Unless you've been living under a rock for the past few months, you probably know that the latest version of Windows--called Vista--is due to hit store shelves later this year (in time for the holidays, Microsoft tells us). The successor to Windows XP offers a little something for everyone, from eye-catching graphics and new bundled applications to more-rigorous security. In fact, there is so much in the new operating system that it can be tough to get a handle on it all.
Michael Desmond has tested a recent beta version of Windows Vista (Build 5270). A few things he was excited about included:
1. Security
2. Internet Explorer 7
3. High-end graphics effects
4. Desktop search
Read more... (PC World)
QUOTE (Neutron+Feb 19 2006, 11:45 AM)
Unless you've been living under a rock for the past few months, you probably know that the latest version of Windows--called Vista--is due to hit store shelves later this year (in time for the holidays, Microsoft tells us). The successor to Windows XP offers a little something for everyone, from eye-catching graphics and new bundled applications to more-rigorous security. In fact, there is so much in the new operating system that it can be tough to get a handle on it all.
Michael Desmond has tested a recent beta version of Windows Vista (Build 5270). A few things he was excited about included:
1. Security
2. Internet Explorer 7
3. High-end graphics effects
4. Desktop search
Read more... (PC World)
4 reasons to NOT buy Vista:
1. Security (Security has always been an afterthought for MS)
2. Internet Explorer 7 (Poor standards compliance in past releases, no reason to believe it will change substantially)
3. High-end graphics effects (Need to buy a super computer for the eye-candy as large percentage of current computers won't be able to take advantage of high-end graphics)
4. Desktop search (Do you really trust MS to search your data?)
Krreagan
Michael Desmond has tested a recent beta version of Windows Vista (Build 5270). A few things he was excited about included:
1. Security
2. Internet Explorer 7
3. High-end graphics effects
4. Desktop search
Read more... (PC World)
4 reasons to NOT buy Vista:
1. Security (Security has always been an afterthought for MS)
2. Internet Explorer 7 (Poor standards compliance in past releases, no reason to believe it will change substantially)
3. High-end graphics effects (Need to buy a super computer for the eye-candy as large percentage of current computers won't be able to take advantage of high-end graphics)
4. Desktop search (Do you really trust MS to search your data?)
Krreagan
i think saying "living under a rock is a very narrow" sited view, showing that the author is not updated on other operating systems other than Microsoft windows.
1. if you want security then you better not use windows in the first place.
furthermore, Microsoft claims that they will supply security patches for their operating system, haven't they heard the word "backporting"? we pay so much for using it, and for what? for no support at all?!
the saying goes: if the lock is broken why should you pay so much for a new car?
2. you don't change an operating system for a browser! let alone, explorer 7 is known for the fact of ripping off the idea of tabbed browsing that came from Netscape and Firerox. if Microsoft uses open-source ideas, why doesn't it contribute like most big software Enterprises?
3. High-end graphics effects?! that's a nice word more system recourse and bugs that might originate. we seen similar things when moving from windows 98 to windows me.
3. Desktop search - if that's all you have left then go build a patch, not an updating system.
in conclusion, if you want to release an operating system call it windows XP v1.2 and not a new system. for a system to be a new system, one needs to change the SYSTEM and not the USER-INTERFACE.
42
1. if you want security then you better not use windows in the first place.
furthermore, Microsoft claims that they will supply security patches for their operating system, haven't they heard the word "backporting"? we pay so much for using it, and for what? for no support at all?!
the saying goes: if the lock is broken why should you pay so much for a new car?
2. you don't change an operating system for a browser! let alone, explorer 7 is known for the fact of ripping off the idea of tabbed browsing that came from Netscape and Firerox. if Microsoft uses open-source ideas, why doesn't it contribute like most big software Enterprises?
3. High-end graphics effects?! that's a nice word more system recourse and bugs that might originate. we seen similar things when moving from windows 98 to windows me.
3. Desktop search - if that's all you have left then go build a patch, not an updating system.
in conclusion, if you want to release an operating system call it windows XP v1.2 and not a new system. for a system to be a new system, one needs to change the SYSTEM and not the USER-INTERFACE.
42
QUOTE
1. if you want security then you better not use windows in the first place.
If you want real security, go with VMS. All other OS’s are vulnerable.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| 1. if you want security then you better not use windows in the first place. |
If you want real security, go with VMS. All other OS’s are vulnerable.
alone, explorer 7 is known for the fact of ripping off the idea of tabbed browsing that came from Netscape and Firerox.
So I guess this means Netscape and Firefox “stole” the idea from Opera since Opera had that feature first. It’s called responding to the market. The only reason Firefox and Netscape picked up tabbed browsing is due to the popularity and functionality. That is how the market works. Features that are used are picked up and implemented. There has already been a free tabbed version of an IE based web browser first published under the name MYIE2, now Maxthon.
QUOTE
3. High-end graphics effects?! that's a nice word more system recourse and bugs that might originate. we seen similar things when moving from windows 98 to windows me.
Then stick to a single source company like Apple to reduce the possibility of problems of integration from multiple sources.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| 3. High-end graphics effects?! that's a nice word more system recourse and bugs that might originate. we seen similar things when moving from windows 98 to windows me. |
Then stick to a single source company like Apple to reduce the possibility of problems of integration from multiple sources.
3. Desktop search - if that's all you have left then go build a patch, not an updating system.
Again, response to other popular services like the Google search. Why would you trust ANYONE with searching your desktop data?
QUOTE
in conclusion, if you want to release an operating system call it windows XP v1.2 and not a new system. for a system to be a new system, one needs to change the SYSTEM and not the USER-INTERFACE.
So, by using this logic, there is rarely any “new” operating systems. Apple’s development of it’s “new” OS is arguably just a custom version of Linux and there are just minor changes from one version of Linux to another. Even the “big boys” like Unix would not meet this requirement of yours.
None of this matters, in the face of the one very good arguement _not_ to buy Windows Vista: DRM. In hardware, no less! What; are you people stupid? How much of your freedom are you going to give away, today?
Forgive me for laughing at the security part.
Think we were told exactly the same when XP came out. As long as Microsoft uses ActiveX in their browsers, I'm not touching them with a long stick. (Except when forced such as when updating the OS).
Will you catch me at the computer store when Vista gets released? Not a chance - this time around I'll wait for at least SP1 and proper support from software vendors.
By that time the scam artists and other assorted criminals out there will have found the first couple of thousand security flaws.
Is the eye-candy important ?. The betas I got with my MSDN subscription has not convinced my in any way that I need it. To tell the truth, the current desktop model sucks - not to speak of the file system. I never ever had a corrupt file system with Beos or Linux - NTFS on the other side gets corrupted more often than I would like to admit.
No sir, Microsoft will have to do much more to the basics of their OS to ever impress me again. On a technical level I can spend hours pulling their kernel apart. The sad thing is that we have no alternative to Windows on the Desktop and a limited number of alternatives on the server side.
This time I will wait a while - I'm not in any way impressed with the 64-bit Windows software that I'm currently using so I cannot see any reason why I'm going to run after Vista.
Think we were told exactly the same when XP came out. As long as Microsoft uses ActiveX in their browsers, I'm not touching them with a long stick. (Except when forced such as when updating the OS).
Will you catch me at the computer store when Vista gets released? Not a chance - this time around I'll wait for at least SP1 and proper support from software vendors.
By that time the scam artists and other assorted criminals out there will have found the first couple of thousand security flaws.
Is the eye-candy important ?. The betas I got with my MSDN subscription has not convinced my in any way that I need it. To tell the truth, the current desktop model sucks - not to speak of the file system. I never ever had a corrupt file system with Beos or Linux - NTFS on the other side gets corrupted more often than I would like to admit.
No sir, Microsoft will have to do much more to the basics of their OS to ever impress me again. On a technical level I can spend hours pulling their kernel apart. The sad thing is that we have no alternative to Windows on the Desktop and a limited number of alternatives on the server side.
This time I will wait a while - I'm not in any way impressed with the 64-bit Windows software that I'm currently using so I cannot see any reason why I'm going to run after Vista.
I couldn't help but think as I read the list: Wait, where have I seen every single one of these "features"?
Answer: OS X.
Firstly, as many others have said, desktop search is a reason for a new OS? What crap is this?
And as for all the new security features --> Requiring admin passwords to install stuff, complete disk encryption, software firewall... Am I confused, or have I been using all of these features ON MY MAC for the last year and a half?!
I realize it might be impossible for Microsuck to just admit defeat. However, I think they could do a bit better than simply regurgitating others (that's not so bad) OLD (that's bad!) ideas. They have plenty of muscle to bring about a whole new computing experience. They just need to get rid of that steaming mound of code called Windows...
I mean, come on. Does ANYONE still use Internet Explorer? Ick.
Genesplicer: I would agree with your remark about OS X being nothing more than some fancy, improved Linux... but you will admit, it is very nice to use. Even if it is based on a previous idea. Just out of curiosity, how would you rate the relative stability of all the systems you have used?
Oh, and that claim about "all the security holes being fixed" never stops giving me a chuckle.
-ben out-
Answer: OS X.
Firstly, as many others have said, desktop search is a reason for a new OS? What crap is this?
And as for all the new security features --> Requiring admin passwords to install stuff, complete disk encryption, software firewall... Am I confused, or have I been using all of these features ON MY MAC for the last year and a half?!
I realize it might be impossible for Microsuck to just admit defeat. However, I think they could do a bit better than simply regurgitating others (that's not so bad) OLD (that's bad!) ideas. They have plenty of muscle to bring about a whole new computing experience. They just need to get rid of that steaming mound of code called Windows...
I mean, come on. Does ANYONE still use Internet Explorer? Ick.
Genesplicer: I would agree with your remark about OS X being nothing more than some fancy, improved Linux... but you will admit, it is very nice to use. Even if it is based on a previous idea. Just out of curiosity, how would you rate the relative stability of all the systems you have used?
Oh, and that claim about "all the security holes being fixed" never stops giving me a chuckle.
-ben out-
I'm certainly not getting a mac, Not that i think apple makes poor computers or software, I just find that PCs better suit my needs, so i guess Vista is the only way for me. It does look nice, I'm sure it will have plenty of problems, but at least it's an improvement.
It does look nice, I'm sure it will have plenty of problems, but at least it's an improvement.
QUOTE
None of this matters, in the face of the one very good arguement _not_ to buy Windows Vista: DRM. In hardware, no less! What; are you people stupid? How much of your freedom are you going to give away, today?
Yes, most people dont even know that. Our freedom has been going down the drain slowly and people just accept it... a shame
Wow, such hatred for Windows and Microsoft. Yes I agree that Microsoft's Windows could be better, but I am not like most of the dumb people out there, when there is an update, I install it. Hence my computer has not had the hacking issues that others have had. I also ensure that my firewall, both hardware and software are kept up to date. I also run a good anti-virus program with active worm monitoring.
Now why would I not consider a Mac, well lets look first at the idea of proprietary. I have no way of putting in the items that I WANT, not what Apple says I can have. I want to be able to configure a computer with my own specifications and that includes ignoring Dell, HP, Gateway, etc because they still limit me as to what I can get. Also, with Windows, I know that I can either get a driver from Microsoft or the manufacturer of the hardware that will work.
Yes bugs happen, did OS X have a big flaw that had to be patched shortly after its release, I do believe so.
The only reason Window's is hacked more, is because it is the dominate system out there, if Apple was the dominate system, you would find it being hacked constantly. Hackers are only going to go after that which is predominate and easy to get to. Hence Apple users are nice and safe.
Though a word of warning to Apple users, watch what apple is doing, it seems like they might be switching to Window's in the next 5 years. The move to Intel CPU's is only the start. I will post a story I read on it to the forum.
Enjoy your bashing while you can, but since I know that my laptop is a 64 bit processor, I know that window's xp will never make use of its full potential. I guess it will have to be upgraded to Vista to ensure that the new technology can be taken advantage of.
Also remember, with Vista, there is a new file format, that takes us away from NTSF. Which I myself won't mind getting rid of FAT and NTSF as I have had major problems with both and found FAT is worse than NTSF.
Have a great day!
Now why would I not consider a Mac, well lets look first at the idea of proprietary. I have no way of putting in the items that I WANT, not what Apple says I can have. I want to be able to configure a computer with my own specifications and that includes ignoring Dell, HP, Gateway, etc because they still limit me as to what I can get. Also, with Windows, I know that I can either get a driver from Microsoft or the manufacturer of the hardware that will work.
Yes bugs happen, did OS X have a big flaw that had to be patched shortly after its release, I do believe so.
The only reason Window's is hacked more, is because it is the dominate system out there, if Apple was the dominate system, you would find it being hacked constantly. Hackers are only going to go after that which is predominate and easy to get to. Hence Apple users are nice and safe.
Though a word of warning to Apple users, watch what apple is doing, it seems like they might be switching to Window's in the next 5 years. The move to Intel CPU's is only the start. I will post a story I read on it to the forum.
Enjoy your bashing while you can, but since I know that my laptop is a 64 bit processor, I know that window's xp will never make use of its full potential. I guess it will have to be upgraded to Vista to ensure that the new technology can be taken advantage of.
Also remember, with Vista, there is a new file format, that takes us away from NTSF. Which I myself won't mind getting rid of FAT and NTSF as I have had major problems with both and found FAT is worse than NTSF.
Have a great day!
QUOTE
If you want real security, go with VMS. All other OS’s are vulnerable.
VMS, mac, Linux, you can even use MS-DOS (i know people who do). but not windows!
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
If you want real security, go with VMS. All other OS’s are vulnerable. |
VMS, mac, Linux, you can even use MS-DOS (i know people who do). but not windows!
So I guess this means Netscape and Firefox “stole” the idea from Opera since Opera had that feature first. It’s called responding to the market. The only reason Firefox and Netscape picked up tabbed browsing is due to the popularity and functionality. That is how the market works. Features that are used are picked up and implemented. There has already been a free tabbed version of an IE based web browser first published under the name MYIE2, now Maxthon.
and as we know that opera releases versions of system to all operating systems, Linux mac and pocket computers, thats playing by the rules for me. nether do they promote closed source Internet development like activate X (i am not the first to mention that here).
QUOTE
Then stick to a single source company like Apple to reduce the possibility of problems of integration from multiple sources.
my choice is Linux. i thought about getting a mac, but changed my mind because of the hardware cost. but the important thing is: i had a choice and Apple gave it to me with no closed standards.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Then stick to a single source company like Apple to reduce the possibility of problems of integration from multiple sources. |
my choice is Linux. i thought about getting a mac, but changed my mind because of the hardware cost. but the important thing is: i had a choice and Apple gave it to me with no closed standards.
3. Desktop search - if that's all you have left then go build a patch, not an updating system.
QUOTE
Again, response to other popular services like the Goggle search. Why would you trust ANYONE with searching your desktop data?
better said than me
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
Again, response to other popular services like the Goggle search. Why would you trust ANYONE with searching your desktop data? |
better said than me
So, by using this logic, there is rarely any “new” operating systems. Apple’s development of it’s “new” OS is arguably just a custom version of Linux and there are just minor changes from one version of Linux to another. Even the “big boys” like Unix would not meet this requirement of yours.
you said the word "custom", they changed it! UNIX and Linux is NOT the same code, it was re-written, and the fact you can change it means it not the same. you can't change the windows kernel. Linux also admits that the latest kernel is 2.6 and not 3 because its not much different, but they don't go and rename it, they back-port to older versions, they don't throw away the code and say its obsolete.
unlike this so-called new windows. nothing new there.
i guess what i really want here, as most people that replied here, is for this article to compare systems and not treat windows as the only thing there and we should make our voice on this.
QUOTE
Wow, such hatred for Windows and Microsoft. Yes I agree that Microsoft's Windows could be better, but I am not like most of the dumb people out there, when there is an update, I install it. Hence my computer has not had the hacking issues that others have had. I also ensure that my firewall, both hardware and software are kept up to date. I also run a good anti-virus program with active worm monitoring.
Not every one has the time, knowledge, experience to keep up. I have to reinstall my fathers OS every couple of months to remove the crap thats installed. My mothers Mac is still running the original install from 2000.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Wow, such hatred for Windows and Microsoft. Yes I agree that Microsoft's Windows could be better, but I am not like most of the dumb people out there, when there is an update, I install it. Hence my computer has not had the hacking issues that others have had. I also ensure that my firewall, both hardware and software are kept up to date. I also run a good anti-virus program with active worm monitoring. |
Not every one has the time, knowledge, experience to keep up. I have to reinstall my fathers OS every couple of months to remove the crap thats installed. My mothers Mac is still running the original install from 2000.
I have no way of putting in the items that I WANT, not what Apple says I can have.
One reason Apple computers are more reliable is that the core hardware is known! One main reason MS is so unstable is that the HW is not known. They have to support everything! how would a car run if it had to support running on Gas, Diesel, E85, Methane, Kerosene... Not very well.
QUOTE
Yes bugs happen, did OS X have a big flaw that had to be patched shortly after its release, I do believe so.
Every software has bugs... It's the number and how they respond that is reliavant. Apple responds much better then MS. MS's attitude is we'll fix it if and when we feel like it! Apple hase been good (not great) at fixing the (relatively small number of ) bugs found.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Yes bugs happen, did OS X have a big flaw that had to be patched shortly after its release, I do believe so. |
Every software has bugs... It's the number and how they respond that is reliavant. Apple responds much better then MS. MS's attitude is we'll fix it if and when we feel like it! Apple hase been good (not great) at fixing the (relatively small number of ) bugs found.
The only reason Window's is hacked more, is because it is the dominate system out there, if Apple was the dominate system, you would find it being hacked constantly. Hackers are only going to go after that which is predominate and easy to get to. Hence Apple users are nice and safe.
MS gets hacked more because it easy to hack! OS X is based on BSD (UNIX, not linux as has been suggested earlier) UNIX systems are more secure out-of-the-box then windows. Afterall MS has been trying to secure windows for decades! and still has gaping holes!
QUOTE
Though a word of warning to Apple users, watch what apple is doing, it seems like they might be switching to Window's in the next 5 years. The move to Intel CPU's is only the start. I will post a story I read on it to the forum.
You really need to get ideas of your own instead of spouting opinions from idiot magazine commentaries!
Apple going to windows! That's like replacing a Lexus with Chevy! HAHAHAHAHA!
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Though a word of warning to Apple users, watch what apple is doing, it seems like they might be switching to Window's in the next 5 years. The move to Intel CPU's is only the start. I will post a story I read on it to the forum. |
You really need to get ideas of your own instead of spouting opinions from idiot magazine commentaries!
Apple going to windows! That's like replacing a Lexus with Chevy! HAHAHAHAHA!
Also remember, with Vista, there is a new file format, that takes us away from NTSF. Which I myself won't mind getting rid of FAT and NTSF as I have had major problems with both and found FAT is worse than NTSF.
(I assume you mean NTFS) MS has had > 5years to ge their "New and Improved" file system going!!! guess what! they had to leave it out of Vista because their current FS's are so ingrained into the OS it can't be removed with out a complete rewrite of the core OS (Again!).
There may be some aspects of Apple I don't like, But at least they seem responsive to users needs/wants and produce great systems!
Krreagan
QUOTE (Guest+Feb 20 2006, 10:31 AM)
QUOTE
None of this matters, in the face of the one very good arguement _not_ to buy Windows Vista: DRM. In hardware, no less! What; are you people stupid? How much of your freedom are you going to give away, today?
Yes, most people dont even know that. Our freedom has been going down the drain slowly and people just accept it... a shame
Well, who's responsible for it? Look around carefully - what is happening? Did any ONE of these sheeple in this forum bother to comment on this ""feature" of Windows Vista besides yourself? No! Will they complain a lot, when they finally wake up to the horrible truth of it all, when it's already far too late to actually do anything about it? You bet! Will they then finally switch to Linux in droves? No, they will not - they'll gripe to no end, but they will put up with it because they are nothing but lazy, apathetic sheeple by their very nature. They won't bomb Microsoft! But they will make it ever-increasingly more difficult for the people who do switch to an "other" OS, because the Net will follow their suit - all of the standards will change, to march in step with the requirements of Vista... and DRM.
It's funny to see peoples responses here. It's pretty obvious that this set is happy as a clam having nothing mroe than a command prompt.
The top reason to buy vista.... because it is loads better than linux or mac osx.
The top reason to buy vista.... because it is loads better than linux or mac osx.
Marketing hype.... Microsoft is really missing the main reasons why people buy an OS, it provides compatability, support, ease of use, responsive. Further if you always listen and believe marketing hype you will always be disapointed.
The reality is Vista was meant to provide a great new file system that has once again slipped. A new UI which is not all that great and can be found else where such as windows blinds... IE7 is really bad in its beta form.... A seperate update utility, making a web activeX into a standard application deserves no more then a side note.... it is no real feature. Finally security and Microsoft dont have a happy relationship. So basically i have to spend money to upgrade my hardware to get an OS that has features I can already get now that work better....
Every time I hear about vista i am less excited.... Will I buy it...yes(only with my next computer), but the switch to linux and or osx is becoming ever more attractive is windows is less and less interesting....
The reality is Vista was meant to provide a great new file system that has once again slipped. A new UI which is not all that great and can be found else where such as windows blinds... IE7 is really bad in its beta form.... A seperate update utility, making a web activeX into a standard application deserves no more then a side note.... it is no real feature. Finally security and Microsoft dont have a happy relationship. So basically i have to spend money to upgrade my hardware to get an OS that has features I can already get now that work better....
Every time I hear about vista i am less excited.... Will I buy it...yes(only with my next computer), but the switch to linux and or osx is becoming ever more attractive is windows is less and less interesting....
Why?
Intel hasn't released a decent chip since the P3 1.13
There hasn't been a killer app written in 6 or 7 years.
The talented game designers left the industry years ago.
This game is over guys.
I'm waiting for micro-embedded systems so that I can have
things like a pair of sunglasses that let's me see the wind blow.
The only thing you can do with a PC other than mundane buisness
work is to manipulate video and audio.
I'm running a homemade box that's 5 years old and it runs all
the latest and greatest apps effortlessly.
However..
We live in an age of unprecedented wealth.
People DEMAND more things to spend money on. So give them what they want.
In the future everyone will be an AOL subscriber watching RSS feeds of
continuous commercials while the F.B.I. monitors their every move, because
that's what they want.
Yes, IE 7 is just tabbed browsing.
Yes, the amazing GUI is just a Window Blinds rip-off.
Nobody except me used VOIP when it was free, but charge money and
millions will sign up. Nobody wanted mp3's when they were free, but charge
a dollar a pop and millions will download.
As far as M$ DRM, don't worry, it will be hacked 5 minutes after it's released.
But by the time they get to DRM version 5.0 all the hackers will have left
out of boredom, so the corporate monopoly wins in the end, and the
consumer actually believes they're getting value for their money.
I recommend you buy a fishing pole instead. Or use the one you already
bought from the marketing hype. Before all the fish are gone...
Intel hasn't released a decent chip since the P3 1.13
There hasn't been a killer app written in 6 or 7 years.
The talented game designers left the industry years ago.
This game is over guys.
I'm waiting for micro-embedded systems so that I can have
things like a pair of sunglasses that let's me see the wind blow.
The only thing you can do with a PC other than mundane buisness
work is to manipulate video and audio.
I'm running a homemade box that's 5 years old and it runs all
the latest and greatest apps effortlessly.
However..
We live in an age of unprecedented wealth.
People DEMAND more things to spend money on. So give them what they want.
In the future everyone will be an AOL subscriber watching RSS feeds of
continuous commercials while the F.B.I. monitors their every move, because
that's what they want.
Yes, IE 7 is just tabbed browsing.
Yes, the amazing GUI is just a Window Blinds rip-off.
Nobody except me used VOIP when it was free, but charge money and
millions will sign up. Nobody wanted mp3's when they were free, but charge
a dollar a pop and millions will download.
As far as M$ DRM, don't worry, it will be hacked 5 minutes after it's released.
But by the time they get to DRM version 5.0 all the hackers will have left
out of boredom, so the corporate monopoly wins in the end, and the
consumer actually believes they're getting value for their money.
I recommend you buy a fishing pole instead. Or use the one you already
bought from the marketing hype. Before all the fish are gone...
QUOTE
Guest
How much of your freedom are you going to give away, today?
How much of your freedom are you going to give away, today?
That would make a odd new sales line.
QUOTE
Genesplicer: I would agree with your remark about OS X being nothing more than some fancy, improved Linux... but you will admit, it is very nice to use. Even if it is based on a previous idea.
It is not my preferred OS, but it appears to be a “nice” OS. I know a few honest multi-OS users whose opinions I can trust who heavily use Apple and Windows and have mixed feelings about both.
But, as I have said before, Apple’s success in producing such and OS and platform is due to Apple’s total control of the system and OS. They could make a larger impact by stepping away form such a monopoly and opening up the platform, but then they would face the same problems as Microsoft.
So should Microsoft adopt the same controlling model as Apple? I think not. I still think that an open market is the preferred one. If all we had were closed monopolistic platforms like Apple, just imagine all of the lost productivity that is offered in the open source community.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Genesplicer: I would agree with your remark about OS X being nothing more than some fancy, improved Linux... but you will admit, it is very nice to use. Even if it is based on a previous idea. |
It is not my preferred OS, but it appears to be a “nice” OS. I know a few honest multi-OS users whose opinions I can trust who heavily use Apple and Windows and have mixed feelings about both.
But, as I have said before, Apple’s success in producing such and OS and platform is due to Apple’s total control of the system and OS. They could make a larger impact by stepping away form such a monopoly and opening up the platform, but then they would face the same problems as Microsoft.
So should Microsoft adopt the same controlling model as Apple? I think not. I still think that an open market is the preferred one. If all we had were closed monopolistic platforms like Apple, just imagine all of the lost productivity that is offered in the open source community.
Just out of curiosity, how would you rate the relative stability of all the systems you have used?
That would depend on what function the systems and servers were designed and used for. My servers are a mixture depending on such need and use. All of my supported desktops are Windows. No real surprise there. I have been able to come up with some fixes for our few Apple-only users to enable them to have access to the same resources and programs.
QUOTE
VMS, mac, Linux, you can even use MS-DOS (i know people who do). but not windows!
Not at all. VMS has a higher security rating with Unix being a close second. All other operating systems are of lower security INCLUDING Windows and Linux. Even though Apple’s OS is based on BSD Unix, I have not seen anything that should prevent it from reaching the same security qualification as Unix, but you never know. In fact, in some areas of security, many distros of Linux cannot be used since they are open source and therefore inherently not secure.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| VMS, mac, Linux, you can even use MS-DOS (i know people who do). but not windows! |
Not at all. VMS has a higher security rating with Unix being a close second. All other operating systems are of lower security INCLUDING Windows and Linux. Even though Apple’s OS is based on BSD Unix, I have not seen anything that should prevent it from reaching the same security qualification as Unix, but you never know. In fact, in some areas of security, many distros of Linux cannot be used since they are open source and therefore inherently not secure.
and as we know that opera releases versions of system to all operating systems, Linux mac and pocket computers, thats playing by the rules for me. nether do they promote closed source Internet development like activate X (i am not the first to mention that here).
You are missing the point and the claim that MS “stole” tabbed browsing for Firefox and Netscape. This is a false claim. Also, Opera does not offer versions for pocket computers. The Opera mini is designed for mobile phone type appliances. There are versions available for Linux based PDAs and HPCs, but not a s separate download for the rest of the PDA and HPC market.
QUOTE
my choice is Linux. i thought about getting a mac, but changed my mind because of the hardware cost. but the important thing is: i had a choice and Apple gave it to me with no closed standards.
What? Apple is a closed standard and the worst type. Like I stated before, if you like paying more for a proprietary system, go for it. But Apple is hardly a valid choice if you are looking for flexibility. I would run Linux long before I would consider a limited system like a Apple.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
my choice is Linux. i thought about getting a mac, but changed my mind because of the hardware cost. but the important thing is: i had a choice and Apple gave it to me with no closed standards. |
What? Apple is a closed standard and the worst type. Like I stated before, if you like paying more for a proprietary system, go for it. But Apple is hardly a valid choice if you are looking for flexibility. I would run Linux long before I would consider a limited system like a Apple.
you said the word "custom", they changed it! UNIX and Linux is NOT the same code, it was re-written, and the fact you can change it means it not the same. you can't change the windows kernel. Linux also admits that the latest kernel is 2.6 and not 3 because its not much different, but they don't go and rename it, they back-port to older versions, they don't throw away the code and say its obsolete
Yes, my bad, Apple’s OS is Unix and not Linux, but again, you miss the point. The OS is NOT a NEW OS. It is just a modified or updated version of the old OS. This would mean that according to the original poster’s requirement, there are very rarely any NEW operating systems.
QUOTE
i guess what i really want here, as most people that replied here, is for this article to compare systems and not treat windows as the only thing there and we should make our voice on this.
Windows is not the only thing, but it is the largest as of now. Besides, I’m confident to say that the article was targeted more towards current Windows users than Apple, Linux or Unix users. It wasn’t a comparison, but a review and recommendation to upgrade.
These already exist in Mac OS X:
1. Security ------------------------- Zero viruses on Mac OS X
2. Internet Explorer 7 ------------- Safari already implement the use of tabs + RSS support
3. High-end graphics effects ------ It's called Expose' and Dashboard in Mac OS X
4. Desktop search ----------------- It's called Spotlight in Mac OS X
yawn... wait till Vista come out and M$ fanboys will talk about the features as though they were new...
1. Security ------------------------- Zero viruses on Mac OS X
2. Internet Explorer 7 ------------- Safari already implement the use of tabs + RSS support
3. High-end graphics effects ------ It's called Expose' and Dashboard in Mac OS X
4. Desktop search ----------------- It's called Spotlight in Mac OS X
yawn... wait till Vista come out and M$ fanboys will talk about the features as though they were new...
QUOTE (GeneSplicer+Feb 21 2006, 06:58 AM)
QUOTE
Genesplicer: I would agree with your remark about OS X being nothing more than some fancy, improved Linux... but you will admit, it is very nice to use. Even if it is based on a previous idea.
It is not my preferred OS, but it appears to be a “nice” OS. I know a few honest multi-OS users whose opinions I can trust who heavily use Apple and Windows and have mixed feelings about both.
But, as I have said before, Apple’s success in producing such and OS and platform is due to Apple’s total control of the system and OS. They could make a larger impact by stepping away form such a monopoly and opening up the platform, but then they would face the same problems as Microsoft.
So should Microsoft adopt the same controlling model as Apple? I think not. I still think that an open market is the preferred one. If all we had were closed monopolistic platforms like Apple, just imagine all of the lost productivity that is offered in the open source community.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Genesplicer: I would agree with your remark about OS X being nothing more than some fancy, improved Linux... but you will admit, it is very nice to use. Even if it is based on a previous idea. |
It is not my preferred OS, but it appears to be a “nice” OS. I know a few honest multi-OS users whose opinions I can trust who heavily use Apple and Windows and have mixed feelings about both.
But, as I have said before, Apple’s success in producing such and OS and platform is due to Apple’s total control of the system and OS. They could make a larger impact by stepping away form such a monopoly and opening up the platform, but then they would face the same problems as Microsoft.
So should Microsoft adopt the same controlling model as Apple? I think not. I still think that an open market is the preferred one. If all we had were closed monopolistic platforms like Apple, just imagine all of the lost productivity that is offered in the open source community.
Just out of curiosity, how would you rate the relative stability of all the systems you have used?
That would depend on what function the systems and servers were designed and used for. My servers are a mixture depending on such need and use. All of my supported desktops are Windows. No real surprise there. I have been able to come up with some fixes for our few Apple-only users to enable them to have access to the same resources and programs.
It's strange to hear the word monopoly used on a corporation that has less then 15% market share! Thats like saying BMW has a monopoly on BMW's.
Macs are as reliable as they are for two main reasons.
1] Apple controls the core system hardware so the set of hardware that the OS is supporting is much smaller, is more well defined and more stable... and therefore easier to write consistent, quality software for.
2] OS X has BSD UNIX as the core OS with the MACH micro kernel. (Linux is a macro kernel BTW and has nothing to do with OS X) BSD OS has been around for decades and was designed from the ground up to be a networked multi-user system!
The advantage of the MS way is that you can attempt to be everything to everyone! The drawback is that your software becomes spaghetti code after a while as mods are constantly being made to accommodate everything for everyone! There is nothing harder to code for then a moving specification!
Since MS went to a windowing OS (>20 years ago) they have rewritten the two windows lineages at least 5 times that I'm aware of: Windows 1.0 -> Windown 3.0 -> Windows 95 -> Windows ME, Windows NT -> Windown 2000 -> Windows Vista. (ITIHTR). This skips some of the minor upgrades required along the way.
Why do you think they had such a hard time removing the media player from the OS? Because it was so ingrained into the OS that everything was dependent on it! This is a horrible way to write code! This is one aspect of their trial that I agreed with MS on. And is an example of why their OS has been so unstable.
MS has severely lowered the expectations of it's users to the point that application and OS failures are common occurrences and are even expected!
Krreagan
QUOTE (GeneSplicer+Feb 21 2006, 07:40 AM)
What? Apple is a closed standard and the worst type.
WHAT!
The worst type?
The core of OS X (Darwin) is more _open_ then Linux!
You can run just about any app on OS X/Darwin that you can on Linux.
You can even modify the underlying OS just like Linux.
Apples browser (Safari) uses the same HTML engine as KDE's Konqueror!
Apple has a reputation of very reliable, easy to use "systems"! complete computer systems. I give Apple credit for not going down the long dusty-road of clones (they almost did but Jobs pulled them back from the brink), else Apple would just be another MS, and who needs that!
Krreagan
WHAT!
The worst type?
The core of OS X (Darwin) is more _open_ then Linux!
You can run just about any app on OS X/Darwin that you can on Linux.
You can even modify the underlying OS just like Linux.
Apples browser (Safari) uses the same HTML engine as KDE's Konqueror!
Apple has a reputation of very reliable, easy to use "systems"! complete computer systems. I give Apple credit for not going down the long dusty-road of clones (they almost did but Jobs pulled them back from the brink), else Apple would just be another MS, and who needs that!
Krreagan
QUOTE
It's strange to hear the word monopoly used on a corporation that has less then 15% market share! Thats like saying BMW has a monopoly on BMW's.
Not at all. If you support the idea that Apple is actually trying to compete on the open market, then monopoly is a valid term. Where do you go to get a Windows system? How about a Linux or Unix system? Pick a source or build your own.
Now where do you go to get an Apple system? Single source.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| It's strange to hear the word monopoly used on a corporation that has less then 15% market share! Thats like saying BMW has a monopoly on BMW's. |
Not at all. If you support the idea that Apple is actually trying to compete on the open market, then monopoly is a valid term. Where do you go to get a Windows system? How about a Linux or Unix system? Pick a source or build your own.
Now where do you go to get an Apple system? Single source.
Macs are as reliable as they are for two main reasons.
Yes and it is well know just why Apples system are not plagued with the same problems. Again, should Microsoft and every other operating system manufacturer take the same approach? Unless you want a collection of a few proprietary and limited systems, I think not.
QUOTE
The advantage of the MS way is that you can attempt to be everything to everyone! The drawback is that your software becomes spaghetti code after a while as mods are constantly being made to accommodate everything for everyone! There is nothing harder to code for then a moving specification!
And your point is? Unless you stick with Apple, the same goes for any OS trying to accommodate users.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The advantage of the MS way is that you can attempt to be everything to everyone! The drawback is that your software becomes spaghetti code after a while as mods are constantly being made to accommodate everything for everyone! There is nothing harder to code for then a moving specification! |
And your point is? Unless you stick with Apple, the same goes for any OS trying to accommodate users.
MS has severely lowered the expectations of it's users to the point that application and OS failures are common occurrences and are even expected!
Again, you can either choose open platform or a proprietary on like the Apple. I’ll choose not to go with a limited and over-priced platform.
QUOTE
(GeneSplicer @ Feb 21 2006, 07:40 AM)
What? Apple is a closed standard and the worst type.
What? Apple is a closed standard and the worst type.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| (GeneSplicer @ Feb 21 2006, 07:40 AM) What? Apple is a closed standard and the worst type. |
WHAT!
The worst type?
Yes, the worst type. Is there something to the term closed that escapes you? It is a proprietary and limited system when compared to the x86 platforms.
QUOTE
The core of OS X (Darwin) is more _open_ then Linux!
Really? So where exactly does one download or acquire the x86 version for standard Intel and AMD processors to run on non-proprietary system? That is open. Making an OS that runs on only one platform is not open.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The core of OS X (Darwin) is more _open_ then Linux! |
Really? So where exactly does one download or acquire the x86 version for standard Intel and AMD processors to run on non-proprietary system? That is open. Making an OS that runs on only one platform is not open.
You can run just about any app on OS X/Darwin that you can on Linux.
You can even modify the underlying OS just like Linux.
Apples browser (Safari) uses the same HTML engine as KDE's Konqueror!
All fine if you stick to the proprietary Apple system. Again, not open.
QUOTE
Apple has a reputation of very reliable, easy to use "systems"! complete computer systems. I give Apple credit for not going down the long dusty-road of clones (they almost did but Jobs pulled them back from the brink), else Apple would just be another MS, and who needs that!
Then I suggest that everyone who complains that Apple only has about 15% of the market share due to lack of flexibility, being over-priced and a closed system should stop complaining. You obviously have the system you and similar mindsets want.
Again, you either go with a company that controls every aspect of the platform to insure stability and therefore sacrifice flexibility, limits what you can do with the system and increases costs dramatically or you can choose a more open platform.
I know MACphiles love to think that their systems are the end-all and be-all in the computer world, but the truth is that a proprietary and highly controlled platform like the one Apple produced never has done well and never will do will in the market at large. This is especially true from the standpoint of any IT department. Microsoft has a hard time competing with the effective and functional Linux systems I can use in place of many of their more expensive higher maintenance platforms.
Facts are:
Windows keeps getting better, and at a faster pace than the other OSs.
The "security" of the other OSs is pretty much inversly proportional to their popularity.
People tend to let their emotional preferences overpower their common sense.
I wil probably buy Vista, utilize it almost exclusively, and will probably find it, all around, the only realistic way to go.
I found your article informative and interesting.
Windows keeps getting better, and at a faster pace than the other OSs.
The "security" of the other OSs is pretty much inversly proportional to their popularity.
People tend to let their emotional preferences overpower their common sense.
I wil probably buy Vista, utilize it almost exclusively, and will probably find it, all around, the only realistic way to go.
I found your article informative and interesting.
"top 10 reasons to download and install Windows Vista"
QUOTE
Not at all. If you support the idea that Apple is actually trying to compete on the open market, then monopoly is a valid term. Where do you go to get a Windows system? How about a Linux or Unix system? Pick a source or build your own.
Apple sells systems not components! Is your TV brand a monopoly? The hardware and software are all packaged in the same container!
MS is only one source for their OS,
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Not at all. If you support the idea that Apple is actually trying to compete on the open market, then monopoly is a valid term. Where do you go to get a Windows system? How about a Linux or Unix system? Pick a source or build your own. |
Apple sells systems not components! Is your TV brand a monopoly? The hardware and software are all packaged in the same container!
MS is only one source for their OS,
Really? So where exactly does one download or acquire the x86 version for standard Intel and AMD processors to run on non-proprietary system? That is open. Making an OS that runs on only one platform is not open.
You don't know what OPEN means in this reference do you?. It has nothing to do with how many system it's available for! It has to do with what you are allowed to do with it!
QUOTE
Then I suggest that everyone who complains that Apple only has about 15% of the market share due to lack of flexibility, being over-priced and a closed system should stop complaining. You obviously have the system you and similar mindsets want.
Thats just it, you dont hear Mac users complain much! We respond to windows complainers and we hear windown users complain ALL the time!
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Then I suggest that everyone who complains that Apple only has about 15% of the market share due to lack of flexibility, being over-priced and a closed system should stop complaining. You obviously have the system you and similar mindsets want. |
Thats just it, you dont hear Mac users complain much! We respond to windows complainers and we hear windown users complain ALL the time!
I know MACphiles love to think that their systems are the end-all and be-all in the computer world, but the truth is that a proprietary and highly controlled platform like the one Apple produced never has done well and never will do will in the market at large. This is especially true from the standpoint of any IT department. Microsoft has a hard time competing with the effective and functional Linux systems I can use in place of many of their more expensive higher maintenance platforms.
No, not the end-all, Just much closer to it then MS or Linux systems. The PC industry is an anomaly in that virtually all other industries meet your definition of proprietary! What other consumer industry has the same type of piece-meal system as the PC industry? Very few, if any! The "market at large" does very well for companies that produce quality products as Apple does! I know I have their stock! As long as the OS and HW are treated as separate products, the systems will remain crap because there is no systems engineering going on!
Krreagan
QUOTE
Apple sells systems not components! Is your TV brand a monopoly? The hardware and software are all packaged in the same container!
MS is only one source for their OS,
MS is only one source for their OS,
Again, you are missing the point. A TV and a car are not analogous to computer systems. There is only a single source for Apple systems while there are multiple sources for Linux and Windows systems INCLUDING building your own. Single source alone for the OS is not the same. We are talking about the system.
You made another comment that displays your lack of understanding regarding both the history of Apple and the computer market.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| Apple sells systems not components! Is your TV brand a monopoly? The hardware and software are all packaged in the same container! MS is only one source for their OS, |
Again, you are missing the point. A TV and a car are not analogous to computer systems. There is only a single source for Apple systems while there are multiple sources for Linux and Windows systems INCLUDING building your own. Single source alone for the OS is not the same. We are talking about the system.
You made another comment that displays your lack of understanding regarding both the history of Apple and the computer market.
Krreagan
I give Apple credit for not going down the long dusty-road of clones (they almost did but Jobs pulled them back from the brink), else Apple would just be another MS, and who needs that!
When Apple did allow “clones” to be produced, the still did not enter into the market in standard fashion. First of all, all of the so-called clones were licensed from Apple. Why would Apple do such a thing when other clones are done in a true open market? Again, over-zealous control.
The clones were limited in capability compared to the Apple versions they were to compete against and expandability was also limited compared to the full Apple platforms. Even factoring that in and the fact that these units were only slightly cheaper that the Apple platforms, the clones were selling well. During the time of the Apple clones, companies like Umax were selling more systems to those with a limited budget than Apple. This was partial due to price, but by some accounts, support was also a factor.
Even when Apple entered the clone market, they do so in a highly controlling manner. Even with such limitations, the Apple clones gave Apple competition they neither wanted nor could stand.
Again, imagine what the market would be like if IBM had taken the same approach back in 78 (I think it was) and kept Apple-like control over the platform. Imagine the market if all systems were controlled in similar manner.
QUOTE
You don't know what OPEN means in this reference do you?. It has nothing to do with how many system it's available for! It has to do with what you are allowed to do with it!
No, you simply are thinking to limited when you talk about “open”. Using your definition, then there is no such a thing as a closed system since Linux, Unix and Windows allows you to do anything with it.
Open means just that. And open system does not include single source. If Apple were open than I would be able to just purchase the platform and go with a different OS. Or I could purchase just the OS and use a superior processor. Or I could get a bare bones Apple system and configure it the way I like. While it is true that there are developers diligently pursuing a Linux version to operate on the Apple systems, such a development would so much smoother and quicker if Apple were indeed an open platform to the market and provided help to the OS programmers in this pursuit.
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| You don't know what OPEN means in this reference do you?. It has nothing to do with how many system it's available for! It has to do with what you are allowed to do with it! |
No, you simply are thinking to limited when you talk about “open”. Using your definition, then there is no such a thing as a closed system since Linux, Unix and Windows allows you to do anything with it.
Open means just that. And open system does not include single source. If Apple were open than I would be able to just purchase the platform and go with a different OS. Or I could purchase just the OS and use a superior processor. Or I could get a bare bones Apple system and configure it the way I like. While it is true that there are developers diligently pursuing a Linux version to operate on the Apple systems, such a development would so much smoother and quicker if Apple were indeed an open platform to the market and provided help to the OS programmers in this pursuit.
Thats just it, you dont hear Mac users complain much! We respond to windows complainers and we hear windown users complain ALL the time!
Really? In any computer conversation where an Apple user is involved, there is always a point at which you will hear about how Windows sucks and how superior the Apple platforms are. If the posts are still on Physorg, I can show you threads where the topic did not included Microsoft or Windows but Apple only and it took no time at all for Apple users to start complaining about Microsoft and Windows.
If Apple users were contented with their systems and did not suffer from the noted arrogance of ownership notorious with Apple users, then there would be no reason to comment.
QUOTE
No, not the end-all, Just much closer to it then MS or Linux systems.
Really? Seems that you again are thinking in a limited manner. I mentioned before the entire computer industry. This includes more that just the desktop system. Apple is not equip to compete on the server market other than in a few niche operation.
I would also argue that there are many Linux systems that can out perform Apple systems. In the realm of function, again, Apple systems are not the best. Most of the heavy computer users I have met and the gurus I encounter use Linux over nearly everything else. It seems that Linux shot right past Apple in the market to compete directly with Microsoft on both the desktop and server level. Is it the fact that a perceived “upstart” like Linux has done what Apple could not that makes you so angry?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| No, not the end-all, Just much closer to it then MS or Linux systems. |
Really? Seems that you again are thinking in a limited manner. I mentioned before the entire computer industry. This includes more that just the desktop system. Apple is not equip to compete on the server market other than in a few niche operation.
I would also argue that there are many Linux systems that can out perform Apple systems. In the realm of function, again, Apple systems are not the best. Most of the heavy computer users I have met and the gurus I encounter use Linux over nearly everything else. It seems that Linux shot right past Apple in the market to compete directly with Microsoft on both the desktop and server level. Is it the fact that a perceived “upstart” like Linux has done what Apple could not that makes you so angry?
The PC industry is an anomaly in that virtually all other industries meet your definition of proprietary! What other consumer industry has the same type of piece-meal system as the PC industry? Very few, if any!
The PC market is unique. That is why comparisons to other markets are examples of non sequitur arguments.
QUOTE
The "market at large" does very well for companies that produce quality products as Apple does!
Again, if what you want is a limited proprietary system, then you have what you want. Yet you still have the need to complaint and vent over other platforms and operating systems. If you have what you want, why bother complaining about platforms and operating systems you choose not to buy?
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
| The "market at large" does very well for companies that produce quality products as Apple does! |
Again, if what you want is a limited proprietary system, then you have what you want. Yet you still have the need to complaint and vent over other platforms and operating systems. If you have what you want, why bother complaining about platforms and operating systems you choose not to buy?
I know I have their stock!
So your opinion is a totally unbiased one. I’m sure in your vast Apple experience you have tested all the other major operating systems and found the Apple system superior to all. That is great for you. But again, why the need to vent about other platforms and operating systems?
QUOTE
As long as the OS and HW are treated as separate products, the systems will remain crap because there is no systems engineering going on!
According to you they are treated separately, but in reality, they are not. “Engineering” does not mean creating one operating system bundled with one platform by one source. That is proprietary and single source.
So I guess then this mean that in order to be a system comparable to Apple, that all platforms should undergo similar proprietary and monopolistic control as Apple system? This means open platform operating systems like Linux are and always will be “crap” in your view unless they become highly controlled and what you see as “engineered” sacrificing what made them and makes them the popular operating systems they are?
Can you imagine the complaints and lawsuits if Microsoft entered into a contract with AMD and Intel to produce a close and proprietary system like Apple?
Like I have stated, if you want such a closed and limited system, then you have what you want, but evidently for the majority of the market and the users that make up that market Apple is not the system of choice.
It is a fact that the open market we have now is the reason for the growth in and development of computer technology. I’m sure as a vested Apple owner and investor you would make the same claims that most of these developments came from Apple, but I would chalk that up to the noted arrogance of the angry and vocal Apple owners.
So if most of the market has chosen not to buy Apple for various reasons and you are correct that Apple is just so darn superior, then what does that say for the 85% of “us” that choose not to buy Apple? Are you going to make the equally as elitist claim that the 85% of non-Apple owners are simply ignorant or not savvy enough to know that we should own Apples?
I’d rather stick to the market we have now and have the freedom to choose which platform and operating system fits the need(s) of the task at hand.
About writing long long long long .....
For the time of writing one of your comments I will write a small virus for the new Windows system
Hey writers who is paying you ???????????????? MS
Well I am running Linux an did not pay for it and I like it and I learn with it and it is mostly FREE.
But if you would like to support Linux by work or money/time you are welcome.
For the time of writing one of your comments I will write a small virus for the new Windows system
Hey writers who is paying you ???????????????? MS
Well I am running Linux
an did not pay for it and I like it and I learn with it and it is mostly FREE. But if you would like to support Linux by work or money/time you are welcome.
QUOTE (100y4o+Feb 23 2006, 05:55 PM)
About writing long long long long .....
For the time of writing one of your comments I will write a small virus for the new Windows system
Hey writers who is paying you ???????????????? MS
Well I am running Linux an did not pay for it and I like it and I learn with it and it is mostly FREE.
But if you would like to support Linux by work or money/time you are welcome.
I tried installing the 64 bit version of Linux (Debian) on a A8N-SLI Deluxe based system with 4 x SATA HDDs configured as a RAID device.
Firstly the nForce chipset RAID and Sil 3114 chipset RAID is not recognised and secondly neither lilo or grub can handle multiple SATA disks.
If the loader of an released OS does not work on a run of the mill motherboard, I'm worried.
After more than 2 days and most likely 20 installation attempts I gave up. I have to admit the 64-bit MS products also do not work properly but at least with them I could get an installation to work.
So I'm back on 32-bit 2003 Enteprise server.
Thus - do not make Linux to be be the answer to everything out there. It is VERY buggy and hardware support is seriously lacking.
Writing viruses is no big deal - try writing something usefull - like for instance - a boot loader for Linux.
For the time of writing one of your comments I will write a small virus for the new Windows system
Hey writers who is paying you ???????????????? MS
Well I am running Linux
an did not pay for it and I like it and I learn with it and it is mostly FREE. But if you would like to support Linux by work or money/time you are welcome.
I tried installing the 64 bit version of Linux (Debian) on a A8N-SLI Deluxe based system with 4 x SATA HDDs configured as a RAID device.
Firstly the nForce chipset RAID and Sil 3114 chipset RAID is not recognised and secondly neither lilo or grub can handle multiple SATA disks.
If the loader of an released OS does not work on a run of the mill motherboard, I'm worried.
After more than 2 days and most likely 20 installation attempts I gave up. I have to admit the 64-bit MS products also do not work properly but at least with them I could get an installation to work.
So I'm back on 32-bit 2003 Enteprise server.
Thus - do not make Linux to be be the answer to everything out there. It is VERY buggy and hardware support is seriously lacking.
Writing viruses is no big deal - try writing something usefull - like for instance - a boot loader for Linux.
The number one reason to buy Vista... Microsoft made you.
Microsoft will do what it always does - immediately stop supporting their previous software and force users to buy an upgrade if they want any support, including critical security patches.
I've been using Xandros Linux (www.xandros.com) for over three years, and I'm never going back to Windows, for a bunch of reasons. It works, the applications are free and open source, no Digital Restrictions Management, no viruses, no spyware, no Outlook worms.
As for the comment that Windows is improving faster than any other OS... you have got to be joking. It seems that windows security problems started off bad and have become much worse over the course of twenty years. I wouldn't use Windows if they paid me $500 a year, because it'd cost me more than that in my time and effort to try to keep it relatively safe from malware.
I can't believe Windows is still the dominant OS. I guess illegal anti-competitive marketing can take a company far.
Microsoft will do what it always does - immediately stop supporting their previous software and force users to buy an upgrade if they want any support, including critical security patches.
I've been using Xandros Linux (www.xandros.com) for over three years, and I'm never going back to Windows, for a bunch of reasons. It works, the applications are free and open source, no Digital Restrictions Management, no viruses, no spyware, no Outlook worms.
As for the comment that Windows is improving faster than any other OS... you have got to be joking. It seems that windows security problems started off bad and have become much worse over the course of twenty years. I wouldn't use Windows if they paid me $500 a year, because it'd cost me more than that in my time and effort to try to keep it relatively safe from malware.
I can't believe Windows is still the dominant OS. I guess illegal anti-competitive marketing can take a company far.
QUOTE
The number one reason to buy Vista... Microsoft made you.
Microsoft will do what it always does - immediately stop supporting their previous software and force users to buy an upgrade if they want any support, including critical security patches.
I could see them losing their grip due to the bulky nature of Windows and the issue of privacy, especially, when you consider Microsoft's role with Homeland Security.
That's not going down too well outside the US.
Then we have an old darkhorse in the Network OS sector with a proven track record of being able to impact small-medium sized businesses, Novell. This is one of the key sectors in establishing an OS as a contender for the domestic market.
Novell is about to push a version of Linux, whilst it will be a slow start, it will take a large chunk of the market and impact Microsoft's expansion into the server market.
At present, I see a bleak longterm future for the OS formally known as Windows...
QUOTE (->
| QUOTE |
The number one reason to buy Vista... Microsoft made you. Microsoft will do what it always does - immediately stop supporting their previous software and force users to buy an upgrade if they want any support, including critical security patches. |
I could see them losing their grip due to the bulky nature of Windows and the issue of privacy, especially, when you consider Microsoft's role with Homeland Security.
That's not going down too well outside the US.
Then we have an old darkhorse in the Network OS sector with a proven track record of being able to impact small-medium sized businesses, Novell. This is one of the key sectors in establishing an OS as a contender for the domestic market.
Novell is about to push a version of Linux, whilst it will be a slow start, it will take a large chunk of the market and impact Microsoft's expansion into the server market.
At present, I see a bleak longterm future for the OS formally known as Windows...
Novell Targets Enterprise Desktops with New Linux Distribution
Jay Wrolstad, newsfactor.com Fri Mar 10, 2:15 PM ET
At the CeBIT computer show being held this week in Germany, Novell unveiled a new
Linux distribution that is designed to lure corporate customers away from Microsoft Windows.
Called SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop (SLED), the new distribution offers improved power-management capabilities, better desktop-search features, a better user interface, and across-the-board application improvements, according to Novell.
"Although the momentum behind Linux continues to be strong, until today, general business users have not really been a part of the story," said Gary Barnett, research director at Ovum, in a statement. "With today's introduction of SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop, Novell is keeping a promise it made last year, to invest in delivering a desktop that is designed for the business user rather than for experienced Linux users."
Novell deserves credit for addressing the issue of usability head-on, said Barnett, by delivering a desktop that "really can meet the needs of the basic knowledge worker."
Wooing Windows Users
To ease corporate migrations to Linux, SLED is compatible with Microsoft Windows, Office, and Exchange. OpenOffice.org 2.0, included with the SLED distribution, can read and write Microsoft documents natively.
In addition, the Novell Evolution e-mail client can connect with Microsoft Exchange in much the same way that Outlook does. IBM is providing a plug-in for Lotus Notes and Domino users.
According to Novell, the new Linux distribution delivers faster boot-ups and better wireless connectivity, among other enhancements. Novell claims to have conducted several hundred hours of usability tests to aid the design of SLED.
According to the company, each feature of the distribution, such as setting desktop preferences, finding files, launching applications, using external devices like USB memory sticks, working with the Internet, and connecting to local and wireless networks, was tested and refined for usability to ensure the best possible performance in a business environment.
Hill To Climb
Linux vendors have a steep hill to climb in targeting the corporate desktop, said Simon Yates, an analyst at Forrester Research. He pointed out that making the switch from Windows is a major ordeal for most organizations.
"The adoption of Linux on the desktop will be slow because a platform migration can be expensive and time-consuming," Yates said. "And there are not yet enough Linux applications for business users."
But there are some opportunities coming up for Linux, said Yates. "Vista will be a fork in the road for some companies that will have to take a closer look at the pros and cons of Windows versus Linux when choosing a major upgrade," he explained.
SuSE Linux Enterprise Desktop is scheduled to be available in the summer of 2006.
Windows Vista? I don't think I could afford it anyway. I guess i'm still stuck with my Windows 98 Second Edition!
genesplicer... I have noticed over a period of time that you have this fixation with Apple. In all cases you complain about one thing or another that Apple has done yet you never admit or say that Apple produces both great hardware and software. Even I can say that PC software and hardware makers produce some good stuff. Please end your tireless rants about all the negatives about Apple. It's old and played out. My suggestion to you Jason... is to get off your lazy *** and do something with your life other than write on blogs all day.
genesplicer... I have noticed over a period of time that you have this fixation with Apple. In all cases you complain about one thing or another that Apple has done yet you never admit or say that Apple produces both great hardware and software. Even I can say that PC software and hardware makers produce some good stuff. Please end your tireless rants about all the negatives about Apple. It's old and played out. My suggestion to you Jason... is to get off your lazy *** and do something with your life other than write on blogs all day.
In some ways, Windows 98 is superior to Win XP.
I note that Win XP, in some functions, I have to hit enter twice.
The system is defragged and has maintenance done, however is not one hundred percent sure on commands given.
The problem with Microsoft, is that they had a good idea in Longhorn.
Microsoft, however' eats its own crap.
They don't want anyone in there who is not one of the chosen Microsoft allowables, so you do not get a fresh poll of ideas in there.
What Microsoft's problem is, that it has its own head, up its as*.
The final trickle down logic is, that you must build a free to self logic system, that is allowed to interact with the user.
Its a trust factor and you can't get around this.
This goes back to the Star Wars era, that where you have a droid and give it commands, since it has the ability to free think, then you must not only give allowance for this system to free think, but you must trust it too.
This might not work in this particular society, where stoicism, seems to be the order of the day.
A free thinking o.s. means that this system, must be able to socially interface with the user.
It must align with how the user thinks.
What these systems do, is to copy their own particular user, then it formats them, then reproduces a version of the user in its own minds eye, then either becomes that, or utilizes this, as a display programmable, in its own minds eye logic.
You cant get around this.I'm sorry, its in the writing of how self intelligent systems think.
I note that Win XP, in some functions, I have to hit enter twice.
The system is defragged and has maintenance done, however is not one hundred percent sure on commands given.
The problem with Microsoft, is that they had a good idea in Longhorn.
Microsoft, however' eats its own crap.
They don't want anyone in there who is not one of the chosen Microsoft allowables, so you do not get a fresh poll of ideas in there.
What Microsoft's problem is, that it has its own head, up its as*.
The final trickle down logic is, that you must build a free to self logic system, that is allowed to interact with the user.
Its a trust factor and you can't get around this.
This goes back to the Star Wars era, that where you have a droid and give it commands, since it has the ability to free think, then you must not only give allowance for this system to free think, but you must trust it too.
This might not work in this particular society, where stoicism, seems to be the order of the day.
A free thinking o.s. means that this system, must be able to socially interface with the user.
It must align with how the user thinks.
What these systems do, is to copy their own particular user, then it formats them, then reproduces a version of the user in its own minds eye, then either becomes that, or utilizes this, as a display programmable, in its own minds eye logic.
You cant get around this.I'm sorry, its in the writing of how self intelligent systems think.
These two sources, to my say:The Liza Givens Eye On Hollywood, show archives, stating that the Star Wars series, was past information, channeled by a man.I don't have a how, Lucas et al. got the same information, but this information was said to have been real.
*Point of interjection:If you build design a droid, bot as we call them, then this system must interact with the user.
So the MIT Labs, under the Brezeal Group, to where a system must also emotively be able to judge, seems the right way.
Source two, in triplely verified information:A hunter is separate from his companions in the woods during a hunting trip.
There is a landing to where a walking robot, peruses the hunter.
Hunter climbs up a tree.Hunter shot arrows at walking robot, with no effect.
* POI, is that the robot was self tasked to think.
After a certain time, robot returned to its ship and to the beings that were with it, when robot was brought to Earth.
*Point of interjection:If you build design a droid, bot as we call them, then this system must interact with the user.
So the MIT Labs, under the Brezeal Group, to where a system must also emotively be able to judge, seems the right way.
Source two, in triplely verified information:A hunter is separate from his companions in the woods during a hunting trip.
There is a landing to where a walking robot, peruses the hunter.
Hunter climbs up a tree.Hunter shot arrows at walking robot, with no effect.
* POI, is that the robot was self tasked to think.
After a certain time, robot returned to its ship and to the beings that were with it, when robot was brought to Earth.
PhysOrg scientific forums are totally dedicated to science, physics, and technology. Besides topical forums such as nanotechnology, quantum physics, silicon and III-V technology, applied physics, materials, space and others, you can also join our news and publications discussions. We also provide an off-topic forum category. If you need specific help on a scientific problem or have a question related to physics or technology, visit the PhysOrg Forums. Here you’ll find experts from various fields online every day.
To quit out of "lo-fi" mode and return to the regular forums, please click here.