Slashdot Mirror
XP Users Are Willing To Give Windows 7 a Chance
Harry writes "PC World and Technologizer conducted a survey of 5,000 people who use Windows XP as their primary operating system. Many have no plans to leave it, and 80% will be unhappy when Microsoft completely discontinues it. And attitudes towards Vista remain extremely negative. But a majority of those who know something about Windows 7 have a positive reaction. More important, 70 percent of respondents who have used Windows 7 say they like it, which is a sign that Windows 7 stands a chance of being what Vista never was: an upgrade good enough to convince most XP users to switch."
They arrived at 7 for the version number in this way: Windows 1.0, 2.0, and 3.0 lines are self-explanatory. The NT4 and Windows 95/98/ME family were all part of the 4.x version of Windows. Win2000 and XP were 5.x, so naturally Vista was 6.0. That leaves us at 7 for the new Windows.
Here you go. Found it at the bottom of the RSAT forum page from MS. RSAT for Windows 7
Trying to become famous by taking photos. Visit my homepage please.
Speak for yourself. For me, this is Year 5 of the Linux Desktop, and my "seething" at Microsoft has long since cooled to "very occasionally annoyed when forced to look at someone's Windows box".
Il n'y a pas de Planet B.
With Linux, often the assumption is made that you are running a similar configuration as the developer, and critical libraries may be missing and the response is just "well, you should have that already".
No.
All packages that are built from source automatically detect your libraries and will build whatever works with them -- as long as you install development packages if you use anything built from source. If libraries are missing, you just install them.
All packages that are provided for Debian or Ubuntu already refer to all dependencies, so unless you go out of your way to install them "the Windows way" (download package in a browser, use dpkg from command line to install it, instead of using a repository), everything happens automatically.
All packages that have their own installers, carry libraries with themselves (this is what all Windows installers do).
The only things that don't fit into those categories that I have seen recently are truly ancient applications that are a massive pain in the neck to install on any OS, Unix equivalents of DOS applications. Last example of this that I have seen was Xilinx FPGA Editor -- it insisted on Motif and portmap, did not recognize screen number, and was not packaged for Ubuntu, so I had to configure such an environment for it manually.
Well, I don't, and now I have to scour the web to find the missing libraries - which also aren't in the repositories - in order to install an app.
If they are binary Debian/Ubuntu packages, that's because libraries are in the maintainer's repository along with them. You NEVER "scour the web" for Linux libraries' binaries. The only way to produce a valid Debian package that depends on a library is to have another package with that library and refer to it -- so consistency is maintained.
If they are only available as source tarballs (what by now only applies to bleeding-edge development stuff), you see all their names in the output of ./configure, look up the repository, and only if they are not there you may have to look for them elsewhere -- usually in a README file that you forgot to read in the first place.
The difference between Linux and Windows is, in Linux if you want to do anything outside of what Debian, or Ubuntu, or Fedora
Or it's in Ubuntu Launchpad PPA for that package, where you can get pretty much everything that ever was released as open source and is somewhat maintained by someone. Or in a private repository.
think you should need to do you have to hack it. Hacks and workarounds are the norm in Linux, and don't tell me it's not because I've used it off and on for the last 15 years.
If installing from manufacturer/developer's package is a "hack", then all Windows applications require hacks to be installed as well.
Contrary to the popular belief, there indeed is no God.