Nikhil,
An interesting topic of discussion!!
Linuxers hate Windoze and Micro$oft because of it's lousy ways of marketing, and business practises, and the buggy software it produces.
Windoze is here to stay because of the ease of use and being popular, NOT because it is well-designed with well thought-of OS concepts.
How many OS concepts of Windows do you think are original to Microsoft? For that matter, how many original ideas do you think Microsoft came up with? Ask them. They will send you a list of all the companies from where most their software has been stolen or purchased.
It is not appreciated if you steal someone else's valuables and try to tell the world that it is yours. Nobody is going to have any respect towards such a person or company.
There is a long list of companies that Microsoft screwed up, because they were its competetors. Have you heard of a beautiful OS called "BeOS"? Microsoft spoiled a deal that Apple was to make with Be, to implement that OS on Apple. Then, Apple went ahead on its own and came out with Mac OS X. As it has always been doing, M$ messed Be completely without mercy; without even recognizing the fact that BeOS is MUCH MORE beautiful and elegant than Windows.
I agree with you that Windows is here to stay, not because of it's strength as an OS, but because of our human nature of being conservative and because of the wide variety of software/shareware available.
Frankly, I would hesitate to call Windows as an Operating System. Microsoft, having some of the best talent in the world, is doing the worst job - of creating buggy software, and releasing it without checking it thoroughly. How can you think of any company to be so irresponsible towards the world, unless they are pretty sure that we are dumb?
And, when someone advertise their bugs, they get annoyed and say that they have to inform Microsoft to protect the users. Funny, isn't it? They dont do their job well, and dont credit others who does.
You said Windows is more afforable than Linux. Do you know that you can get a Linux CD just by paying for the media and shipping charges? So, how much are you really paying for the OS? Please compare that with Microsoft's OS prices, and you will realize the fact. Also, Linux is tested, being open source, whereas Windows is never fully tested - you come to know about a bug only if Microsoft releases it, or someone else finds it. Still you are not convinced of their monopolistic and stupid practises?
Any big company try to acquire or kill it's competitors, so that it can survive and dominate. But not as mercilessly and unethically as Microsoft.
They as well tried to kill Java, but thanks to Sun Microsystems and others; they couldn't do that!
Being popular and widely used doesnt mean that it is good or the best. Do you know that in the process of doing so many stupid things; they once tried to migrate Hotmail servers to Windows NT from Solaris? They soon have to accept the fact that NT can't do it.
Well, we can write a whole book about the evil-doings of Microsoft, and the annonying behaviour of it's OSes.
Let me conclude by saying that Linux is here to stay. Go learn it, compare the features, and then come back here to give your feedback.
thank you, sisiro
--
Get 250 color business cards for FREE! http://businesscards.lycos.com/vp/fastpath/
On Saturday 21 July 2001 11:13 am, sisiro . wrote:
Windoze is here to stay because of the ease of use and being popular
That's the point I want to make. Even a 3 year old can use Windows. Now there may be a sarcastic argument that windows is meant for a 3 year old ! Let's leave that aside. But we can say for sure that Linux is meant for advanced users (read geeks) .Though Linux is becoming simpler by the day it is still the OS for programmers at least perceived by the non Linux users.
Can we convince an average guy who is buying a new PC to install *only* Linux ? Certainly not. Almost everybody is comfortable with Windows and we certainly have to give Microsoft credit for this.
I agree with you that Windows is here to stay, not because of it's strength as an OS, but because of our human nature of being conservative and because of the wide variety of software/shareware available.
Again here the above argument holds good. An average user doesn't mind re-booting the machine if he can play Doom,Quake and so on . I have a friend who bought his PC recently. Now after a few months I tried convincing him on using Linux telling him about the stability,the customizations offered et al.He asked me just one question : Can I play all those groovy games on it? I gave up.
Operating System. Microsoft, having some of the best talent in the world, is doing the worst job - of creating buggy software, and releasing it without checking it thoroughly.
I think this is harsh remark. Microsoft releases beta versions of Windows for testing and also has patches in the form of updates. Also I think no programmer can claim that his new software is bug free. Even Linux has bugs and I agree that they are repaired sooner than those in Windows.
You said Windows is more affordable than Linux.
O.K. I was wrong .I realized that compared to NT it is lot cheaper.
Being popular and widely used doesn't mean that it is good or the best.
I guess this holds true for Linux as well. We certainly can't say that Linux is best OS around. The hardware compatibility is the area where Linux falls behind Windows. I know it is the fault of the manufacturers who make only windows drivers. But try to argue this with average user and he will tell you "See that's why I said Windows is still the best" I mean most of the people ( I don't know but I think around 75%) use Microsoft Windows on their PC. Now they certainly aren't insane to shell out money for a buggy software which hangs now and then and makes their life worse than hell. If it ain't good no one will use it. Simple.
I love Linux . I also like Windows .Both have their merits and demerits. At the end of the day it is up to the individual to decide what he wants from his OS and make a choice wisely.
_________________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Get your free @yahoo.com address at http://mail.yahoo.com
--- Nikhil Joshi nikhiljoshy@yahoo.com wrote:
Again here the above argument holds good. An average user doesn't mind re-booting the machine if he can play Doom,Quake and so on . I have a friend who bought his PC recently. Now after a few months I tried convincing him on using Linux telling him about the stability,the customizations offered et al.He asked me just one question : Can I play all those groovy games on it? I gave up.
Incidentally, you *do* get Doom, Quake, et al on Linux. Check the id Software site.
Krishnan
__________________________________________________ Do You Yahoo!? Make international calls for as low as $.04/minute with Yahoo! Messenger http://phonecard.yahoo.com/
On Mon, 23 Jul 2001, Nikhil Joshi wrote:
That's the point I want to make. Even a 3 year old can use Windows. Now there may be a sarcastic argument that windows is meant for a 3
A three year old can also use linux. My cousin used to use my linux system when she was four. She used to play simple games and do drawings then. Using a well set up system is easy for anyone. My sister and my dad both use linux at home. Neither of them are `into' computers, and are only part time users of the computer.
Can we convince an average guy who is buying a new PC to install *only* Linux ? Certainly not. Almost everybody is comfortable with
You cannot expect the average guy to install anything. I've met guys who are above average on the techie front. At least, they work with computers everyday, but aren't geeks. Almost all are afraid to install windows. These are the same guys who have no problem opening the system and removing CDROM and Harddisks. They are just afraid of doing something wrong while installing windows.
Like I said before, there is no problem using a well set up system. Setting up a system well is the problem.
stability,the customizations offered et al.He asked me just one question : Can I play all those groovy games on it? I gave up.
One answer. Yes. Most game companies have ported their games to linux. The reasoning is simple. The best gamers are in fact geeks, and not windows users who's sole purpose of owning a computer is to play games. Don't argue with this statistic, it has been found to be true; I don't know where or when.
I think this is harsh remark. Microsoft releases beta versions of Windows for testing and also has patches in the form of updates.
They are called service packs. Windows releases the software for testing, but only to selected users. Also, without the source code, one can only find buggy behaviour, but not the bugs themselves (black box testing). White box testing however requires the source. With the source, testers could audit the code, and find bugs before they show up on screen.
Also I think no programmer can claim that his new software is bug free. Even Linux has bugs and I agree that they are repaired sooner
The above is precisely the reason why. I think it is logical to say that for all the programmers on earth, all the software bugs have been seen before. Most programmers will remember common bugs, and notice them immediately when they see them in code. Executing the code may not even be necessary for such bugs. To quote Linus' law, `given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow'.
I mean most of the people ( I don't know but I think around 75%) use Microsoft Windows on their PC. Now they certainly aren't insane to shell out money for a buggy software which hangs now and then and
No, they are not insane, they are just sheep. Humans, like sheep tend to herd. If everyone else is doing it, then so should we. Many people don't even know that alternatives exist. In fact, for 98% of that 75%, a computer is a tv that shows a windows logo when you push the big round button.
Philip
Sometime today, Philip S Tellis wrote:
To quote Linus' law, `given enough eyeballs, all bugs are shallow'.
I thought ESR invented that phrase.
In fact, for 98% of that 75%, a computer is a tv that shows a windows logo when you push the big round button.
Well said. Most of these people don't realise how much power they have at their disposal. Of course, it gets wasted in displaying the Windows logo.
Manish
Sometime today, Nikhil Joshi wrote:
That's the point I want to make. Even a 3 year old can use Windows. Now there may be a sarcastic argument that windows is meant for a 3 year old ! Let's leave that aside. But we can
That's not why Windows is popular today. Even Mac OS is easy to use (more than Windows, I've heard). Mac OS X simply rocks (from UI point of view). But look, Windows has more than 90% of the desktop market.
install *only* Linux ? Certainly not. Almost everybody is comfortable with Windows and we certainly have to give Microsoft credit for this.
The reason why most people will not install Linux *only* is because they have come to believe that Windows is the only easy to use OS and that they don't have a choice. Joe Sixpack hasn't even heard of Linux.
He asked me just one question : Can I play all those groovy games on it? I gave up.
Right, Windows is good for him. Let him have it.
We certainly can't say that Linux is best OS around.
There is no "best OS". What is best depends on the requirements. For the gamer, Windows is the best OS and there shouldn't be any doubt about it.
At the end of the day it is up to the individual to decide what he wants from his OS and make a choice wisely.
Ya, but for the average user to make a choice, she should know about the options available. Educating people about GNU/Linux is the Nice Thing (TM) to do now.
Manish
-
Manish Jethani -
Nikhil Joshi -
Philip S Tellis -
S. Krishnan -
sisiro .