The only thing I don't like about Windows is how much bloated crap gets installed by default. Apart from that XP has been rock solid for me for years.
windows is only bloated for us geeks who know a better way to set up a network or somthing. average joe knows jack-s**t about doing anything more than using the net and wordpad, which is why there is wizards etc. for us geeks who don't need it, most of the time we have a way to get rid of it. 2000 and XP have been working very well since i've had them, only crashing a couple of times which was caused by me fiddling with settings or my less computer literate family downloading a virus or somthing. this reminds me, it's about time I cleaned out the cyber-junk thats hiding itself on my computer
Read this and tell me Microsoft are a nice bunch. If you have (a lot of) time, also read this. edit: Actually here are the main reasons: Bloat Backward Incompatibility Perpetual Upgrading Vaporware Hostile treatment of customers Predatory Practices Bundling of inferior products Bugs, bugs, and more bugs Insecurity Closed "standards" Mutilation of existing standards Lack of innovation Attempts at taking over appliance markets Attempts at buying the public's trust Outright Deception
I used windows for years before making the switch to Linux and BSD. Much of the problem is the fact that windows is so dominent in the market place, that everyone knows how to use it, as it is the defacto standard for 80% of schools/businesses/homes. If linux was in the position windows is now, regardless of costs and general whining, would this thread be the other way round. Linux/UNIX is not so bad, its come a long way since i first started using it (Redhat 5.x iirc). The only problem really remaining is lack of the big names (Adobe/Macromedia/AutoCAD etc) porting there software. But at the end of the day, Its a personal preference. But I bet 99.999999% of everyone in the developed world has used UNIX based software, wether they know it or not. I think M$ generate most of the bad publicity themselves, by using dirty tricks, slander and genrally bad mouthing competitors, and with the amount of clout they hold in the industry, they get away with it. Personally I think m$ release over priced, incomplete and under developed software. But credit has to go to them for helping get a computer in so many homes. Joel
I don't know, the last time I saw the NT kernel source it was pretty... Oh wait a minute, I've never seen the source. Imagine that. Aside from the many problems I have with the operating system itself, I don't think it's right to support a monopoly and shoot yourself in the foot. Why innovate when you own the market? And since Microsoft does own the market they really haven't done jack **** with Windows. All of their "innovations" have been purely superficial. I'm interested to see if Windows Longhorn (I forget the name they gave it) has any real improvements. Like it or not this whole linux/MacOSX business has put a strain on Microsoft and they will either flourish or die. Until then I'll use WinXP purely for gaming and linux for everything else. Although the day is drawing near when linux will be just as good for gaming as Windows.
I am a diehard x86 fan, not because it is a superior arch, but because I hate macs so much (you lot think Microsoft's business practices are so bad, take a look at apples!) Having said that, I like Windows. It's stable, supported by nearly anyone who wants to sell anything, supports my hardware, and it does the job with a minimum of fuss. Anyone who argues that Windows is not stable either: 1) has a crappy computer 2) is a moron who doesn't understand that clicking every link in every popup is bad or 3) is a moron who does not understand how to install and config an OS. Nearly every Windows crash or failure I have had in the past 2-3 years has been due to hardware malfunction (like a hard drive or motherboard dying). Heck, even 9x was stable if you knew what you were doing (and yes I know what I'm talking about, I ran win98/ME for what seems like a very long time). I agree that longhorn is way overdue, as is IE7 and many other things we've been promised since, well, a very long time ago. Seeing as I'm running on an OS that's getting close (well ok, it's still a little ways off) to 4 years old now (that is 4 years XP has been on the market), I'm getting kind of impatient I'm also a linux fan, for completely different reasons. I do not use Linux as a desktop os, because while it can get the job done, it takes a whole lot of work to get it there. Linux makes for completely awesome servers and is fun to work with, but I doubt it will be replacing Windows for me any time soon.
you ran winME? BURN THE WITCH! BURN THE HERETIC!!! I used win98 for a LONG time and it worked quite well for me... you had to reformat more often to keep speed up but it wasnt that bad
for me XP has to be one of the best M$ releases they have done to date... 98 was good for me the win ME OMG how many times did my dad have to re install that on the computer after it crashes and stops responding and cant acess a thing
Just have to say what a refreshing and balanced read this thread is. After all this is a hot topic and many times I’ve seen serious word wars start. I’m a Windows user and have been since I left my old Amiga in the attic. I went through the noob growing pains that any first time user has with any O/S , this was with the early win95. By the time I had 98 installed I was an old hand, had learned how to tweak & bash it in to submission and it remained stable up until I installed Win XP. It is the same with win XP. My crashes are/were usually of my own making whilst mucking about with software or hardware. Owing to the fact that I was aware that I might break it I keep images and regular backups so if the crash was serious and /or I couldn’t be bothered to fix it I slap in the Image and put it down to experience. I agree with the guy who said that it has one huge job of work when you think of the total world user base and I agree too with the guy that wondered what would happen if Windows was the minority and Linux to top dog. As for MS business practice, well it’s just that isn’t it, Business. If you feel so strongly about it then simply stop using their products. If you think that Linux is the best thing since sliced bread, fine, use it and nothing else and have 100% conviction. Don’t get me wrong though, if was I setting up servers I would want Linux running. But this is because of other factors such as the usually talented but misdirected idiots who want to “stick it to da man” Mac’s, well I have no real experience really other than I think them expensive. I did once see two freeze in separate locations in as many hours. I was quite alarmed at how unspectacular the crash was - in fact it was more like a sad little whimper than a full blown Windows throw all the toys out the pram sort of thing. Personally, I’m happy. I have a wish list but then not even Linux will ever release the perfect O/S. The only thing that bugs me is the elitist thing and every Penguin fancier telling me how crap everything in the world is except for Linux.
Hi all, I wasn't planning on joining this forum until my old man (Alwayz Dead) sent me an e-mail with this link so I thought I would join and put across my personal perspective. Oh, and let some of your modders know how impressed I am with your work. I would just like to point out that everything I have to say in this post and future posts in this thread and other threads is my own personal perspective. I have used Linux for just under 2 years and Windows for 7+ and over the two years I have grown accustom to that of Linux and prefer it over Windows. And therefore have 2 years of comparison backing up my own personal perspective. Firstly, I like nothing better than to bash Windows now and again. That doesn't mean I do not think it is fit to be an operating system. It does what it is supposed to do, whether it does it well or not is a different matter. Currently I use Windows XP Pro along with Gentoo and CentOS Linux. I much prefer using Linux over Windows for anything other than games (I also prefer to do Graphics in Windows). I haven't much experience with emulating games through Wine or any other emulation software. There are two factors to this thread, Microsoft and Windows. I have a lot against Microsoft, there monopoly game and the way in which they put down Open Source Software. They don't like the fact that something free is becoming well known in this world and for many, preferred over something that they charge a ridicules amount of money for. Now Windows. Well, what can I say? For people that just want to browse and do misc tasks such as word processing and spreadsheets for example. Windows is fine (unreliable, but fine). To make this clearer, I mean desktop computing, whether it actually be word processing and spreadsheets for the average user or graphics design, CAD as well as some encoding and some programming. Also, Windows is great for games; I made a comment earlier about emulating games on Linux. So the majority of you Windows users will be thinking "HA! Linux has to emulate Windows applications/games in order to be good." Well all I can say to you is either start thinking logically or don't bring this conversation up. Games are designed for Windows because the majority of computer owners run Windows. Because of this game developers develop for a greater market. And now you're thinking "Exactly, a greater market" and again I have a reply (I always do), my reply is simple, Linux was developed in 1994 by Linux Torvalds, Windows development on the other hand started in the early 1980's (1983 IIRC). 11 years Windows has had over Linux, this is why people tend to use Windows over Linux, it is a well known name and I dare say, trusted for users that don't understand (Not know, I mean understand) Linux. An analogy would be an 18 year old starting a business over a 30 year old. More trust in the 30 year old would take place based on the years of experience they may have got despite the fact that the 18 year old may be extremely knowledgeable in the market he is going into. I use Windows mainly for two reasons, Gaming and college work. Gaming, as I mentioned needs to be done on Windows as games are initially developed for windows, also explained why. I do some graphics work in Windows, but I am moving away from this. I do like many of the Windows based applications but as mentioned have grown accustom to Linux applications. College requires for me to take screenshots of the Windows desktop regularly, so I must use Windows and this is why I have Windows as my main OS at the moment, until I leave college. Then this will all change, I will however still use Windows for gaming and misc operations for network sharing with my family. The majority of the Windows users do not understand Linux. They do not understand how something so free can be as good as something that costs. Well there is not much I can say to those people other than do not judge until you have tried. My old man often says you can do more with Windows than you can with Linux in terms of the amount of applications. Well firstly I would like to point out that statement is totally incorrect. For every one application there is for Windows, I would like to point out the majority of the time there is two for Linux. Example, the main Office Collection on Windows is Microsoft Office however Linux has two for users to pick from, Open Office Org and StarOffice (And yes, I do use Microsoft word because I have to for college). This is a bad example as Windows has some other office applications. I am trying to get across to you that Linux has just as much if not more software (Let’s not include games here) than that of Windows. People cannot say Linux hasn’t as much support software wise as Windows if they haven’t used it. They do not know and again are making judgement without having backup. Windows is fine, there is a lot wrong with it, but it gets the job done. At least it does for the original environment it was built for, desktop computing. And Linux does extremely well in the environment it was originally built for, Servers. Windows cannot and will not take too much pressure or strain before problems start popping up, this is because Windows was initially not designed for such an environment as Linux. However Linux is very much capable of being as user friendly as Windows as a desktop environment, however is only just being noticed. If the tables were turned, Windows being free and Linux costing not much would be different. Linux can cost for enterprise editions and support for those editions/distros. Secondly things would be much different in people’s arguments than they are now. Mainly because Linux would be worth the extra few ££ or $$ due to its reliability, scalability and stability. I will leave this here for now, and would just to say one last thing. Windows is sticking around, it won’t go anywhere. The same applies for Linux and MacOS. This war against Windows, Linux and MacOS will continue and in the end we will come to a single conclusion. It’s your choice and your own preference to which operating system you choose. Just be careful.
Your college requires you to use a certain word processor? Interesting... Too bad my 'old' man has never bestowed his godly wisdow upon me about operating systems. Damn
My college course includes assignments based on specific applications such as Microsoft Word, Excel and Access and others. I have to take screenshots regularly and therefore need to be using the applications.
Linux isn't a company, so it wont release anything. --- A general note on the down sides of Linux: Linux is an OS of the people, if you want changes you can post in forums and get replies from the people that write the code that goes into millions of Linux systems. If you feel a bit uneasy using windows, fancy a change or are just sick of crashes but have issues with Linux as well, you have a power to make a change. Let the people who code know what you want, or if you're good enough at the coding yourself, which if you use windows I doubt that you are, have a crack at it yourself.
acrimonious, you will need to explain this. Some people do not know that Linux is a Kernel and not an Operating System. What Alwayz Dead is referring to is the companies that develop the individual Distributions. Following is a quote from Google explaining what a Distro is: "A Linux package made up of the Linux kernel, other system software, user applications, and with all major distributions, an installation program. Anyone can put together a Linux distribution, and the operating system can vary widely depending on the kernel version and system software employed." Hope this helps clarify.
I went there and was glad to see that I can chuck all this stuff out and get a 486 - no more worries However, to leave this here as a Father & Son debate is not what this subjest needs. Dislexik, your points are finecept for:- "And now Windows. Well, what can I say. For people that just want to browse and do misc tasks such as word processing and spreadsheets for example. Windows is fine (unreliable, but fine)" That is so unfair. I build graphics, websites, Advertisements for corporate magazines a banner that was required to grace the side of a building 2 stories high, CAD, Flash, Director movies etc' .............little bit more than browsing and writing letters. Be honest when my system goes down its because I have messed with it or been to dodgy websites where I was asking for trouble. Hell yes it can be flaky but you just slapped a great many Windows users in the face that are damn good at what they do with the software they have chosen to use. Jeez, lets just use the things to create and leave this crap behind us.
Actually the OS is called linux . Each distribution is a linux operating system which uses the linux kernel. An operating system is it's kernel.
Okay, back on topic, Windows is not a bad operating system. It is widely supported (because of its 11 year gain on linux, I admit) and thus pretends to be easy. I say pretends, because I have a brand new name-brand wireless-G PCI card, winXP Pro w/SP2, and my connection still dropps frequently. (The wireless router is about 7 feet away, and my wife's laptop never drops.) The only reason I don't switch to linux is also because my wireless card does not work, but at least in windows I get 2 hour blocks that I can game/surf online. I dual boot linux, but unfortunately I get numerous errors after getting into gnome. (slackware 10.1) The second I can get linux to work properly and recognize my card, I will be using linux primarily and switch to windows to game. The reason I would prefer linux over windows is the license. If windows messes up, and I found a way to rework the kernel, I would be in violation of my license agreement and could possibly be slapped with a lawsuit. If linux messes up and I found a way to rework the kernel, then I get to show it off and get even more help on cleaning up my portion of the code in the community.
You're not seriously saying MS Office is the only one of its kind for Windows? Market leader by a long way, I accept, but there are several other office suites. Including OOo for Windows. And Corel. Plus Lotus. And on every other type of professional application - graphics, web authoring, CAD, finance, project management, whatever - you've far more choice for a Windows OS. You've conceded games to Windows, but for much the same reason other pastime software such as astronomy, mapping, foreign language, cooking, reference, you name it, are all there for the Win user. It's sheer weight of numbers, market size. You might dislike the MS monopoly, but it's created cheaper software by the competition amongst companies fuelling the beast.
