__/ [DFS] on Thursday 20 October 2005 13:31 \__
> Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>> NOTE: In the blog, I included 10 links to support every single
>> argument I make here, so before a wintroll squeezes his head through
>> the XP fire- wall and blurts out some junk, I suggest you look at
>> the clear evidence. ===
> You have no evidence.
See post sent to a previous (accidentally despatched parent) thread.
Everything is there if you follow the link. With all due respect, do so and
you will learn a thing or two about Windows deficiencies, I promise you.
>> WINDOWS Vista was already said to be a trainwreck, primarily due to
>> its inability to deliver something innovative. It gives no
>> compelling reason whatsoever for users to upgrade. People who have
>> had the chance to fiddle with the Vista beta build can confirm this.
>> In fact, it seems to be lag- ging behind other operating systems,
>> notably Mac OS X as was previously confesses by a Microsoft
>> On top of it all, hardware requirements of Windows Vista make it
>> rather unappealing.
> What requirements are those? MS hasn't haven't released them.
There are two citations in the text.
>> Novell have said that Vista will drive away
>> Windows users and ultimately lead them to Linux.
> And 2005 was supposed to be the Year of Linux. So was 2004, and 2003....
It was! They all were. Have you seen sf.net and freshmeat.net recently? All
we need is now there, including beautiful bricks for operating systems that
finally need to be exposed to the public. By the way, Open Office 2 is now
officially out. It makes Windows and Office very much obsolete.
>> To many, adopting
>> Windows Vista probably means acquisition of a new computer, which
>> will most probably contain Win- dows pre-installed for a variety of
>> reasons that involve anti-fair trade practices.
> Only if you consider the OEMs selling what they want to sell to be "anti-
> fair trade."
> I know you Linux hypocrites would love to force the OEMs to sell Linux
> machines, despite the fact (that's capital FACT) that it would shortly
> all of them out of business. You whiners believe in 'choice' only when
> it's the choices you want.
No, we want choice. That's exactly the point, which somehow you fail to grasp
or maybe it's reverse psychology.
>> Windows XP was first introduced to the public in late 2001 and, as
>> we ap- proach the end of 2005, Windows XP is worse than ever
>> before. The many critical patches, which came in the form of
>> Service Pack I & II have made it slower and less likely to interact
>> with all underlying modules grace- fully. With more Windows viruses
>> in the wild, it requires more attention and maintenance than
> With SP2, it requires less effort than ever.
Not enough. On average, a connected computer will get infected within 10
minutes once it comes 'out of the box'. Moreover, one needs anti-virus
software, malware scans, et cetera et cetera. Been there, seen that.
>> which has definitely led to unrest among its users community.
>> In the mean time, Apple's Tiger has been gaining strength and has
>> even surpassed, in term of it functionality, the Microsoft equiva-
>> lents -- something that even Microsoft could not truly deny. KDE, in
>> the mean time, has been growing very rapidly and it is now comparable
>> with any other desktop layers and often surpasses the competition in
>> terms of its functionality. See, for instance:
>> * KDE Plasma
>> * State-of-the-art Linux Screenshots
>> * Next Generation of X
> KDE is a nice desktop, no doubt. Far superior to Gnome or any other Linux
> window manager/desktop environment.
I agree, but it depends what your machine is intended to do. I would never
run KDE on a Web server, for example.
>> It is also worth mentioning Ubuntu Linux, which has done tremendously
>> well at easing a transition to a free operating system. Hewlett
>> Packard have recently started selling Ubuntu desktops and laptops,
>> as a matter of fact. Ubuntu comes in just a single CD, its hardware
>> detection is admirable, and moreover it is stable and user-friendly.
>> Its bundled Live CD makes another big pro as users who are too
>> resistant to delete Windows can have a period of adaptation and
>> gain some re-assurance with regards to their platform migration.
> Don't make us laugh. Gnome-based Ubuntu is a joke. Anyone used to a real
> OS like Windows will find it primitive and slow and amateurish.
Primitive? Does Windows come with something as good as the GIMP? Or Open
Office? Or a decent browser like firefox, which actually has the notion of
Slow? Have you ever tried Ubuntu? I think you meant to say "fast", unless you
judged based on the Live CD.
Amateurish? Define that. As far as I know, that verbal thing is ascribed to
people, not technology.
>> Windows is dying. The writings are all over the wall...
> As is the case with so many of the stupid MS and Windows proclamations made
> by you silly cola bozos, there is NO evidence to support anything you say.
Follow the links and get the truth. Or... just live in denial until you give
Roy S. Schestowitz | UNIX: Because a PC is a terrible thing to waste
http://Schestowitz.com | SuSE Linux | PGP-Key: 74572E8E
4:45pm up 56 days 4:59, 4 users, load average: 0.23, 0.25, 0.38
http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms