Op Wed, 11 Apr 2007 15:07:18 +0200, schreef Richard Rasker:
> Op Wed, 11 Apr 2007 02:35:38 +0100, schreef Roy Schestowitz:
>
>> Why Does Windows Get Slower Over Time?
>>
>> ,----[ Quote ]
>> | The natural impulse is to blame Windows itself. The phenomenon is so
>> | well known and widespread that some in the industry have even coined a
>> | term for it: "Windows rot." The idea is that, for lack of a specific
>> | cause, Windows just performs worse the longer you use it.
>> `----
>>
>> http://www.playfuls.com/news_06892_Why_Does_Windows_Get_Slower_Over_Time.html
>
> [snip]
>
> If this isn't a sure sign of how utterly crappy Windows is designed, I
> don't know what is.
And when I read the linked story once more, my eye was suddenly caught by
the overall conclusion, the basic paradigm, the thing to stick to:
"In general, Henry David Thoreau's golden rule of life - "simplify,
simplify" - applies to computer users as much as it does to
philosophers. If you can slim reduce what you need on your Windows
computer to the bare essentials - and forego the untested and unproven
- you'll end up with a computer that works as well on the third year that
you have it as well as it did on the third day."
Well, I guess the only way to follow this essential bit of good advice is
to forego Windows completely, as it's completely at odds with Microsoft's
development model and the reseller's strategy: more bloat in every
successive version of the opaque, tangled mess they call Great Software,
and load it up with tons of half-b0rk3d "trial versions" to entice the
poor Windows victim to spend even more.
Linux doesn't have all these problems. You can have it as simple and
trimmed-down as you want - or as elaborate and feature-rich as you want,
but still without the "Windows rot".
Richard Rasker
--
Linetec Translation and Technology Services
http://www.linetec.nl/
|
|
