Who says Vista is a flop????
- Status
..:: Free Radical ::..
The Transcendental
aww..c'mon every1. you don't need every thing from the OS. There are so many excellent 3rd party tools. with all that upgrading fuss, who needs Mac or Vista or the latest Linux distro on the block when you can do everything better currently with your own choice of apps.
i did like win98 due to its bloatware free, streamlined interface and still reminisce of the good old days of a 150 MB windows install. I cuurently run XP without all the bells and whistles with all the crappy services, firewall, drm crap removed. Apps like foobar2000, media player classic, AHK and directx are delaying my switch to linux. Now, I must emphasise that the best software I have used has been open source. I love Firefox and hate using a browser (even if it is firefox) on any other computer because of my customized (and even modded) extensions. Now you can only run Linux on a Playstation and not Windows
. Who needs Mac when I cant change my hardware according to my needs? ( I being a person who likes to have control of all software on his hardware LOL. Heck, is there lInux for my Symbian phone. i wanna flash.)
No doubt, if you are a Mac user accustomed to all that eye candy and simplistic interface, Windows is a nightmare. If you are a control freak and fastidious about everything an OS should have, Linux is the absolute best you could have.XP treads on easier ground, and atleast I know its flaws, so I can be sure-footed around its holes. Vista, I don't like something I cant have total control over. Hell, it reads My Computer.
It would be sometime I switch from my own stripped and tweaked XP.
In the end what matters most is the labor you put into your OS.
You should always take the OS which YOU are efficient at. Why waste time migrating when you can get the job done with what you have?
Peace.
i did like win98 due to its bloatware free, streamlined interface and still reminisce of the good old days of a 150 MB windows install. I cuurently run XP without all the bells and whistles with all the crappy services, firewall, drm crap removed. Apps like foobar2000, media player classic, AHK and directx are delaying my switch to linux. Now, I must emphasise that the best software I have used has been open source. I love Firefox and hate using a browser (even if it is firefox) on any other computer because of my customized (and even modded) extensions. Now you can only run Linux on a Playstation and not Windows
. Who needs Mac when I cant change my hardware according to my needs? ( I being a person who likes to have control of all software on his hardware LOL. Heck, is there lInux for my Symbian phone. i wanna flash.)No doubt, if you are a Mac user accustomed to all that eye candy and simplistic interface, Windows is a nightmare. If you are a control freak and fastidious about everything an OS should have, Linux is the absolute best you could have.XP treads on easier ground, and atleast I know its flaws, so I can be sure-footed around its holes. Vista, I don't like something I cant have total control over. Hell, it reads My Computer.
It would be sometime I switch from my own stripped and tweaked XP.
In the end what matters most is the labor you put into your OS.
You should always take the OS which YOU are efficient at. Why waste time migrating when you can get the job done with what you have?
Peace.
Last edited:
mediator
Technomancer
U say u have used linux and u ask such question about linux updates? Have some experience before showing ur ignorance about linux package updates. Neways whats wrong in kernel updates? First time I used windows without any updates or SPs, I got numerous "BSODs/crashes" coming further. I have been using fedora 5 without any updates ever since and I forgot those terms. So Unstable kernel? Please dont make me laugh. If u r into programming then u wudn't have even said such absurd stuff! The sites themselves tell u if the kernel is unstable or stable and that stability (OSS) is well tested by millions out there everytime not by just a few sitting in a department as in case of closed source!shantanu_webmaster said:
Neways for ur enlightenment, kernel updates doesn't mean some patches for some noticable bugs to the existing kernel. If some bugs r to be removed in the existing kernel then its called "patches" to the kernel. Stable kernel doesn't usually have any noticable bugs coz its well tested, an unstable kernel is the one with which u can play with. A kernel update is usually associated with better hardware support! Thats y they say if u wanna have better hardware support then u shud update kernel or compile the drivers with existing kernel! U can have plenty of kernels to boot with on ur startup. U can also learn to optimize the latest kernel keeping the existing ones in case ur not successful with the optimization!
It was like ur asking me to remove ur ignorance!shantanu_webmaster said:
Thats y I told u to quote and reply me line by line, coz firstly I was talking about support for OSS like in case of linux servers and removing ur ignorance about that and secondly the proof has been given over n over gain for mS apologising for malwares. If u can't read the links automatically marked in blue then please google to have plenty of pages to enlighten u bt it!shantanu_webmaster said:
Even steve balmer doesn't talk with such absurdness! Yes, OSS isnt a company itself but I hope u know redhat,novll etc r dont u? If u ask for enlightenment then u shud read Opensource and tech news sections.shantanu_webmaster said:
Read this Who really writes linux
U asked what Mac and linux give for windows, then read again what u wrote "OSS is not a company" and linux is a part of OSS and its OSS at the end that is contributing to Windows.
Please keep ur sentiments with u and instead have a nice quote n reply discussion if u dont wanna hurt me! About the percentage thats just another statement from a fanboy and quite laughable! and then u say ur not a fanboy...how cute!shantanu_webmaster said:
eddie
El mooooo
Did you read the document you linked me to and then compared the mentioned features to the ones available in competitive products? As far as I can see, Superfetch is probably the only feature that does not have a completely stable alternative available in Linux/Mac platforms. Even though preload is available in Linux but it is still in development stages. So Superfetch alone will make Vista's "Kernel" to take over the world or do you have some other unique features in mind?shantanu_webmaster said:
gxsaurav
You gave been GXified
ax3 said:
Again, no one is forced for anything. It is users choice wether you want to get Vista or not. Vista runs fine on old systems, my computer is a very good example as it was bought 3 years ago. It even runs on 4 years old computer with a DirectX 9 graphics card (Pentium 4 2.4 Ghz & Radeon 9600 Pro)
Zeeshan Quireshi
C# Be Sharp !
amitava82 said:
well mate there's a reason y 3rd parties don't program for Linux , it's simple , Windows has a standard , u can use WIndows Media SDK to develop a multimedia app and u can use the binary across all versions of windows , in linux , there r no Concrete Standards , u program using one library , while there are 500 others so it becomes very difficult to support the product on each and every distro and config .
also , programming for windows is a hell lot easier , just look at c# , designing GUI apss with it a piece of cake whereas and you'll be lost for bout a whole day learning the basics of GTK .
{ plz i'm not bashing OSS , i'm just putting my point of view }
aryayush said:
hey arya , aren't u contradicting mac's greatness , if iwndows and linux can run on pc hardware as well as mac hardware that means they r more flexible and hence can run on various hardware configs , but on the other hand Mac OS can only run on it's propreitary hardware and the developers haven't taken the pain of makin it more dynamic nad able to run in different scenarios ?
Last edited:
mediator
Technomancer
Well the last time I tried installing winxp manager, it prompted me to install .net libraries! For linux u have tar files, i.e source, from which can make the program on any distro. Some times it says that library needed. So if u can install VB, .net libraries in windows then wats wrong to install a few libraries (usually in KBs) in linux too?
Neways 3rd party apps (or better say proprietary stuff) exists for linux too. PLease have some experience with linux and u'll find the softwares u r talking about in plenty. They have even started developing games for Linux. Have a tour in the OPENSOURCE section.
Again its a point of getting used to. I find programming in c/c++,java a lot easier in linux. U dont even have to put the "getch()" syntax in the last line of the c file...which is used in windows just to show the output!!?? And then u can copy the result straight forward to ur lab file. In the leading windows's c compilers like turbo c,borland c compiler copying the result is a heck. The thing here that is making the life of a programmeur much easier is the Linux SHELL.
aryayush
Aspiring Novelist
Well, this "flexibility" is what causes Windows to be so unstable. I am much happier buying my hardware and software from the same company and experiencing zero compatibility problems, than buying Windows and staring at BSoDs.Zeeshan Quireshi said:
And anyway, Mac OS X can run fairly well on regular PCs if you want to do so. But it is illegal and Apple deliberatly puts many roadblocks in the way to discourage such an act. They need to sell their hardware too.
My post was just intended to clarify that Windows (even Vista) runs absolutely fine on a Mac.
gxsaurav
You gave been GXified
Meditator, I have said it many times & saying it again. offline Application installation in Linux is extremely bad. .deb is bad cos it doesn't comes with own libraries but requires you to download more. .mo of Slax is best so far.
In Windows, there is no compilation required. With Vista the runtime is already available & .net 2.0 & 3.0 are given in digit magzine too, it is not much to download & once downloaded, that one runtime is all you need. Besides, I have myself tried compiling Gaim 2.0 b6 on Ubuntu & despite of being 2% linux user i was unable to, & plz just like any Average Joe, i don't plan to read 30 tutorials (example).
zeeshan said:
Yo, you working on the "thing" na?
Now what to say
about him.arya said:
This felxibility is the only reason Windows rulez.
Try buying a Dell or HP Computer with proper WHQL drivers & trust me, you will not get a BSOD unless you tinker with Windows.
aryayush
Aspiring Novelist
Well, I tinker a lot with Mac OS X but it never crashed on me.
My brother bought an HP laptop and it came up with a BSoD when we installed a few third party software and were updating it through AutoPatcher. Now tell me "u will not get bsod if you not instal 3rd party sw & system update".
I have a better option - let's just turn it off and put it in a cardboard box. I am sure it won't give a BSoD even then.
My brother bought an HP laptop and it came up with a BSoD when we installed a few third party software and were updating it through AutoPatcher. Now tell me "u will not get bsod if you not instal 3rd party sw & system update".
I have a better option - let's just turn it off and put it in a cardboard box. I am sure it won't give a BSoD even then.
mediator
Technomancer
I guess we already had a discussion over that. If u wanna compare that then u shudn't cripple one OS so as to put the advantage on the other. I can also say, if u dont have a cdrom/dvdrom then u can't even install windows but can do a network install of Linux directly from the site! And if u dont have a cdrom then u'll be dead already installing the service pack that is near 200 mb and other party packages (in gbs) that form the complete pleasure package in windows!
I know u might say that cdrom is like an organ of a PC, then so is internet today. Its more like a necessity now. I mean both r.
So lets not put the offline/online arguments or cripple the OS of its basic hardware like net,cdrom etc. Neways if digit can give u the libraries of windows then they can supply u with linux libraries tooo to get their business going/growing.
Also u get the libraries,missing codecs issues with free linux distros and then windows tooo. So if u really hate such things and hate 30 tuts page then get proprietary linux like SUSE where everything is bundled there for an average joe like u as u said. Also an average joe expects everything to be installed already so as to minimise his installation work. If u can spend 6000 on windows which doesnt even have office suite, then paying much less for propreitary linux shudn't even be an issue.
Neways in free linux distro like Fedora I always advise the fella users to do "yum -y install *lib*" install so that they dont have to install libraries afterwards!
So Zeeshan n I were having libraries discussion. Lets not have a null and useless discussion of Internet/cdrom/offline installation etc! There r a lotta things an average joe expects, one of them listed already by me and one by u! And an internet connection is a basic necessity for an average joe!!
mediator
Technomancer
@gx : In the link u gave, u r discussing about updates, WAIK(800 MB), then something for 1.3 GB etc. But here we r discussing about libraries. I haven't updated my FC5 yet. It is still as it was, when I first upgraded it from FC4, without any problems ever since. All I did since then was installing of programs I liked. As far as I remember the total install size of the extra libraries wasn't greater than 200 MB and it consisted of all the libraries in the seven repositories enabled on my FC5 => "yum -y install *lib*". Since this command means, to install any package that has "lib" in its name, then u may include any software package too that has "lib" in its name that might have got installed and contributing to that 200 MB. An average joe with even 64 kbps wud have got that 200 MB installed during the night. But now we r having average joes with 256 Kbps speed and mtnl/bsnl joes with 2Mbps speeds.
Also just like u said in the post/link that u downloaded packages and formed an updated source, similarly in Linux u call it "caching" of the repository and can point all the "ethernet" machines on a LAN to it.
Also just like u said in the post/link that u downloaded packages and formed an updated source, similarly in Linux u call it "caching" of the repository and can point all the "ethernet" machines on a LAN to it.
infra_red_dude
Wire muncher!
yes i do agree wid this point. offline installation is a pain in linux. i also agree that broadband is a sorry scene in this country. i waz kept waiting for 8 months for my BB connection. i cudn't afford to download ~200mb on a dialup connection.
i also agree to the point that c/c++ programming is much easier and more productive in linux. i do that mostly in my linux system.
both points are valid! but lets get back to the discussion here abt vista.
vista will surely roll on wid new PCs.....my opinion is that many many organisations (not private obviously) still haf win98 era PCs wid win98 as the default OS. they'll obviously get new hardware and when they do they'll get vista bundled wid it.. so its a plus point for vista!
i also agree to the point that c/c++ programming is much easier and more productive in linux. i do that mostly in my linux system.
both points are valid! but lets get back to the discussion here abt vista.
vista will surely roll on wid new PCs.....my opinion is that many many organisations (not private obviously) still haf win98 era PCs wid win98 as the default OS. they'll obviously get new hardware and when they do they'll get vista bundled wid it.. so its a plus point for vista!
Zeeshan Quireshi
C# Be Sharp !
mediator said:
well , u got me wrong here , i'm sayin that windows has a standard set of libraries that u need to download , in this case .NET , which is ~20MB n each and every .NET program uses the same library , but with linux(or any other FREE system ) , u have many options , so say a developer uses library A for (say)XML parsing , whereas some other developers use libraries , B , C , ... etc for same thing , so now while compiling programs , the user has to download a multitude of libraries that do essentially the same thing .
secondly it is even harder for developers to learn new libraries and for new developers who join a dev team and find out that the library that the team uses for doin their work is not the one he uses .
mediator said:
where are u man , u don't need to put "getch" to get the program output , heck , "getch" is not even in "Standard C++" ANd , the leading windows compiler is Microsoft's Visual C++ , turbo c++ was released in 1991 and is now extinct , today's development environments r modern windows programs with a GUI , this is MUCH better than programming in a CMD text editor and compiling by hand .
- Status