Home Messages Index
[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index

Re: Vista and SuSE Linux

  • Subject: Re: Vista and SuSE Linux
  • From: Roy Schestowitz <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx>
  • Date: Tue, 30 Aug 2005 16:04:31 +0100
  • Newsgroups: alt.html
  • Organization: schestowitz.com / MCC / Manchester University
  • References: <1125364011.775449.165930@f14g2000cwb.googlegroups.com> <Xns96C25E594F8C9jkorpelacstutfi@> <pqqmnpw8fw88.dlg@locusmeus.com> <uoTQe.15127$FA3.1974@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <jpee0xg8z7yq$.dlg@locusmeus.com> <3xjhtgm1rw1y$.dlg@locusmeus.com> <eBVQe.15287$FA3.11655@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <1tlzu8vko44we.dlg@locusmeus.com> <8mWQe.15349$FA3.9905@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <1eo2iva8e0ufb.dlg@locusmeus.com> <saXQe.15396$FA3.10650@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <9CXQe.15424$FA3.8095@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <df1i0t$2ve3$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <KCYQe.15511$FA3.13399@news-server.bigpond.net.au> <df1lab$3088$1@godfrey.mcc.ac.uk> <8hZQe.15545$FA3.2783@news-server.bigpond.net.au>
  • Reply-to: newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx
  • User-agent: KNode/0.7.2
__/ [rf] on Tuesday 30 August 2005 14:36 \__

> Roy Schestowitz wrote:

>> I placed my reply too far below the text it was referring to, which
>> discussed the bloated and opaque Windows Registry system.
> Er, well, OK, I still don't understand you.

You advised Els to re-install Windows and I replied, perhaps in an
over-enthusiatic fasion, that it might be better for her to use SuSE Linux,
which she already has installed (as am I). There are many arguments, even
within the Windows community, that the Registry mechanism needs to be
revised (I have used Windows since version 3.1 so am not just blowing air).
I have a Windows computer here in the office and the O/S was installed over
a year ago, barely to have anything installed. I have slowly seen the
performance becoming so terrible that the machine is practically crippled
to function at the speed of a Pentium 1 or 2. I am brutally honest.

Re-installation is very time-consuming and the need for it should not be
necessarily be defended. There are alternative and you needn't throw them
out the window because you do not know them well.

>> >  What is a SuSE?
>> It is one of the (if not just "the") most reliable Linux distributions.
>> Els got it installed quite recently as well.
> Oh. I don't do linux.

I respect that. I hope that Els will at least consider and respect my
opinion on the matter.

>> Vista. What is a Vista?
>> It is the next version of Windows (formerly called Longhorn) which is due
>> to be released in September 2006 if I recall correctly. It is currently
>> in beta 1, or maybe alpha.
> I have never heard it called Vista. I will stand corrected when Microsoft
> posts me (as they do) my beta copy. I always thought it was calles
> Longhorn.

I think you were feeling annoyed from this point onwards and quite unfairly
so. Longhorn was the name that persisted for years. It was bound to be the
next version of Windows, which would be released in 2006. About a month and
a half ago, Microsoft changed the name altogether. Longhorn is no more. It
has been called Vista ever since the announcement. It has reached virually
any newspaper too and the name Longhorn is deprecated.

>> >> will be worse in terms of hardware requirements
> Oh, do come on. Absolute rubbish.
> [following unsnipped for clarity, or lack of]

Have you seen a preview/screenshot of Vista (formerly Longhorn)? It
incorporates many of Apple's visual effects, e.g. transparencies and shadow
casting. Hence, it requires a lot from the hardware it runs on. That is
what people who run the beta version would say.

>> >> [1]... much worse, so brace yourself (or spend more money on a new
>> >> [machine
>> >> with new software licences).
>> >
>> > I don't need to pay for Microsoft for specific operating system
> licences.
>> > You *are* talking about Microsoft, aren't you?

I think there was a misunderstanding here. Most vendors sell computers that
are Windows-friendly and Windows-compatible. They also have the operating
system pre-installed, so a decent portion of the cost of the machine goes
to the software manufacturer.

>> Yes, buying Windows-based hardware is rather expensive these days.
> What, may I ask, is "Windows-based hardware"?

My aplogies. I used a poor term to refer to a 'Windows machine' or 'Windows
box' or 'Windows PC'. There is not 'Windows hardware' which is how I
mistakenly phrased it.

> In any case I stated that I do not have to spend extra money on windows
> *software*.  As to the hardware I have a very low end 386 machine that
> runs windows XP quite admaribly. I also have a number of other "hardware"
> machines that happen to run windows. They are not, however, "windows
> hardware" machines.

Correct. The ambiguity or unclarity was my fault.

> You are beginning to sound like a standard microsoft basher.

The "standard Microsoft basher" will just yell out "Win sux" or "Windows is
for my mom". I have used Windows intensively for many years and I still do.
I try to convey and tell you about the bad experiences I have had with
Windows, bloated registries being one of the most frustrating ones.

> [bill gates joke]
> Who bloody cares. He does not own that joke. The bloke in the pub that
> told it to me owns it!!
> <snip links>
> Yada yada
> Cheers
> Richard.

Hope there are no hard feelings,


Roy S. Schestowitz        Useless fact: 85% of plant life in in the oceans

[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next]
Author IndexDate IndexThread Index