Slashdot Mirror
Linux Has Better Windows Compatibility Than Vista
Several readers have written to tell us about one users rant in which he tells the story of being so frustrated with gaming on Windows Vista that he tried comparing gaming on Vista to that on Linux using Wine, with surprising results. "This post is clearly a bit biased. What shocked me though was how easy it was to find games that didn't run under Vista but did in Linux by using Wine or DOSBox. I'm not a huge gamer, so I don't have a huge collection of games to try out, but even still with just a few hours of frustrating work, I have been able to show that not only is Linux a reasonable alternative to Vista for gaming (XP is still king though), but also that Linux handles application failures more gracefully than Vista. Every game but Blackthorne crashed my Vista box, this didn't happen a single time under Linux."
This is the second post.
What's the deal with people having vista compatibility problems? It's like malware, and any computer problems at all- everyone else gets it but if you do things right and don't break stuff, you'll never have problems. Ever thought "HOW STUPID DO YOU HAVE TO BE TO GET SPYWARE?" well--- same thing for vista problems. Just don't go into it expecting an 8 year old operating system - XP - and you'll be fine.
does anyone really believe this moron that vista, which actually runs directx, is going to be worse then linux with it's crappy emulation?
If you mod me down, I will become more powerful than you can imagine....
How about we mod you -1:Flamebait instead? At least the author admits the article is "a bit biased".
On the other hand you're saying it ISN'T news for nerds that games built to run on a prior version of Windows don't work in new one but do work on a totally different operating system?
Let me guess. You don't think it's news that newer versions of Office won't open old word documents but Open Office will.
Don't get me wrong, the choice of games (besides perhaps Civ 4) is questionable, but make no mistake YOU are the one trolling. The author of the blog article has a point.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Please elaborate why my posting should be modded 'flamebait', for I fail to see a valid reason.
YOU are the one that called for the article to be modded flamebait in the first place. Now you're complaining about someone else doing the same to you. Pot. Kettle. Black.
The article however fails miserably in showing evidence for such a claim.
So the summary was bad. Why does that make the whole thing flamebait?
I fail to see how my post is controversial; I also fail to see any intention of provoking an emotional response.
Your failures aren't my problem. If you can't see why asking to mod/censor an article that might be of interest to others might provoke an emotional response, I don't see how I can help you. If new versions of windows are less compatible with even some software than Linux emulating an old version that is of interest to me, and I don't appreciate people like yourself trying to shout down the article.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
"the guy" suggested that an entire article didn't belong on /. and should be modded flamebait and "the other guy" pointed out that this was news to geeks and shouldn't be censored. You may wish to consider trying not to sound like a bubblegum chewing teenager when you summarize a discussion. At least use "one poster" and "another poster" instead of "the guy" and "the other guy".
Time for me to "yell" "YOU TROLL" at you instead?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
"Its you screaming 'TROOOOOOLL' at fairly reasonably points and then crying when people call you a troll because you've shown little to no interest in debating the content of the article, only the way that the OP is arguing."
The opening poster was interested in debating the content of the article???? That's news to me. The opening poster wanted it censored as flamebait, which is what I objected to. Get a clue.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Which is sadly not very much, except for name calling.
Name calling? Well if you're going to accuse me of it, might as well do the crime. MORON!
My point was that the article is newsworthy. When you call for it to be "modded flamebait" and tell me that it's "not newsworthy" you're saying it doesn't belong on slashdot and are calling for its censorship here. There is no other interpretation, and denying it makes no sense. To throw one of your own supposedly "civilized" insults back at you "Please don't tell me that did not get that?"
By the way getting other people to post as anonymous and or mod things flamebait is incredibly immature. You must be one prize to deal with in person. Thankfully I am unlikely to ever have that pleasure.
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
fairly reasonably points ...and... only the way that the OP is arguing.
The only thing that the OP has argued is that the article should be suppressed, preventing any further discussion.
Also, it's "pray", not "prey".
Actually it's spelt "anal retentive grammar nazi poser". When I want an English lesson I'll go hire a teacher you rude little man.
This isn't a formal business letter, it's a message board, on which you'll find plenty of typos, spelling mistakes, and errors in grammar. These discussions occur at all hours of the day and night and are casual. Small errors rarely take away from the argument and are usually only pointed out by petty gits who wish to offer these errors as some kind of proof that they're superior (usually when they have nothing better to say).
When did I say that?
When did you tell me to shut up? Lets see you're accusing me of showing no interest in debating the content of the article, but you object to me telling someone not to call for it to be suppressed (aka "modded flamebait"). In other words you don't want to hear that I don't like someone asking for it to be suppressed. What is there to not understand here exactly?
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer
Attention! You are receiving a message which may contain a virus:
You must be new here. : )
Cancel or Allow?
What day is it? Could you please tell me?
What difference, specifically, will the exact number of units sold make to you? Top selling PC at the nation's largest retailer in the month before Christmas? Here's your answer - a lot. What is the exact number of these Vista competitor PC's you keep mentioning that Walmart sold complete with digital cameras? Oh yeah - you don't have that number either.
While you're being pedantic, I'll have to ask you for references to back up your claim that MS is outperforming Google, Apple and the entire tech sector by 20%. Mostly, because, you're full of shit.
Give it up. Vista sucks, everybody knows it. The only reason people buy it at all is when the computer they otherwise want ships with it. People are "downgrading" to XP every chance they get. Open your eyes. MS is rushing the next OS, Vista will become the next ME.
I don't know how I keep getting wrapped up in arguments with trolls.
It may be of interest to you (maybe because you play the exact 5 games or because of some other reason), but that does not make it newsworthy *for slashdot*.
/. I don't play any of those games. but you already had guessed that, hadn't you. I'm quite justified in calling you a troll - you're clearly trolling here. Please look up "Straw man".
/. - you're not an editor.
/. users who may want to upgrade. I'm sorry his sample size and choices don't meet your standards of professional journalism, but if you look at the other stuff that gets posted here professional journalism is not what /. is about.
Ah because that would be the only reason it would be newsworthy... With your limited imagination you can't think of another therefore the article should be banished from
If I know 5 people with red hair, and they all have an IQ far above (or far below) the average IQ, and I write an article about that claiming 'Gene That Causes Red Hair Makes People Dumber' (or 'Smarter'), then that article is not newsworthy because its claim is based on faulty logic.
A stupid analogy from a weak mind, to say the least, combined with another straw man. The only similarity to the story posted is the small sample size, which I think is the point you're trying to harp on. However the last time I checked, genetics wasn't meant to be tied to hair colour whereas backward compatibility is very much tied to how an operating system is engineered. Also the last time I checked there weren't social issues (racial supremacy) tied to how an operating system is engineered. If only you'd chosen blonde hair and blue eyes instead of red hair I might have been able to claim Godwin (even though I'm no fan of Godwin's law).
Please look up straw man.
>I>And about censorship: you keep using that word, but I do not think you know what it means. If someone stands up in a movie theater and starts giving everybody his opinion about the movie, he is told to shut up or go away. That is not censorship. Slashdot is not the right place for that article, since its reasoning is deeply flawed
Yet another straw man, and yet another bad analogy.
First of all you have no right to decide what goes on
Secondly, a person speaking at a movie theatre can't be ignored simply by moving on to the next article. They can cause a paying audience to miss a crucial part of the movie. In contrast if you don't like the article it shouldn't burden you too much to move on as soon as you realize the author is talking about just 5 games. There are other stories posted that you can read.
Thirdly, regardless of any flawed reasoning this person has brought to light something of interest to
Fourth, you seem to be simultaneously saying that the article should not have been allowed on to slashdot while claiming you're not censoring it. Even if you're technically correct (and I don't concede that point at all) it's clear that you'd rather the article didn't exist because it doesn't meet your personal standards, so you're being quite dishonest.
And once again; I am not trying to insult you.
Funny. You're doing an excellent job of belittling me and defending your actions no matter what they are.
The "Please don't (..)" was to express disappointment because I got the impression you purpously refused to understand me.
Oh I understood you and I suspect you knew I was launching your own consdescending tripe back at you.
I do not set people up to do things for me. I am perfectly capable of saying what I want to say myself; I need no ACs to make my point.
What else am I to conclude with the number of AC's coming to your defense. Also if you look at my original comment's moderation at least 3 people thought it was interesting or insightful before it was torpedoed.
I thought that would be obvious, it seems it is not
What's obvious is that you feel justified in calling for the
These posts express my own personal views, not those of my employer