Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> NOTE: In the blog, I included 10 links to support every single
> argument I make here, so before a wintroll squeezes his head through
> the XP fire- wall and blurts out some junk, I suggest you look at
> the clear evidence. ===
You have no evidence.
> WINDOWS Vista was already said to be a trainwreck, primarily due to
> its inability to deliver something innovative. It gives no
> compelling reason whatsoever for users to upgrade. People who have
> had the chance to fiddle with the Vista beta build can confirm this.
> In fact, it seems to be lag- ging behind other operating systems,
> notably Mac OS X as was previously confesses by a Microsoft
> On top of it all, hardware requirements of Windows Vista make it
> rather unappealing.
What requirements are those? MS hasn't haven't released them.
> Novell have said that Vista will drive away
> Windows users and ultimately lead them to Linux.
And 2005 was supposed to be the Year of Linux. So was 2004, and 2003....
> To many, adopting
> Windows Vista probably means acquisition of a new computer, which
> will most probably contain Win- dows pre-installed for a variety of
> reasons that involve anti-fair trade practices.
Only if you consider the OEMs selling what they want to sell to be "anti-
I know you Linux hypocrites would love to force the OEMs to sell Linux
machines, despite the fact (that's capital FACT) that it would shortly drive
all of them out of business. You whiners believe in 'choice' only when it's
the choices you want.
> Windows XP was first introduced to the public in late 2001 and, as
> we ap- proach the end of 2005, Windows XP is worse than ever
> before. The many critical patches, which came in the form of
> Service Pack I & II have made it slower and less likely to interact
> with all underlying modules grace- fully. With more Windows viruses
> in the wild, it requires more attention and maintenance than
With SP2, it requires less effort than ever.
> which has definitely led to unrest among its users community.
> In the mean time, Apple's Tiger has been gaining strength and has
> even surpassed, in term of it functionality, the Microsoft equiva-
> lents -- something that even Microsoft could not truly deny. KDE, in
> the mean time, has been growing very rapidly and it is now comparable
> with any other desktop layers and often surpasses the competition in
> terms of its functionality. See, for instance:
> * KDE Plasma
> * State-of-the-art Linux Screenshots
> * Next Generation of X
KDE is a nice desktop, no doubt. Far superior to Gnome or any other Linux
window manager/desktop environment.
> It is also worth mentioning Ubuntu Linux, which has done tremendously
> well at easing a transition to a free operating system. Hewlett
> Packard have recently started selling Ubuntu desktops and laptops,
> as a matter of fact. Ubuntu comes in just a single CD, its hardware
> detection is admirable, and moreover it is stable and user-friendly.
> Its bundled Live CD makes another big pro as users who are too
> resistant to delete Windows can have a period of adaptation and
> gain some re-assurance with regards to their platform migration.
Don't make us laugh. Gnome-based Ubuntu is a joke. Anyone used to a real
OS like Windows will find it primitive and slow and amateurish.
> Windows is dying. The writings are all over the wall...
As is the case with so many of the stupid MS and Windows proclamations made
by you silly cola bozos, there is NO evidence to support anything you say.