On Wed, 26 Nov 2008 01:53:31 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
> Hash: SHA1
>
> ____/ Rick Brandt on Tuesday 25 November 2008 17:30 : \____
>
>> On Mon, 24 Nov 2008 19:54:18 +0000, Roy Schestowitz wrote:
>>
>>> -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
>>> Hash: SHA1
>>>
>>> The 'best' of Windows:
>>>
>>> http://www.guidebookgallery.org/pics/gui/desktop/empty/winxppro.png
>>>
>>> My desktop:
>>>
>>> http://schestowitz.com/temp/screenshots/screenshot-2008.jpg
>>>
>>> Why is Microsoft jammed in 2001?
>>
>> You show an image of a Windows XP desktop as it would look after a clean
>> install and no customization and compare it to a Linux desktop that you
>> have personalized. Is this a fair comparison?
>>
>> Your desktop appears to be mostly dual monitors (or were you rotating the
>> desktop cube?) with a nice background image. Is that supposed to be
>> really impressive? I have seen some really impressive desktop images on
>> Linux pages and that doesn't make the cut.
>>
>> As to the "jammed in 2001" comment that is when XP was released. Why
>> shouldn't it look like that without customization?
>>
>> As MS slams go, this was a pretty lame attempt.
>
> It's a matter of taste really, but point taken.
He does have a point.It's like comparing the bait and switch advertisement
in the newspaper for a stripped car to one that's actually functional
albeit much more expensive.Would you like a steering wheel with that?The
problem with Windows is that skinning it in general costs money for add
ons.Linux comes equipped with these things on the CD and they are of course
free.Personally I don't see the need for such items but they are nice
looking.I like a nice background,good looking text and several virtual
desktops.That's all I need and Linux does that very nicely indeed.
|
|
