Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

Skip to comments.

Windows Vista vs. Linux: Why Vista Might Lose the Battle
PlayFuls.com ^ | 05/29/2006 | Cyberlord

Posted on 05/30/2006 11:51:59 AM PDT by N3WBI3

click here to read article


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-169 next last
To: Golden Eagle

Ha ha!

Jackass.


41 posted on 05/31/2006 5:39:31 AM PDT by FLAMING DEATH
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies]

To: MikefromOhio; Golden Eagle
Iggle you are SUCH an ignoramus....

I disagree. Ignorance can be fixed, stupid is forever.

42 posted on 05/31/2006 5:41:33 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 37 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord
In this particular case, i happen to believe that they are going in the right direction of offering different types of Vista installations (seven different versions the last i counted). If they expand on this concept, and make versions of the OS that meet Differing types of user preferences they can make this into a big winner.

This will be hell for helping people. Support people will need to know the difference between seven versions. Users also won't know what version they have.

The only reason for multiple versions is market segmentation for Microsoft's profit. Plus you'll get the case I'm seeing with XP Castrated Edition, where people buy it and find they need to upgrade to do anything serious. "I bought a computer with Windows, but I can't encrypt folders or set file-level access controls. What? I need Pro for that? How much?"

43 posted on 05/31/2006 5:55:52 AM PDT by antiRepublicrat
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3

Sorry, but Windows doesn't rule because it's a superior platform. It rules because there's one vendor, with powerful finances, that has OEM relationships with all major manufacturers. Even Apple is now delivering Macs with Windows pre-installed. Linux, with dozens of competing distros and weak OEM support will never match that. And I'm a Debian user, folks. The same thing that makes Linux such a success among developers and enthusiasts is the very thing that will prevent it from every being packaged as an OEM system...freedom to do whatever the hell you want with it, freedom to make as many versions as possible. Vendors don't want to support dozens of distros. They want one, single business to deal with, one single standard. Not multiple desktop managers, distros, or toolsets. Microsoft and Apple have the benefit of absolutely controlling their platforms. That's what OEM's want. When Red Hat decided to focus exclusively on the business server market, any hope of corporate supported mass market Linux died.


44 posted on 05/31/2006 7:38:28 AM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3
I work at a major pharmaceutical company and we just got new computers in January and they are still using Windows 2000. Haven't even upgraded to xp yet. I just don't see a big rush to vista.
45 posted on 05/31/2006 7:50:28 AM PDT by ol painless (ol' painless is out of the bag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 1 | View Replies]

To: DesScorp
Sorry, but Windows doesn't rule because it's a superior platform.

Of course not MS has always been yesterdays technology but with a great business plan

Linux, with dozens of competing distros and weak OEM support will never match that.

Nobody is expecting Linux to have a huge market share but MS's blunders in the creation of vista will help Linux greatly. That and the fact I (1) Dont want to run different desktop operating systems and (2) I cant afford to upgrade the hardware to every desktop in the company leaves me with the following, I have to seriously look at Linux on the desktop if for no other reason than to run a transparent RDP to a terminal server..

.freedom to do whatever the hell you want with it, freedom to make as many versions as possible. Vendors don't want to support dozens of distros.

You are implying Dell / HP or an application vendor has to support all distros if the support any, this is not true. Dell only sells RedHat servers they wont support Debain

46 posted on 05/31/2006 8:02:35 AM PDT by N3WBI3 ("I can kill you with my brain" - River Tam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 44 | View Replies]

To: ol painless
What are the CPU, Memory and Storage spec on the desktops? You might not be able to run vista if you wanted to..
47 posted on 05/31/2006 8:03:28 AM PDT by N3WBI3 ("I can kill you with my brain" - River Tam)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 45 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3
They are Intel P4 3.0 HT, 512 RAM, and 74Gb HD. They did not upgrade even to XP. They reinstalled Win2000 Professional.
48 posted on 05/31/2006 8:29:10 AM PDT by ol painless (ol' painless is out of the bag)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 47 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord
Am i the only person in America who actually liked Windows ME?

Probably.

in Essence, it was Windows XP's features with Windows 98SE's kernel, and an FAT32 file system instead of NTFS.

It was horribly unstable. So bad, in fact, that a friend told me that a shop refused to work on her laptop because it had Windows ME on it. I thought 98SE was a much better product. Its registry was a mess if memory serves me correctly.

49 posted on 05/31/2006 8:54:58 AM PDT by Señor Zorro ("The ability to speak does not make you intelligent"--Qui-Gon Jinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 39 | View Replies]

To: Señor Zorro
It was horribly unstable. So bad, in fact, that a friend told me that a shop refused to work on her laptop because it had Windows ME on it. I thought 98SE was a much better product. Its registry was a mess if memory serves me correctly.

The only real difficulty i had with Windows ME was when i got one of the first computer virii that existed, an old boot sector exploit. My own fault using old floppies that hadn't been virus checked. All that was required was the insertion of the DOS Disk, and an fdisk /mbr command.

As i said in my post, the key to Windows ME was to keep the registry clean. For that purpose i use System Mechanic's registry cleaning tool once a week. The laptop still runs fine with Windows ME.

Fact is that all operating systems will have individual quirks. This includes the various flavours of Windows. For example: i run SuSE 9.2 Professional on this machine with a dialup connection. Last week as i was getting SuSE updates from one of their ftp sites, my connection died. i couldn't get back on line. It seems that my modem commands were changed. i didn't know the Hays modem commands, so i was pretty screwed. Couldn't have the modem redetected and configured for some reason. Ended up that i had to insert a Knoppix CD, run kppp and look at the modem command set after i configured the Internet tool. Copied that into SuSE's kppp utility, and was back in business. The quirk involved is that SuSE (and Redhat/Fedora) both have messed up their internet connection tools. i still can't connect with kinternet.

50 posted on 05/31/2006 9:17:26 AM PDT by Calvinist_Dark_Lord (I have come here to kick @$$ and chew bubblegum...and I'm all outta bubblegum! ~Roddy Piper)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 49 | View Replies]

To: antiRepublicrat

Stupid is posting an article claiming Linux will win "the battle with Microsoft", then trying to claim knocking MS down from 90 percent to 87 percent is somehow victory. But, that's how pathetic the open source lunis on this site have become.


51 posted on 05/31/2006 10:12:41 AM PDT by Golden Eagle (Buy American. While you still can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 42 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
But, that's how pathetic the open source lunis on this site have become.

Your definition of an Open Source "luni" (I presume you mean "loony" or "luny") seems to be anyone who considers GNU/Linux to be superior to Windows--which, IMO, it is.

I do not speak from ignorance. I used Windows for years before I switched to Linux and even now, I work for a company that is almost 100% Windows where I write code primarily in C# and ASP.

Stupid is posting an article claiming Linux will win "the battle with Microsoft", then trying to claim knocking MS down from 90 percent to 87 percent is somehow victory.

I don't think that Microsoft will lose its market superiority, but knocking them from 90 to 87 percent would, in fact, be a victory. Microsoft has one advantage: their products are not having to go head-to-head against much of anything. Most department stores or tech stores (Best Buy, Circuit City, etc.) stock mostly or all Windows, with some having a few Macs laying around somewhere. The reason for which is, obviously, that their OS comes pre-loaded on every system. This is, from a marketing/PR point of view, a very difficult problem to overcome. If they lose 3% of their market share, it means that more people are pro-actively making the switch from Microsoft to an alternative. They are becoming more aware of the possibilities. Three percent may not sound like much and, if you are going for market dominance, it isn't, but 3% of computer users is a lot of people, nonetheless. Does three percent bring down Microsoft? By no means, but it would be a victory for OSS.

52 posted on 05/31/2006 12:58:59 PM PDT by Señor Zorro ("The ability to speak does not make you intelligent"--Qui-Gon Jinn)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 51 | View Replies]

To: Calvinist_Dark_Lord
Ironically, Windows ME was the most stable of the 9X line for me, but that's because I build my own white boxes. I found that most people having trouble with ME were either upgraders or users of OEM versions on HPs, Compaqs, etc. OEM's put their own flaky drivers in the systems, and those machines were absolute crap, especially HPs. I found that when you do a clean install on generic, industry standard ATX board, ME was really stable. Also, few manufacturers tried to write new ME-specific drivers when they should have. And while it required more CPU horsepower and RAM than 98, it used excess memory more efficiently. After 96 mb in 98, you got declining returns in your RAM performance (this from the mouth of a Microsoft rep). You could put 256, 384 MBs on a ME box and it would be used much more efficiently and effectively.

Gotta disagree with the prior poster that said ME was XP with a 9X kernel....it was more like a 9X kernel with Windows 2000's looks and (some) features.
53 posted on 05/31/2006 2:03:12 PM PDT by DesScorp
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 50 | View Replies]

To: N3WBI3
(We waited 6 years for XP with eye candy)...

I still haven't tried Vista yet.  I am putting together another PC and will probably load it.

I hope I am not disappointed with it.

54 posted on 05/31/2006 2:32:05 PM PDT by softwarecreator (Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 30 | View Replies]

To: MikefromOhio
WTS is great.

WTS?

55 posted on 05/31/2006 2:33:40 PM PDT by softwarecreator (Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 24 | View Replies]

To: Golden Eagle
These guys can't relate, they consider those that give away their work for free as their heros

The day I give away work for free is the day my wife hands me my Heroic butt on a plate.

I guess the capitalist in me doesn't understand the whole concept.

56 posted on 05/31/2006 2:36:47 PM PDT by softwarecreator (Facts are to liberals as holy water is to vampires.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 28 | View Replies]

To: staytrue
my pc just craped out again
This time I got a mac mini...LOVE IT
57 posted on 05/31/2006 2:36:58 PM PDT by Gone_Postal (government big enough to give you everything you want is a government big enough to take it away)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 6 | View Replies]

To: softwarecreator
You can still be very well paid and work on Open Source projects. Many companies pay developers to work on Open Source projects for cost efficiency reasons - it's cheaper to say, commit a few developers to an Open Source project where labour and testing costs are spread out over several firms (and others), rather than bear the burden of all the development costs solo.

Regards, Ivan

58 posted on 05/31/2006 2:41:07 PM PDT by MadIvan (I aim to misbehave.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 56 | View Replies]

To: softwarecreator

Windows Terminal Server

Easy to manage, doesn't crash easily and if your users log off correctly, they won't get hung sessions which will force you to clear them off.

Basically if XP worked as well as WTS 2003 does (and it doesn't and it's no where close), there wouldn't be an issue really. Just my experience.


59 posted on 05/31/2006 3:43:20 PM PDT by MikefromOhio (aka MikeinIraq - WTFO)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 55 | View Replies]

To: Señor Zorro

Actually I should have said "free software lunis", as that is ultimately what they are, but they hide under the sheep's clothing of "open source".

Microsoft is bound to eventually lose some of their market share, there's simply nowhere to go up from ~90%. When they do, it won't all be to free software like Linux, but to other products like Apple OSX and Sun Solaris instead. Hopefully most of it will, since those are American products owned by American companies, and not a foreign born fake like Linux.


60 posted on 05/31/2006 4:47:09 PM PDT by Golden Eagle (Buy American. While you still can.)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 52 | View Replies]


Navigation: use the links below to view more comments.
first previous 1-2021-4041-6061-80 ... 161-169 next last

Disclaimer: Opinions posted on Free Republic are those of the individual posters and do not necessarily represent the opinion of Free Republic or its management. All materials posted herein are protected by copyright law and the exemption for fair use of copyrighted works.

Free Republic
Browse · Search
General/Chat
Topics · Post Article

FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson