Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft Challenges Linux's Legacy Claims
Michael writes "Microsoft Corp.'s Linux and open-source lab on the Redmond campus has been running some interesting tests of late, one of which was looking at how well the latest Windows client software runs on legacy hardware in comparison to its Linux competitors. The tests, which found that Windows performed as well as Linux on legacy hardware when installed and run out-of-the-box, were done in part to give Microsoft the data it needed to effectively 'put to rest the myth that Linux can run on anything.'"
i have a copy of win95 on a p1 with 8mb ram and it actually is usable, explorer works well and so does IE, good to have a usable gui with such a weak PC
linux on the other hand will make the PC look like a 1980's throwback with no gui and green text on a black screen, imhe windows runs on more legacy hardware than linux does and looks good, try getting kde or knome usable and looking good on a 8mb p1 75mhz pc
Come on.. I'm not an MS fan, but at least make sure what you're saying is correct.
3. Most of the additional tools people want can be had for free or very little money (like Java's SDK, which can be downloaded for nothing, or Oracle Express, which is also free).
And most of the things that are available for free for Linux can also run under Windows. Java's SDK is free. I don't know anything about Oracle Express, but a quick Google search for it didn't turn up any information.
4. It has better default driver support than Windows, without having to go out to a vendor site and hope they still offer downloads; In fact, most hardware is detected right off the bat nowadays.
But when Linux doesn't detect your hardware by default, it's more than likely that you won't be able to find a vendor solution at all. Even when there are open source drivers available, it's entirely possible that they won't provide the full range of features (see any 3D acceleration card).
5. YES, Linux is more secure than Windows, and offers better and more diverse tools for locking down your system.
Because ACL support is so common and widespread in Linux, right?
6. This one's esoteric, but what the hell: I can use Reiser FS on Linux; Windows didn't offer a journaling ANYTHING up until their latest greatest (does that even offer journals???).
What the hell? This is just plain ignorant. NTFS is a journaling filesystem. You know when NTFS first came out? 1993, with Windows NT 3.1. It's been supported in NT 4, Windows 2000, Windows XP, and every other non-9x-based version of Windows since then.
Overall, Linux is better than Windows in almost every conceivable way.
Except vendor support, 3d acceleration, user base, UI consistency, sheer number of applications, and so forth. Come on, I like Linux just as much as the next guy -- heck, my job involves developing multi-million dollar systems that run on it -- but please be honest with yourself about its capabilities, and be familiar with the competition.
Karma: Terrifying (mostly affected by atrocities you've committed)
Microsoft got the wrong operating system. ...You meant NetBSD. After all, their slogan is "``Of course it runs NetBSD.''"
I think your right, i have a friend who tried it with an athlon x2, he said it was not worth it, driver support is crap, and the OS doesn't correctly utilize both cores :(,
"MY OPINION" is the only windows to run is win 2000 on x86, everything else is better left to linux or mac (again thats my opinion).
You can most certainly pick your shell in Windows to lighten up your load if you so desire. You can even run the system with explorer.exe unloaded and nothing to take it's place. Most people prefer Litestep, though, it seems.
This is why I tell people I use Explorer for Windows and GNOME for Linux (But more and more I'm using KDE as it lightens it's load, not that GNOME is a feather, either).
"We invented personal computing." - Bill Gates
Build your career on it.. it's the safest bet you get
I'm a software visionary. I don't code.