Hard Light Productions Forums
Off-Topic Discussion => General Discussion => Topic started by: SuperCoolAl on February 01, 2004, 09:25:08 am
-
well, it took me the better part of a day but i finally got red hat 9 installed to dual boot with windows
hah all you windows suckers don't know what ure missing
-
And you're obviously not going to tell us :rolleyes:
-
well, i have RH9/win98SE on my desktop, and RH is nice, but windows is still preferable if you lack the time to study linux properly. linux is good if you just want to surf, play simple games and/or chat, but more advanced stuff seems to take quite a lot of time to learn.
-
Downloading Mandrake 9.2, right now. Starting off easy.
Will be installing it on my laptop. Knoppix 3.2 ran fine on it so...
-
well having not delved in that much i will tell you that it rules wondows in the looks department. It also doesnt have to restart after updates.
-
Have fun with all those fantastic linux games.
-
I don't like redhat that much, but I like the stuff that debian can do.
-
Originally posted by 01010
Have fun with all those fantastic linux games.
Why? Why not have fun with all those fantastic windows games under WINE/WINEX?
Ah, gotta love an OS with the freedom to do what the hell you want. ;)
-
Well, that's just what i do with Win XP...
*Got XP Pro at $30... I love my new MVP privileges!!!*
-
Weak.
We Certified Solution Providers get all the OSs and MS Software for free. Along with our Technet subscription and Beta Program membership. ;)
-
running Win 98SE / SuSE Linux 8.0 / WinXP / MS-Dos6.2 (the original!!) from this machine.
:D
gotta love LiLo (a linux boot loader).
Most of the time i use Win98, though, since all my games n' software *is* Windows-based, I mainly use Linux for cross platform file transfers (Ami --> PC / Mac --> PC / Windows --> DOS (as there can be only one primary DOS partition when you're running DOS or Win98)).
So... :)
-
Well, i could have chosen the free technet subscrprition for most software and betas, but i choose MSDN because i will get VS.NET for free...
BTW, with the credit bonus at the MS shop i'm getting my stuff for free anyways...
-
Like I pay for my OS. Ha ha ha, ridiculous notion.
-
Originally posted by Zarax
Well, i could have chosen the free technet subscrprition for most software and betas, but i choose MSDN because i will get VS.NET for free...
BTW, with the credit bonus at the MS shop i'm getting my stuff for free anyways...
Dude, we get it all, pretty much free. There's an annual fee, but that annual fee covers monthly updates to the media and pretty much every Microsoft software ever, except the games. That includes things like Visual Studio .Net in its entirety, every OS, etc. Its the only real use of having an MCSE that I've found yet.
I'd hate to become an MCSD now, though. They get screwed, like you are. We grandfathered to the old program, from 1996.
-
Well, screwed as you believe we will ensure at least another quarter century of Microsoft greatness, despite every petty revolution...
Open source will evolve, and it must because it is unlikely that this rape of intellectual property will be tolerated for long...
With all this anti MS hate people has forgotten who is the real enemy...
IBM will try again to reduce software to a thing bundled with other stuff, and centralizing it again...
All that utility computing hype is only a modernized revival of the time sharing terminals connected to a centralized server...
And linux is giving them a brand new weapon, that's why i hate it...
-
And then IBM will make hunter killers and terminators and enslave us all. Give it up Captain Cyborg. No one believes you.
-
So you mean I have the choice between being raped by MS or being anally raped by IBM?
-
Originally posted by Zarax
With all this anti MS hate people has forgotten who is the real enemy...
IBM will try again to reduce software to a thing bundled with other stuff, and centralizing it again...
All that utility computing hype is only a modernized revival of the time sharing terminals connected to a centralized server...
And linux is giving them a brand new weapon, that's why i hate it...
Jesus, you really buy into Microsoft hype, don't you?
Dude, you've forgotten that Microsoft wants software as a centralized, easy to control service.
Frome a CNet article on 'applications as services': Speaking of Microsoft, the Redmond, Wash. ... has been the most vocal about its intentions to dominate the software-as-service market.
They introduced the concept of Office as a subscription service in 1998. .Net was created to implement that vision. This isn't hype or conflation or hyperbole. This is exactly what Bill Gates said in numerous speeches at industry events. Did you somehow miss the last half of the 90s and the first two years of the 21st century?
IBM will try again to reduce software to a thing bundled with other stuff, and centralizing it again...
You mean like Windows Terminal Server, right?
And linux is giving them a brand new weapon, that's why i hate it...
You do realize that Linux is just a kernel, and IBM funds development for individual bits of various operating systems BASED on that kernel, right? I hope so, or else you're woefully misinformed. Consider: IBM doesn't have anything to do with things like Gentoo, which is a Linux based distribution. And IBM has nothing to do with other free Unix projects, like FreeBSD, OpenBSD and NetBSD. You realize that these are all, you know, free, and don't put any money into any big corporate coffers (like IBM OR Microsoft), right?
You've don't seem to get that Linux and BSD and the various free DOS implementations are all free to everyone, no matter what Microsoft and IBM do? And all the tens of thousands of software written for those OSes are usually free too? See, Linux doesn't give IBM a weapon. Open Source Software gives EVERYONE a weapon. You, Me AND IBM--even Microsoft: Don't forget that Microsoft's TCP/IP stack is lifted directly out of BSD Unix.
I don't know why I even try to talk sense into you. You don't listen to reason and you don't even listen to the guy you're claiming everyone is attacking. You're just happy to play the poor little downtrodden Microsofty, the only one that sees the Truth. It doesn't help your case that the things you talk about are pretty much the exact opposite of reality.
-
Argh, this thread radiates with evil.
First, don't troll for Linux or for Open Source, PLEASE. It makes us look bad. (to SuperCool)
Secondly, when did it become fashionable to hate thin client setups, servers and shared/multi-user systems (it seems that's what Zarax described)? Did I miss some new Microsoft revolution?
-
Last edited by Setekh on 07-05-2004 at 09:54 AM
did I miss something? ;)
-
Setekh... likes editing my messages. With a time machine. Err... yeah. :p
-
Well, I like the idea :)
Maybe I should add one of those too.
-
Originally posted by SuperCoolAl
hah all you windows suckers don't know what ure missing
And we don't care, either.
-
Its good to see that Shrike has been elected LEADER OF TEH WINDOWS WROLD! Some of them do care, Shrike. If they didn't, fewer of us would be running *nix on our machines.
-
If I was the leader of the windows world there'd be more people getting poked in the eye, I can tell you that much. And all computers would have a 'slap' button. That would kick ass.
If you prefer to use something other than windows, fine. If you've found that you like it better since you switched, fine. Feel free to tell us why you find it better, maybe someone else will switch because of you. If you want to declare how much cooler you are, how many new friends you have in the anti-windows underground and how much bigger of an e-penis you have because you don't run windows and how everyone who still uses it is inferior, well, you deserve all the scorn that goes you way.
-
Originally posted by SuperCoolAl
well, it took me the better part of a day but i finally got red hat 9 installed to dual boot with windows
hah all you windows suckers don't know what ure missing
i do, after learning a year of nothing but PURE unix based systems, including Solaris (which was more buggy than any windows OS i've used)
in short, why the hell would you even BOTHER to boast that you're posting from a linux install..
*On a linux only forum*
"Lookit me!.. i'm posting from a WINXP machine... or a MAC machine!"
you can see my point with this..
the only reason one would say that windows sucks, etc, is cause they suck at using them..
"a bad tradesman always blames his tools"
-
Damn straight! MS-DOS alla way!
-
Originally posted by Turnsky
the only reason one would say that windows sucks, etc, is cause they suck at using them..
"a bad tradesman always blames his tools"
You know, I'd normally agree with that sentiment--except it doesn't apply here. Windows and things like Office, etc can be very useful and indeed in skilled hands can be extremely effective.
That does NOT however remove the fact that Win9x pretty much sucks. The trivial amount of effort it takes to completely subvert even an up to date, completely patched Win9x box is pathetic. The same applies to ANY OS that lets (or encourages) the user to run in an administrative "all access" mode (yes, this includes you, Lindows).
Even NT based systems are pretty easy to rape when fully patched and up to date, because the system actively trusts that no one will try to screw it up or subvert it. Services and compatibility layers that have absolutely no business running are enabled by default. Services that should be running, ship with vulnerabilities that lay unpatched and unaddressed for as long as a year (witness the current URL spoofing bug, now going on 9mos, completely unaddressed).
When Microsoft gets it into their heads to create something new, they do a good job at implementing a fairly complete and comprehensive, and terribly useful thing. THey just don't think through their decisions. Take, for example, Microsoft Outlook and Microsoft Office. Microsoft introduced a handy dandy way to make Office more useful: they created Visual Basic for Applications. This scripting allowed you to create things like a word document that was always up to date with data in a database or emails that implemented forms for voting on issues. Unfortunately, they made the system insecure: scripts in Office files and Outlook emails run in the context of the currently logged in user (or in some cases in the System context!). This results in it being trivial to create email viruses. Before the advent of VBA, computer geeks made jokes about viruses that you could catch from your email. After the advent of VBA, the joke wasn't funny anymore. Outlook made the problem actively worse by allowing scripts to be run just by looking at the email AND by defaulting to showing selected emails in the preview pane (which counts as looking at the email and triggers the scripts). All of these behaviors can actually be addressed. You can disable, or uninstall most of them. The problem is that they're all enabled and active by default. The result: vendors ship machines and users install systems to be vulnerable to malicious code as soon as they are plugged in.
Entertainingly when problems are finally addressed, they are often addressed in completely broken ways. Take, for instance, Outlook and malicious executable code as attachments. We've probably all gotten an email with a virus included as an attachment. Many users would just mindlessly click on the attachment, thereby infecting their systems (remember, these things run in the context of the user, and the user is almost always an a user with the ability to install software, or they are on 9x where there's no concept of users). Microsoft's solution? Disable the ability to open up all attachments that might be malicious. Doesn't sound like a bad deal on the surface, does it? Unfortunately, it prevents legitimate code from being passed around in the wonderfully organic manner that email otherwise allows. The user is not even given an option to say, 'yes I know it might be bad, but I'm a grown up and I know that Its okay so let me open it, thanks'. As I recall, the user is even prevented from SAVING the file to the hard drive. A better solution is that provided by clients such as Mozilla's mailler: executables have to be saved to the hard drive first. The user then has to go run the file manually. It doesn't protect a stupid user from himself, but neither does the Microsoft method (they can, after all, just turn off the blocker entirely and never have to worry about it).
If you like, I could go on. Hell, I can explain where *nix distributions make some of these same mistakes. I can also explain how good design makes these mistakes trivial on those systems.
Remember: a bad craftsman blames his tools. A good craftsman recognizes inferior tools and obtains and uses better quality ones.
-
Or tries to improve the ones in their hands...
I was just like you guys until a few years ago...
Until i decided to get MS guys and tell them what their software problems were...
After that i realized that the problem was the lack of feedback...
Talking with MS guys about a problem can be a difficult task, but once you start to act like a reasonable person with them things improves quite well...
Currently i'm even running a project to bring MS into Open Source, of course this is not an easy and fast process but it's doable...
What drives me crazy (in not a much different way than Kazan's) are three things:
1) People that uses everything they have to attack MS, and have no reticence into spreading false things.
2) Prejudices so that anything that comes from MS must be bad... ok, their software might not be the finest example of technical prowess but since win2k it runs stable and people have much less problems.
3) The damned way linux is getting screwed away by the big corps, being big blue the leader...
What you fail to see in my opinion is that the open nature of linux can spell it's end as free software...
Let out what SCO is doing, the lack of specific patent holders is a relevant lawyer vulnerability that needs to be addressed...
Who remember early Divx knows that it started as an open codec but now is a closed commercial project, just as Real Media, Quick Time or Windows Media...
Yes, you got X-vid, but what if the leading programmer group decides to do the same thing?
Or worse, what if IBM, Red hat and the other big linux makers does the same?
You will end with a bunch of corps, just like in the 80's...
BTW, open source is not a really new concept...
Berkeley Unix was open source since their first implementations, only that it got a strong patent holder differently than new software...
Now, you will surely flame over my post telling i'm a liar and an MS licker, but i analized the matter with my economy and business management university teachers and we reached that conclusion.
About programming, i'm ecletic...
Instead of forcinng into keeping a project exactly the same for all platform i would try to use the best features of every system and mantain compatibility only for vital components...
-
Originally posted by Zarax
Or tries to improve the ones in their hands...
... which is exactly what open source software is all about: the ability of the user to improve the tool in their hands and not reserving that ability to a corporation.
What you fail to see in my opinion is that the open nature of linux can spell it's end as free software...
BTW, open source is not a really new concept...
Berkeley Unix was open source since their first implementations, only that it got a strong patent holder differently than new software...
Now, you will surely flame over my post telling i'm a liar and an MS licker, but i analized the matter with my economy and business management university teachers and we reached that conclusion.
Funny, BSD was a collection of patches to a commercial software (AT&T Unix) and became an entire distribution of a free OS on its own. Later, it was commercialised (BSDi) which didn't do so well. But FreeBSD, OpenBSD, and NetBSD are still going strong as utterly free software. Its entertaining that BSD--which predates Microsoft--is still here, still going strong, still getting better and supported more widely and on more platforms.
You might want to pick the daemons you use for your arguments a bit more carefully.
-
Microsoft is a monopoly. Monopolies are bad. Thus, monopolies become targets. For the good of software, we need competition.
-
I should listen to my own advice. Microsoft finally patched that 9mo old security problem I mentioned earlier.
http://www.microsoft.com/security/security_bulletins/20040202_windows.asp
You know, when thing like this happen in open source software, they're usually addressed in hours or days, and almost never does it take even a month, let alone nine. Witness the OpenSSH vulnerability that was found a little while back: it was fixed within an hour of being reported.
Oh, and for the record, those forums we all know and love? Guess what they're running (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=dynamic4.gamespy.com). ;)
-
Mikhael, look where www.microsoftusernetwork is hosted and you will know my opinion...
Beside that, i believe that big software companies are the best mean for delivering and distribuing quality products, but there must be only one standard.
Otherwise the average joe won't know what programs to buy because he won't be sure they will run in his shiny new pc, just like into the eighties.
Unix derivatives may be a good choice for servers, but Windows is and will stand as the best choice for the average user.
Aldo, if you say a monopoly is bad you don't really know what an oligarchy (namely trust) can do.
Here in Europe we pay ridicolously high prices for fuel, and this due to the privatization of the previously state run distribution corps (not to mention about the insurance companies).
What they did was to make unofficial non competition agreement, so that they can set high prices but antitrust can't do anything because there are no real proofs about that and the companies are namely competitors.
You can always manage a near monopolistic situation, but you cannot do the same with a corporate trust.
And please don't tell me that open source is the magical panacea that will solve all these problems with software because it won't.
If you don't believe me, then you just need to walk out in a computer shop and look at how many versions of linux are there and their average price.
The main factor that made computers evolve from hobby to a serious profession was and is the economical potential.
If you don't have a cash cow then you cannot afford people working into the R&D, and as a result, very few people interested in advancing software development.
Actually the software R&D budget is around $20 billions globally, but if you look at who is spending that money you won't find really many names.
Without patent and selling benefits believe me, computers would have been little more than terminals.
Yes, you are right, we need competition, but for competition to exist you need something valuable to compete about.
Otherwise the only ones interested in real software development will be PC makers, and believe me the bundled software world is not something you would be happy with.
-
so you say that there should only be one brand and make of car, because otherwise people wouldn't know what to buy?
anyhow, the fuel prices here are mainly due to government taxes, envirenment mainly, and trying to live up to kyoto.
-
Originally posted by Zarax
Aldo, if you say a monopoly is bad you don't really know what an oligarchy (namely trust) can do.
What has that got to do with the price of cheese?
Monoplies are bad because they give one company too much power. It stifles the need to advance through competition, the need to improve for market edge.
although my main dislike of Ms is caused by it's immoral business practices...stuff like trying to create an Ms-only version of the Java VM (thus destroying it's multi-platform purpose) - which Sun successfully sued over, selling technology to the Chinese governemnt which is used for censorship, and soforth.
-
Ingore Zarax - he's a microsoft brownnoser
Why they hell are you using red hat 9? get fedora core you out of date n00b! [/me is posting from FC1 on his dual boot laptop]
-
AAh, Kazan, my dear brother in burning...
Wherever we cross the thread is sure to become a flame...
-
That's why you should leave, and go back to that black hole you stick your nose up every day.. i believe it's called "Bill Gate's ass"
anyone who brags about being a member of the MUN is a technoweenie and a total halfwit when it comes to the computer world
-
Oh, i'm sorry Kazan, god from which all the goodness comes from...
Come on people, let's join and build an altar to this guy's ego...
-
why not, you already did that for Bill Gates
-
At least he created something more than harsh words.
-
I guess a monstrosity is something more than harsh words if you want to be technical
-
Uh, yeah, sure...
Keep bashing, i'll keep building on it...
-
ouch... you just got pwned... you couldn't come up with a witty retort
lol I r witty god
wait.. i must stop i'm acting like a windows script kiddie, and starting to talk like one... DAMN YOU ZARAX!! You didn't tell me you were contagious
----------------------------------
Seriously though, windows is a complete monstrosity -- why in the name of Zeus ass did the IE update they just release container and KERNEL UPDATE! There absofragginglutely no reason that a freaking web browser update should contain a kernel update, unless you're so totally brain****ed when it comes to Software Engineering that you think you should integrate your browser into your kernel -- you sohuldn't even be integrating your shell into your kernel.
I'm not even going to go into Outlook exploits and how pathetic they are.
How about that "Embrace and Extend" program Microsoft likes to turn tword things like HTML, Java, ETC -- str_replace(array("Embrace", "Extend"), array("Steal", "Proprietorize"), $prg->name);
I really like how the win32 API doesn't exactly work as they say it should -- nobody like microsoft for MISDOCUMENTING their own API.
How about that WinSOCK Sockets implementation with the massive bugs that have existed since win 3X and microsoft has known about them and done nothing.
--------------
I don't have time to list every bug in microsoft history, and removing the "fixed" bugs from that list would only shorten the document by 10 out of a few thousand pages
If you want to have your ass so far up bill gates' ass that you cannot see the light of day and his ass-stench is displacing enough oxygen that you can no longer thing that's your business- but I am not going to let you spread BULL**** to anyone in my presence -- you are out of your league
-
So does this 'Linux' thingumy let one play FreeCell?
-
I like to watch nerds fight on the internet. It's the verbal equivalent of robot wars.
DG, get Viewtiful Joe if you haven't already. Quite possibly the best game on the GC right now. ****ing hard though.
-
[color=cc9900]I'm not going to participate in this discussion. People have already formulated their opinions, and they're going to stick to their guns.
What I am going to do is give a handy link to a page with a list of equivalents/replacements/analogs of Windows software in Linux. It ought to make the migration process a lot easier.
http://linuxshop.ru/linuxbegin/win-lin-soft-en/table.shtml
EDIT: And, for games, try this list:
http://www.icculus.org/lgfaq/gamelist.php[/color]
-
Someone lend me thirty squids to buy Viewtiful Joe
-
Odyssey: :D
-
Originally posted by Zarax
Mikhael, look where www.microsoftusernetwork is hosted and you will know my opinion...
Actually, what IS your opinion? www.microsoftusernetwork.com (http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/graph/?host=www.microsoftusernetwork.com) runs on Linux: " The site www.microsoftusernetwork.com is running Apache/1.3.27 (Unix) mod_tsunami/2.0 mod_log_bytes/1.2 mod_bwlimited/1.0 PHP/4.3.2 FrontPage/5.0.2.2510 mod_ssl/2.8.12 OpenSSL/0.9.6i on Linux."
Beside that, i believe that big software companies are the best mean for delivering and distribuing quality products, but there must be only one standard.
Otherwise the average joe won't know what programs to buy because he won't be sure they will run in his shiny new pc, just like into the eighties.
Unix derivatives may be a good choice for servers, but Windows is and will stand as the best choice for the average user.
Interesting thesis, but ultimately flawed. In the 80s there was only one choice for PC users in business: x86 hardware running an OS that was made by or was directly compatible with that made by Microsoft. There wasn't a hell of a lot of choice. This monoculture was directly created by IBM and Microsoft. In fact, any PC made by any clone maker could run software marketted by any PC software company because the hardware was the same.
Linux and BSD are exactly the same: They'll run on any PC (and arguably, on more PCs than modern Windows will, since they can run very servicably on older hardware) and pretty much everything else out there. Windows, today, runs only on x86 hardware. I remember when it ran on Alpha, MIPS, and PowerPC as well. Whilst the free alternatives have been reaching out to embrace more technology, Microsoft has been narrowing down and excluding everything but the x86 architecture. In other words, Microsoft has limited your choices, whilst Linux and BSD have extended it. The cool thing about Linux and BSD is that the user doesn't ever have to worry about their software running (assuming, like with Windows, the underlying hardware platform is the same). My BSD box can run Microsoft products under Xwindows without a problem. Your Microsoft box can't do that (oh wait, yes it can, because you, the user, can recompile our software for your machine, because we give you the source code).
Aldo, if you say a monopoly is bad you don't really know what an oligarchy (namely trust) can do.
A monopoly is a specific kind of trust. I suggest you research antitrust law before you make such ignorant remarks. You are likewise incorrect about what an oligarchy is. Oligarchy (http://dictionary.reference.com/search?q=oligarchy) is rule by a few people.
The main factor that made computers evolve from hobby to a serious profession was and is the economical potential.
If you don't have a cash cow then you cannot afford people working into the R&D, and as a result, very few people interested in advancing software development.
Actually the software R&D budget is around $20 billions globally, but if you look at who is spending that money you won't find really many names.
So that's why Sourceforge and Freshports and kernel.org and Freebsd.org and OpenBSD.org and the rest shut down. No one would work if they weren't getting paid... Maybe we should call them all up and let them know.
...and believe me the bundled software world is not something you would be happy with.
You're absolutely right: Many of us aren't happy with the bundled software world. I get a Microsoft OS with my computers whether I want one or not. I'm really not happy with the fact that my printer bundles (and usually installs without asking) software I'll never use. Same for my CD Burner and my scanner and my video and sound cards.
Thank goodness I can install FreeBSD and download and install drivers and software for this hardware that I want, instead of depending on the bundled software and operating systems that come with the hardware.
-
Originally posted by diamondgeezer
So does this 'Linux' thingumy let one play FreeCell?
Yes.
-
thank you mikhael
Mikhael has hope for you, I do not. You are ignorant of your own volition are are ignoring the truth. Linux outright out performance windows. LINUX IS PROFITABLE AND THAT SCARES YOU -- HP posted over $3 million in linux related profit last quater - and IBM is posting even bigger profits.
The profit is open source is in KNOWLEDGE -- Support and Training -- software isn't something to be sold it is something to be shared. Those have spent their time learning how the system works, working on the system, even helping the system evolve has unique knowledge and a unique ability to teach you. This is what you give them money for - for their time and dedication to helping the commons.
So much time and money is duplicated every day in the propreitary software industry. Massive ammous of code duplication. It's sad.
-
Kaz, as I explained to my wife: I have no hope for Zarax. I have hope for all the lurkers who are reading this and would only ever get Zarax's side of things if we all just dismissed him. You gotta show the people that its the whole open source thing isn't really about "microsoft bad!"'. You gotta show them that its about "choice good!"
Of course, I say "Linux Bad! BSD Good!" ;)
-
hehe -- i say "Microsoft! Bad!" because Microsoft is the anti-choice
-
Originally posted by diamondgeezer
Someone lend me thirty squids to buy Viewtiful Joe
Abduct a small child off the streets and either sell it or steal it's pocket money.
There's nothing more satisfying than shooting down an apache helicopter with it's own bullets that you are punching back at it.
-
Mmm... small child...
-
While we're on the subject of Linux and Gamecube...
(http://www.gc-linux.org/pic/linuxpreview1.jpg)
-
Look at Windows from an economic point of view before you diss it. What makes people buy Windows? Because it's what everything runs on. This is far more valuable to the majority of users than anything *nix provides, and this will no doubt persist in the forseeable future. At the end of the day all MS has done is get there first and had the good business sense to cement the market so it was favourable to them. I'd try to do the same if given the opportunity and commend this behaviour.
(BTW I don't doubt Linux is technically superior to MS software, it's just that only a small percentage of people use it as a regular desktop OS.)
-
What Makes you buy linux: Because that's the only operating system most manufacturers offer
Everything DOES NOT run on windows - every other operating system around is POSIX compliant - ie you write almost identical code for every single one of them - a program i write for linux can be recompiled for freebsd can be recompiled for OSX (and using special libraries) can even be recompiled for windblows.
It will not "no doubt persist" these are the views of the person who doesn't know what's really going on (no offense intended) -- and have been widely dispelled among upper management through many corporations.
Doing it first doesn't mean doing it RIGHT -- Microsoft has used it's position in anticompeteative practices - but it's no doing them any good -- they have lost the server market war and they are going to loose the overall war within the next 5 to 10 years.
Microsoft is going down, it just takes a while
-
What I'm sure Sid is referring to, Kazan, is basic software you'd pick up in a store like CompUSA or Staples. Walk in there, you'll see mostly Windows-based programs. Also, most games tend to either be Windows only or come out for Windows first. Admittedly, you could use an emulator to run the programs, but that, IIRC, does cause a performance loss.
-
Grey Wolf: start naming software and I'll start naming the multi choices you have that replace it on linux -- there isn't a lot of that software in the store because there doesn't need to be - it's already there on the distro CD
Once people move the games will move
-
Oh, I understand you can replace most software with open source equivalents. Many people, however, probably don't even have a clue what open source is.
And the thing about the games moving, the problem is, it's a bit self defeating. People will not move without the games, and the games will not move without the people.
The final problem is driver support. There are some things that just don't work right under Linux. Winmodems, for example. They're technologically inferior, but they're found in virtually every computer built by an OEM, and many don't run under Linux.
-
im sorry, but are you just thick?
THAT'S WHY YOU EDUCATE THEM
People _Will_ move without the games, to say they won't is to impose your narrow computing choices upon the general population - the business world doesn't give a rats ass about games [except the game companies of course] --- tehy will move
as they move more and more home users will move.
Some things just don't work right - and that's very few. You should never even buy a winmodem -- if you know anything about how modems actually work and the difference between a real modem and a winmodem you would never buy a winmodem. (BTW more winmodems do work with the "LinModem" drivers than don't)
-
Of course I know that winmodems are completely useless, and I stated that in my last post. And I have researched the entire winmodem/linux affair, which is actually part of the reason I'm not running a dual boot system right now (the modem in this computer came from a Gateway computer I gutted).
The Linux operating system is a good deal better than Windows, as you say, and you're right about many of the major companies switching to it (I believe I read recently that IBM is switching all of their network to Linux). However, home users often are slow to upgrade to different technologies. There are quite a few Windows 95 users still out there, even though the operating system is nearly ten years old.
It is very likely that within ten years we will see Windows nearly gone from the marketplace, especially as many of the major chip makers are starting to turn away from them. But until then, Windows will remain a major factor, at least in the OEM market.
-
exactly -- but in your last post you made it sound like M$ was here to stay -- it's most certainly not.
HAve you tried Fedora btw?
-
How long will it be before things change then, I ask? I became aware of Linux' existence about 7 years ago. Since then I've only seen enthusiasts, programmers, and businesses that have increased their use of it. Perhaps it is the way forward but until it becomes majorly useful to consumers - the slice of the market that outweighs everyone else - MS's 'monopoly' will endure.
It will be decades before this changes unless something miraculous happens.
It will not "no doubt persist" these are the views of the person who doesn't know what's really going on (no offense intended) -- and have been widely dispelled among upper management through many corporations.
'Upper management' sums it up really.
-
upper management are the ones that make the decisions about it's usage throughout the compnay.
Furthermore until recently linux was not targetting the desktop it was almost purely server oriented with desktop as a bonus.
Try Fedora 1, i think you'll be suprised (have you even tried linux? when was the last time? which distro?)