Advertisement

Microsoft is back ? =)

Started by April 18, 2001 02:11 PM
44 comments, last by FrankBlack 23 years, 9 months ago
Wow N&V,now I''m just totally confused as to what side you are on (if infact you are taking sides) This is just out of curiosity and nothing else.On one hand you''re new to Linux (if I understood your post correctly) and you use Win2K and like it,yet on the other hand you have a "Resist WindowsXP" banner as a signature.What''s the story? What is it about WinXP you don''t like or are so against.(I guess I could go read the WindowsXP post but it''s way too long and I''m too lazy :p So a short version would be nice ) From what I''ve seen of WindowsXP,it looks like a computer idiot''s heaven (ie,about more than half the computer-using economy)That''s a good thing in my opinion for MS.More money while making computers easier to operate for the average Joe.Why would you think this is a bad thing? (I''m not all up to date on the WindowsXP thing so I''m not well equipped to argue anything)

I really wish I knew what side I was on, it would be a lot easier that way. I just try to tell my version of the truth for the most part.

WinXP in a nutshell: You must ask Microsoft for permission to install, or use WinXP after changing any hardware or all hardware. My stance on this, what happens if they decide you don''t need a new registration key? BTW: They only work once for one hardware configuration.

Secondly, they plan to use WinXP and .NET to cause people to "rent" their software. Which isn''t bad in and of itself, it''s just that I want it all on my HD when I install it, or I won''t pay for it at once or over time. There are plans for MS to host your data on their servers in the future. You have the dump terminal, they have the mainframe...

Thirdly, I don''t want to waste my system resources (it takes even more RAM) just for a "pretty" GUI that I have no access to the tools to edit. If they released the skin kits (they won''t, they already said they wouldn''t), I might not complain about their skins. I also think it looks way too much like MacOS (see the trashcan in the lower right corner in those screen shots?), which is the main reason I dislike Macs. Not the trashcan, the OS in general. I haven''t seen MacOS X yet, so I can''t speak about it.

"Finger to spiritual emptiness underlying everything." -- How a C manual referred to a "pointer to void." --Things People Said
Resist Windows XP''s Invasive Production Activation Technology!
http://druidgames.cjb.net/
Advertisement
quote:
Original post by TheGecko

SilentError: I never said you are your IDE,but a good IDE helps me get my work done alot faster (productivity anyone?)



I know, just kinda seemed implied. Actually I just wanted to say that, seems too many people are becoming their IDE. I look at people I know, and that REALLY seems the case. It's really sad when you begin to look like your IDE though! Don't laugh, I know people who do!

I just find I get along well without the IDE. Sure, syntax shading is nice and all, but give me a simple text editor and all is well. I work better that way, forces me to program a bit more defensively I've found. But then again, that's just me.

All in all, my comments should only be taken lightly. I, unlike most other programmers it seems, wasn't made for 48 hour days!

~~What the hell have I done now?~~

Edited by - Silent Error on April 19, 2001 2:47:03 AM
If only debugging were as easy as killing cockroaches... *sigh*
quote:
Original post by Buster

>>So the quality of software is equivalent to how much money you make ?

Yep.

Soon people will be asking questions like "Daddy why did people ever use Linux?" and saying things like "Linux was only used by perverts looking for kiddie-pr0n, Johnny."


So that would make win95/win98 the best software ever, right ?
Since it sold more than anything. With such a masterpice I guess you never expirenced a crash or something similar ?

My personal opinion is that it''s probably the worst pice of software ever produced.

But hey, lets work hard and earn a lot of money, so we can buy lots of fat food and spend all our free time infront of tv and only care about ourself. Lets not educate ourselfs lets just try to become as big and stupid as we can and ignore everyone else.
Lets do it the american way.

I truly hate comersialism and greed. Makes me wanna trow up.
But hey, lets work hard and earn a lot of money, so we can buy lots of fat food and spend all our free time infront of tv and only care about ourself. Lets not educate ourselfs lets just try to become as big and stupid as we can and ignore everyone else.
Lets do it the american way.
---------------------------------------------------

Yup, all day, every day, all I do is sit in front of my TV watching my soaps and Springer, eating McDonalds food and proceeding to undo every ounce of intelligence left in my brain. And thats only Friday nights.

Now, I use both Win98 and Mandrake 6.0, should I take a side or say you are all wrong? Btw, vim + gcc = best IDE ever.

-----------------------------

A wise man once said "A person with half a clue is more dangerous than a person with or without one."

The Micro$haft BSOD T-Shirt
-----------------------------A wise man once said "A person with half a clue is more dangerous than a person with or without one."The Micro$haft BSOD T-Shirt
I can't belive it. All these people saying "linux is difficult to use". Well, guess what? Userfriendliness is relative.

Is windows really user friendly? No, it's no more user-friendly than - say - KDE.

How do I reason here, you might ask yourself... I'll elaborate:
You think windows is user-friendly, because that's what you've probably been using for the past few years. But it's all learned behavior.
So, when a windows user tries linux for the first time, his/her immediate reaction will be -"Damn this is awkward", but in reality, they mean -"Damn, this is not like windows!".

Linux is not like windows. it's user-friendly in it's own way. Had you been using linux for a couple of years, you would have the same feeling when you have your first encounter with windows. -"Darn, why can't I change the resolution with ctrl,alt,+ ??"

It's all about what you're accustomed to.

Commands? Today, you really don't need to know that many, to use a linux-system. Most of the stuff can be done with GUI-tools. However, a few common commands are always good to learn. But that wasn't a problem for the people who started out with DOS back in the days, was it?

Enough ranting, for now

Edited by - mr BiCEPS on April 19, 2001 12:49:59 PM
Advertisement
quote:

Soon people will be asking questions like "Daddy why did people ever use Linux?" and saying things like "Linux was only used by perverts looking for kiddie-pr0n, Johnny."



Dude. If you''re going to troll, you might as well do it good, not with some lame "all Linux users do is watch kiddie pron" post.

I''m reminded of the day my daughter came in, looked over my shoulder at some Perl 4 code, and said, "What is that, swearing?" - Larry Wall
I'm reminded of the day my daughter came in, looked over my shoulder at some Perl 4 code, and said, "What is that, swearing?" - Larry Wall
mr Bicep: When I talk about userfriendliness,I talk about how easy it is for a total white-trash trailerpark-living redneck (no offense to anybody,been watching Jerry ) to install both OS''s (assuming he can turn on a computer and insert a CD ROM etc.) I guarantee that installing windows is more of a no brainer to him than installing any flavour of Linux,even Mandrake.Windows tends to hide alot of the stuff from their users unlike Linux.This could be a good or bad thing.It depends on how you look at it.I use both OS''s and I love em both to death.They each have their own ups and downs.But as a high techie,I always try to put myself in the place of the average Joe and compare doing one thing in windows to one thing in linux and windows almost always wins in ease of use.

(PS I was exaggerating about the whole redneck thing,but you get my point )

A couputer newbie would often not be able to install windows. He/she would more often than not ask someone more experienced for help. I'm sure most of us have been asked for help sometimes when one of your friends/family needs to install windows

I remember the first time I installed a Linux distro. It was slackware 3.5. I was a little bit nervous, because of all the talk about how difficult it was. But because I Read The Fine Manual before installing, everything installed smoothly. With today's installers (such as the mighty mandrake-installer with it's DiskDrake) anybody who has at least some grasp of what a partition is, should be able to install Linux, if he/she just reads the instructions first.

My father uses windows 95 on his old p120. He knows how to dial up the internet, and start a web-browser. Also how to "turn the damn thing" off. That's about it. He knows how to do these things because I told him how, and not "because windows has a intinuitive user interface". (shutdown after clicking a button that says "start"... Hello? How intinuitive is that?) His kind of computer user is more common than us programmers often belive.

So, could even his kind of user use linux? Yes. Contrary to popular belief, a browser or word-processor is not more difficult to launch on KDE than windows. Their functionality is almost identical. In the case if my father, I could just sa easily have shown him how to do those things on Linux instead, and it would'nt have been anything more difficult. Maybe just not exactly alike. Not alike does however, (contrary to what windows-refugees will feel) not equal more difficult.

By logging in as a user and not root, this kind of users have somewhere near zero chance of screwing up their system - Unlike win9x, where the user may screw up whatever he has access to... -Which is everything.

What I'm trying to say is basically, that when you install your Linux from a CD, you will end up with a system that works. You don't need to edit any configuration files (about as dangerous as playing with regedit in windows... don't do it unless you know what you're doing), unless you want to, of course. You don't need ro recompile a kernel, unless ofcourse you want to. There are lots of advanced things you can do in linux, but that does not mean you have to do it . If you have a working system, there's no need to mess around, just go by your bussiness browsing the web, using the word-processor, like you would if you were in windows.

That's all for today, thank you...


Edited by - mr BiCEPS on April 20, 2001 1:14:10 PM
quote:
Original post by mr BiCEPS
If you have a working system, there''s no need to mess around, just go by your bussiness browsing the web, using the word-processor, like you would if you were in windows.



Exactly. Why switch to Linux if your Windows box is working perfectly? The average user, who already owns a copy of Windows, and only uses his computer for email and word processing, really doesn''t have much to gain from switching to Linux, does he?


~~~~~~~~~~
Martee
http://www.csc.uvic.ca/~mdill
ReactOS - an Open-source operating system compatible with Windows NT apps and drivers

This topic is closed to new replies.

Advertisement