anon@xxxxxxxx wrote:
> 7 <website_has_email@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> says:
>>John Locke wrote:
>>> On Sun, 29 Jul 2007 05:51:18 +0100, Roy Schestowitz
>>> <newsgroups@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote:
>
>>>>Windows Vista vs Linux
>
>>>>| Don't get fooled by intimidating advertisements about Microsoft Vista.
>>>>| Although Vista will probably be a very nice, stable operating system,
>>>>| there is more in the world than Windows. Other operating systems
>>>>| sometimes are years ahead of it!
>
>>> I wouldn't say years ahead..but at least the fact that there are
>>> alternatives is beginning to soak in here and there.
>
>>I would say it is years ahead. You just need to be more than 2
>>years ahead to be years ahead. Right now its at least 2009 before
>>windopws can catch up to what Linux does in 2007.
>
> So you guys just pull these numbers out of your ass, eh? How could
> an OS, whose default shell can be traced all the way back to the
> 1970s, be "years ahead" of any other OS at all? What OS are you
> comparing it to? Apple DOS?
>
> The idea seems to be that linux is good because you use it. And you
> are good because you use linux. And there doesn't seem to be a lot
> of thought deeper than that. No wonder there are so many people
> over here who use pgp trash and so few over here that can grasp the
> limitations of pgp trash.
Windopws Pista will suck until 2009 before next updates are released.
Therefore its atleast 2 years behind.
If you have seen the latest Beryl and Compiz
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=Rmz9a9pJR_s
You will know how much windopws sucks.
Windopws still doesn't dual boot or do virtualisation like
you do with Linux yet. Also they don't do open source OS.
So it looks like tata windopws, it waz a waste of time and
resources knowing you.
> Retards.
>
> cordially, as always,
>
> rm
|
|
