Linux vs MS! Who's better for programming!?

[Yosuke_]

Hello!

Linux has so many programming tools in its installation, while Windows has only debug.com! Linux doesn't require any libraries, while Windows programs need so much dll's! I don't know why, I love programming on Linux, but it is so much fun! I discovered that I can program parallel port, and its very fun to make blinking LED's or some simple device! I also found a tutorial on Linux document how to connect coffee machine with transistors to parallel port and make program, that will turn on coffee machine! :D I'm Learning internet application programming its also very interesting, I have never before enjoyed programming so much, than I enjoy it now on Linux!

I have to write a little article for school, can you please give me some arguments why Linux is better for programming than Windows? Thank you!

[tlyons]

Originally posted by Yosuke_
Linux doesn't require any libraries, while Windows programs need so much dll's!

And thank goodness. I've been wanting to delete all these pesky lib files for a long time now. Think of the disk space I'll be saving. :D

- T.

[CoffeeMan]

A good development platform means more potential for better applications

[XiaoKJ]

If I'm not wrong, most libs on linux are also available on windows, so if you use them, you can port them to windows later. Or even all linux-compatible systems.

Examples of the libs used in linux and compatible on others would be libSDL and opengl.

anyway, compiling on linux is more secure and cheaper. gcc is such a good compiler! why go windows and use the MS compiler that is not anywhere need usable?

[blobaugh]

its easier to build portable applications with linux imho

[CaptainPinko]

Originally posted by Yosuke_
why Linux is better for programming than Windows?

1) open source lets you tinker and see how the big boys do it
2) more tools available. ms visual studio student edition is still pricey for a 15 year old, but gcc is free
3) more languages available. I've always be interested in computer languages and it seem like there are more of them available for *nix than for Windows. For example I don't think their is a complete Haskell 98 implementation for Windows. Many languages you can't even get free as in beer on windows.
4) a lot of libraries to play with that are open

PS- please don't write "Linux is better" but "an open source *nix like Linux of FreeBSD" etc. None of these arguements applies specifically to Linux that won't apply to OpenSolaris and Linux doesn't deserve to be the only project getting attention.

[Yosuke_]

Thank you very much!
But I have heard that Unix requires libraries for socket applications, and they are not compiled in executable!

[bwkaz]

I remember where I told you that, and I'd like to say now that it actually seems like a better idea to have socket stuff in a separate library.

The reason is that the glibc library is pretty enormous already (/usr/lib/libc.a from a year-old version of glibc is 2.5 megs). If they would split some of the less-used stuff out into separate libraries and either load it on demand (like they do with the NSS stuff) or have the programmer link it only if it's needed, that would be much better for file sizes.

The fact that it's a separate library usually does NOT mean that your program won't run on that Unix. The reason is that every installation of that Unix also has that library installed. Sockets are a standard feature in every single Unix-like operating system in existence anywhere; they all have some library to support it.

(And even glibc systems require a library to support socket stuff. When you link in glibc, you're linking in a library.)