[H]omer wrote:
Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
Rafael on Friday 09 February 2007 03:56
Dimitry wrote:
This group should be renamed comp.os.microsoft.paranoia because
for the most part, that is a good description of the
discussions. It's like a feeding frenzy of sharks in this
group. Tell me, honestly, what would you all be discussing if
Vista never happened?
What's Vista?
According to:
http://www.m-w.com/cgi-bin/dictionary
Pronunciation: 'vis-t&
Function: noun
Etymology: Italian, sight, from visto, past participle of vedere to see,
from Latin vidEre -- more at WIT
1 : a distant view through or along an avenue or opening : PROSPECT
2 : an extensive mental view (as over a stretch of time or a series of
events)
Actually, the name is quite apt.
1. I have taken "a distant view through or along an avenue or opening
(prospect)" and found it quite lacking compared with alternatives.
2. After "an extensive mental view (as over a stretch of time or a
series of events)" compared with my Linux experiences since 1996, I find
I do not need Vista.
So what would you do if there was no Vista?
Er ... same thing I do now; maintain a Linux-powered website with a
Linux powered CMS, write software for Linux and produce RPM packages
for Red Hat and Fedora systems, browse the web and read email and
newsgroups using Linux software, play Linux and Windows games under
Linux, learn Perl and PHP under Linux, run massive batch jobs of
video transcoding projects using Linux software, listen to music and
watch video using Linux software, etc., etc. Did you have something
particular in mind?
To me, Windows is completely irrelevant, and Vista is little more
than a joke.
I and most of my colleagues agree. We are tired of the hardware upgrade
cycle.
How do you know how many people have downloaded Linux? There's no
"Till Receipts" with Free software, that you can put on a
market-share chart.
because Linux doesn't offer them anything new or better than
what they have now
Nothing new?
Nothing better?
Well apart from Linux's better security, stability, efficiency, and
standards compliance, a proper ACL inplementation in SELinux, new eye
candy with XGL and Beryl, Linux LiveCDs which even Windows users
need to rescue their b0rked Windows systems, and the flexibility and
do-no-evil approach of Open Source.
but Linux does have the potential to screw up their systems.
Pure FUD.
I was reminded very recently of how frequently and seriously
*Windows* and its applications screw up, after I was given an iPod
for my birthday. I plugged it in ... BSOD. I rebooted, launched
iTunes ... HANG. I did a power reset, and did the usual perfunctory
"clean Windows" routine lasting a couple of hours, including a
reinstall of iTunes. Now it (iTunes) runs and works with the new
iPod, but v e r y s l o w l y.
I gave up, rebooted into Linux, launched GTkPod, and synced my music
and (recently transcoded) H264 video collection from an NFS share.
Very snappy, no hiccups, BSODs, reboots, or slow and stupid behaviour
to worry about. Windows is a pig of an OS.
Here is a key example of FUD:
http://news.bbc.co.uk/1/hi/technology/3600724.stm
Microsoft's Linux ad 'misleading' Computer user looking at the Linux
website The ASA said different hardware was used in the claims
Microsoft has been reprimanded over misleading advertising by the
Advertising Standards Authority (ASA).
The UK watchdog upheld complaints about a magazine advert which
claimed that the open-source operating system Linux was more
expensive than Windows.
Referring to research, it read: "Linux was found to be over 10 times
more expensive than Windows Server 2003".
The ASA concluded that the comparison was misleading because the
operating systems ran on different hardware.
Hardware differences
Microsoft had said the Get the Facts ad campaign was intended to
compare competing file-serving set-ups that met the same needs and
were intended for the same purposes.
According to the software giant, a field test by independent analysts
showed that Linux could be 10 times more expensive than Windows.
A graph used in the advert compared the cost in US dollars per
megabit per second of a Linux image running on two z900 mainframe
CPUs, with a Windows Server 2003 image running on two 900 MHz Intel
Xeon CPUs.
But the ASA ruling said the hardware chosen for Linux was more
expensive than it needed to be and could have influenced the outcome
of the analysis.
Microsoft has been asked to change the advert.
Linux is an open-source operating system, which means it is
essentially "free".
But many software companies use elements of it as the basis for
programs they make commercially available.
There are no facts, only "Get the".
--
Cheers, Rafael
http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/
http://www.hyphenologist.co.uk/killfile/anti_troll_faq.htm
|
|
