translation layers. Obviously not native support, but it works.

[Zonked]

Wow, I did not expect awesome. in-depth answers like that!

 

I may play around with a few different Linux distros and see if I take a liking to any of them as a programming environment.

 

My issue is, is that Ubuntu (This may not be true with other distros as I have tried only Ubuntu and a small helping of Mint) lacks a lot of software I like to use while programming, but isn't related to programming. So I love iTunes to listen to my music, I watch movies on MPC, then I can game when I want to take a break. I know there are alternatives but none of them seem as good to me. Steam on Linux is new so lacks games. I love iTunes even though I own no Apple products, and iTunes is not available for Linux as far as I am aware. Although there is VLC player, there is no MPC. I also love Notepad ++ more than any other software, I think it is glorious, and that (For no justifiable reason that I can see) is not available. I have tried Bluefish and Gedit and they really fall in comparison. I think my main issue with a new OS is that I hate change, so I think it is time I manned up and found good replacement software for my beloved programs I have used for so long.

 

Also the actual desktop experience  on Windows is more clean, refined and fluid to me, so I think that it would be hard for me to steer away from that. I can't help but feel that a lot of people would not use these Linux distros very much if they came at a cost.

 

I am going to dual boot a few Linux distros, and see if they can aid in my programming experiences in any way. I will also have to find alternatives for the software I use while programming. I really want to enjoy Linux as a developers platform, because by no means is Windows a particular good OS, but for me it is the best one at the moment.

[alpenwasser]

Wow, I did not expect awesome. in-depth answers like that!

One strives for thoroughness. EDIT: And as you can see, I'm quite passionate

about the subject (though not religiously so). :)

 

I may play around with a few different Linux distros and see if I take a liking to any of them as a programming environment.

That's definitely quite important. When Ubuntu switched to Unity two years ago I looked

around for quite a while until finally settling on Arch. Many people say they like Arch

because it's pretty bare-bones and allows deep insights into your system, but to be honest

as long as you only use the standard package manager for installing precompiled packages

I think you'd be better off with Gentoo, Linux from Scratch or even FreeBSD if you want

to gain a truly deep insight into your system. You can get deep into your system

and compile Arch from scratch, but the distro in and of itself doesn't really force it on

you to the extent people usually seem to believe it does.

In fact, since the documentation is so good (that really is a big plus for Arch, although

much of its docu can be used for other distros as well) I might even recommend Arch to

a complete Linux newbie. As long as they have a guiding hand to give them a few tips

here and there it's not that difficult to set up and maintain (I'm not being sarcastic

here, it's really not that tricky as long as you don't encounter any serious driver

issues). Basically all you have to do to set it up is enter a few CLI commands and

modify a few text files, and almost all but the most fringe cases are well documented.

You would of course have to do quite a bit of reading as a newbie, not just about Arch

but also about how a Linux system works in general, but it's definitely feasible. Hell,

I started out with Gentoo in 2004. Now that was a steep learning curve (I did

have a buddy who was proficient in it though and was usually quick to answer basic

questions). :lol:

Anyway, the search for your "perfect" distro can indeed be long and arduous. Altough

I think Unity has matured quite a lot since its inception. Ubuntu is definitely not

a bad distro IMHO.

 

My issue is, is that Ubuntu (This may not be true with other distros as I have tried only Ubuntu and a small helping of Mint) lacks a lot of software I like to use while programming, but isn't related to programming. So I love iTunes to listen to my music, I watch movies on MPC, then I can game when I want to take a break. I know there are alternatives but none of them seem as good to me. Steam on Linux is new so lacks games. I love iTunes even though I own no Apple products, and iTunes is not available for Linux as far as I am aware. Although there is VLC player, there is no MPC. I also love Notepad ++ more than any other software, I think it is glorious, and that (For no justifiable reason that I can see) is not available. I have tried Bluefish and Gedit and they really fall in comparison. I think my main issue with a new OS is that I hate change, so I think it is time I manned up and found good replacement software for my beloved programs I have used for so long.

This is something you will encounter probably on every other distro out there.

And indeed this is the main weak point of Linux on the desktop today (at least

in my opinion): The lack of support/availability of a lot of proprietary software,

and not inherent flaws of the operating system itself.

iTunes, MS Office (although the problem isn't so much that MS office doesn't run on

Linux, but much more that its open source counterparts can't implement the office

document standards cleanly to make it a really viable alternative in business use),

Photoshop (however, GIMP is pretty damn close these days and Photoshop is only really

necessary for some very special and high-end uses) and a good video editing software

are what comes to mind off the top of my head (we are getting closer on the video

front, and for amateur use I would say it's usable, but not yet for a professional

production environment), besides games of course.

For scientific purposes, it's quite a good environment. Since a lot of software

used in that market (Matlab, Mathematica, commercial CAD software) originated in

the 80's when Sun's UNIX workstations were quite popular for those kinds of uses

they usually still provide a Linux/UNIX version.

As for text editors, I recommend learning either Vim or Emacs. I'm not saying that

to sound elitist or anything (I honestly think Np++ is really quite good), and indeed

it will be quite a learning curve, but once you have reached a certain level you can

be a lot more productive than with any alternative I know of (besides maybe

Sublime, but that one's commercial :( ).

Personally I use Vim for all my programming and text editing needs, and I'm very

happy with it. But learning it well enough to really make use of its advantages will

take time and effort (and indeed I'm nowhere near to exploiting its true potential,

I'm just good enough to be more productive than with a "normal" alternative).

Overall, when it comes to multimedia you will probably have to take a few hits

when it comes to usability and overall features, in that area the Linux counterparts

are definitely less polished from my experience. Finding a programming and text

editing setup which you are happy with might take some time and effort, but in

that field there are definitely excellent options on Linux.

But yes, if you really want to start working on Linux properly you will need to

invest some work and kick yourself in your lazy bum a bit. ;)

 

Also the actual desktop experience on Windows is more clean, refined and fluid to me, so I think that it would be hard for me to steer away from that. I can't help but feel that a lot of people would not use these Linux distros very much if they came at a cost.

From what I've seen, the desktop experience on Windows is usually a bit more polished,

but the areas where I've found Linux to be lacking are again mostly related to third

party software (as mentioned above, Canon for example). The most recent version of

Gnome 3 (don't usually use it, but I've installed it on ZEUS because I don't really

think I can burden my family with the quirks of a tiling window manager :lol: ) is

really quite polished and usable. I know Gnome 3 has taken a lot of hate, but overall

the current version is really quite good (not fully happy with its file manager, but

you don't need to use Gnome's Nautilus, you can easily replace it with something else

and still use Gnome).

I'm not sure about people using Linux because it's free. Personally I don't know too

many people who use Linux, but most of them (at least to my knowledge) use it primarily

because they are unhappy with Microsoft's and Apple's philosophies. For them it's

a matter of principle, at least to some degree. But again, that's a really small test

sample, so it's certainly not the most reliable data. ;)

 

I am going to dual boot a few Linux distros, and see if they can aid in my programming experiences in any way. I will also have to find alternatives for the software I use while programming. I really want to enjoy Linux as a developers platform, because by no means is Windows a particular good OS, but for me it is the best one at the moment.

There is definitely a distinction to be made between an OS being "good" and an OS

fitting your personal needs. I don't think very highly of Windows (though I don't

hate it), but for most people I would still recommend going with that. I don't

feel like having to help my dad's girlfriend mount her camera and then get the

pictures off of it via command line interface.

Personally I have found Linux and similar operating systems to fit my needs a lot

better than Windows, which is most of the reason I'm using it. The other part of

my reasoning is Microsoft's and Apple's philosophies and behavior (I know Bill Gates

is doing a lot of good in this world via his and his wife's foundation, but MS

itself has quite a dodgy history when it comes to their moral compass, and Apple

might easily be worse from what I've heard and read).

EDIT: Ha, didn't know about that best answer feature. Cool :)

[Darkfeign]

Vim always looked great to learn but man, does it take some will power to stick with. hjkl for moving the cursor feels so off for me. But anyway, you can get sublime text for text editing as an alternative to Vim should you want to stick with something you (may already?) know as it looks the same across all platforms.

 

Something you might find pulls you into linux more is looking at installing Guake, where you can simply hit F12 and be presented with multiple terminals as a drop-down overlay, greatly increased productivity for me.

[alpenwasser]

Vim always looked great to learn but man, does it take some will power to stick with. hjkl for moving the cursor feels so off for me.

I mostly used the arrow keys for quite a few years. Then I did my first real programming

job and made a real effort to get better at Vim, and now it's like second nature.

I have HJKL in most of my programs now (my desktop environment, my terminal multiplexer

(tmux), my browser (the Vichrome addon). Once I got used to it, I could no longer live

without it, but getting there was not an easy road (hell, it wasn't even a road, just

a foot path at best :lol: ).

[Darkfeign]

I mostly used the arrow keys for quite a few years. Then I did my first real programming

job and made a real effort to get better at Vim, and now it's like second nature.

I have HJKL in most of my programs now (my desktop environment, my terminal multiplexer

(tmux), my browser (the Vichrome addon). Once I got used to it, I could no longer live

without it, but getting there was not an easy road (hell, it wasn't even a road, just

a foot path at best :lol: ).

A footpath? It looks like a bramble-covered badger hole. My sublime text gives me words.. and I can click them :P

[alpenwasser]

But clicking is so slow! :P

[Darkfeign]

Sublime has jump-to-line and stuff so it'll do for me! Man you say you're not even a programmer by profession and you're already putting in more effort than me, haha.

[alpenwasser]

Well I have done my dad's company website, and I've studied mechanical engineering

for a while (will be starting electrical engineering next fall - long story, bad

health), so even though it is not my profession it is quite a big part of my life

(depending on how you set your emphasis in ME or EE, programming can be very

important, for example in robotics, or designing micro chips and integrated

circuits etc.).

Also, it's (meaning operating systems, computer history, programming, computer science

in general) something I'm really interested in, which of course is quite helpful. ;)

[Yepik]

for commercial usage i would pick a windows over linux there is more programs that are working better with windows on commercial scale. Linux is better for small dev teams cuz it's free and it gives you higher freedom. I personally use both there is nothing like windows with all its compatibility of Commercial programs and linux for its vast amount of free programs that help you develop your skill easier. linux is better for programs that are trails and may cause changes to the system , I found that linux just cares less unless you cause it to crash where windows wants to have full control over what program does and it may cause program to crash  cuz of unreliability of windows system files

[NeoZeon]

Windows can never match the efficency of Unix based OSes when it comes to High Performance Computing. Some of models I code for my research can take a few days to run on a 848 processor cluster. Redhat sets the bar for enterprise grade efficiencies .

[alpenwasser]

for commercial usage i would pick a windows over linux there is more programs that are working better with windows on commercial scale.

I'd say this depends on what exactly you intend to do with it. There are many commercial software

packages (CAD/CAM/CAE, for example) which are actually available for Linux as well. But yes, overall

the one strong point Windows has is its ecosystem, especially when it comes to video editing at the

moment, as well as image editing to some extent, although the gap between Gimp and Photoshop is really

only relevant for a professional these days. And of course, working with MS office documents in Linux

is still not really 100% smooth.

My dad does a few lectures at a technical school from time to time, for which he needs MS Powerpoint

presentations. You just can't get the same quality result in Libreoffice or any of its open source

brethren (I'm primarily talking about animations here). And cross-compatibility between MS office

and Libreoffice is still quite buggy in many aspects. It has improved significantly, but it's nowhere

near good enough to make it a truly viable alternative if your business depends on it.