Does it really matter?
on
PHP 5 Beta 1
·
· Score: 0, Troll
I mean considering Windows users already have access to ASP.NET and SQL Server, why would they waste their time with PHP and mySQL?
Re:Requires Microsoft Visual C++
on
PHP 5 Beta 1
·
· Score: -1, Flamebait
Some people are bound to bring up the $109 Microsoft Visual C++ Learning Edition
Actually it's called Visual C++ Standard Edition.
1. the EULA attached to its library probably does not permit distribution of generated binaries nor public performance (i.e. use on a public web site) of generated binaries
Ahh, a good dose of FUD to go with your whine.
2. because it does not have an optimizer, the speed of generated binaries is closer to that of an interpreted program than to that of a compiled program.
Well the Standard edition doesn't have an optimizer, certainly. I'm not sure what performance impact that has, but obviously if it was important to you you'd have the full version of C++ and this isn't an issue.
If I had any spare time, I'd fix this by porting the build to MinGW.
You had enough spare time to whine about this on slashbot and promote FUD. MAybe you need to adjust your priorities.
IBM supports OS's and hardware for years after they've gone past their prime.
How many years?
I was curious to validate your claim, so I dod a google search to try to find something from IBM relating to product support lifecycle. Well I didn't find the nice list like Microsoft has, but I did find a letter detailing discontinuance of select S/390 products.
So the one which is probably most comparable is the discontinuance of support for OS/390 Version 2 Release 9. It's about a quarter down the page, says the release is withdrawn from service effective March 31,2003. Towards the bottom it recommends updating to Version 2 Release 10 or the new z/OS.
Ok, so when did Version 2, Release 9 come out? Well I did another search and found this letter. The answer, my friend, is February 29, 2000.
So 3 years. That's how long IBM supports software before forcing you to upgrade.
Doesn't sound much different than Microsoft. The last SP for NT4 was released in November of 1999.
Just because Microsoft isn't supporting NT4 doesn't mean you can't continue to run with it. We ran our IBM mainframes at work for a couple years on older unsupported versions of their COBOL compiler and such. We weren't modifying the systems, so why patch what seemed to be working, right?
Microsoft provided software fixes to prevent this style of virus like 3 years ago. Even without those, just running a virus scanner with weekly updates to dat files would be more than an adequate solution.
and then they received a email with a shell script containing rm -rf / (assuming the user runs as root:)), should we blame on Linux?
Ok, how about 'rm -rf ~'? Wiping out enduser files is going to upset people more than the OS files.
(yea, I know sometimes we should blame on Microsoft, but not everytime)
Oh no, this is slashbot... Microsoft is responsible for everything, including the braindead mechanism of SMTP which doesn't authenticate users before allowing them to relay spam off you.
Yawn. The point is the ship didn't work. Usually that's a sign that something has gone wrong. Call me odd, but that might even be the point where you start troubleshooting.
Well duh.
But the point is, it was the custom software that failed. Trying to blame this on the OS is a bit of revisionist sour grapes.
Have you ever seen an app crash on NT?
Actually no. I've been working with NT for 8 years now. I've supported installations of several thousand machines, and for the past 5 years have worked in internal development at a company with about 5,000 desktops and 200 web/app servers. Have yet to see an application crash NT.
I used to supervise a lab of 200 workstations with the shit on it
Ohhhh, college experience! I used to admin Unix when I was in college. Crashed all the time, big old kernel panics. dump the memory to disk and sit there at the console prompt. Yessir, Unix must suck! Couldn't possibly have had anything to do with students corrupting the filesystem by flipping the power switches, nope... If Unix were a decent OS that would never have impacted it. Yep, that's right, I'm a moron too!
I may be a "moron," but at least I know what happens in the real world when MS fucks up (like it usually does), and I know that real work needs to be done to fix the shit.
Enjoy your Kool-Aid, and hopefully you aren't betting your career on these claims. If you are, the welfare line starts two doors down the left hallway.
"Human error, not Microsoft Windows NT, was the cause of a LAN failure aboard the Aegis cruiser USS Yorktown that left the Smart Ship dead in the water for nearly three hours last fall during maneuvers near Cape Charles, Va., Navy officials said."
now read carefully "Human error, not Microsoft Windows NT"
Now are you saying that the network functionality was provided by a custom application and not by NT?
No I'm saying "The Internet is Down".
It's an enduser description of the problem, it's not technical. They claim the network crashed, when all that happened was the custom software system running things crashed. As far as the enduser is concerned, it's not working, right?
Oh, and i dont appreciate being called a loser no matter how you spell it.
Then don't act like a luser and start engaging your brain.
The fatal flaw in your argument is that you didn't use a enduser help desk call parser to read the description of the issue. This wasn't written up in a technical journal, it was written up in a government management policy journal.
Again, stop claiming "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.
You completely miss the point of the lower court ruling. Microsoft licensed Java. They didn't adhere to the contract they signed with Sun. This was part of the remedy of that lawsuit. It was thrown out today.
No, I'm afraid you missed the point of the lawsuit.
This is a new lawsuit as part of Sun's Strategic Litigation division. (look for the name Lee Patch and check out his title) Sun is now claiming that they were harmed by the earlier lawsuit they settled, after Microsoft announced they were going to pull all versions of Java out of Windows XP.
Well whatever. Anybody who has been in the industry for a while knows why Java failed no the desktop. It had nothing to do with Microsoft's JVM for Internet Explorer. If you wanted to run client-side Java you had to download Sun's JVM anyway. The Microsoft JVM just let you run Java applets in the browser.
But Java applets in the browser never took off, not because Microsoft made a JVM that allowed developers to hang themselves if they wanted to.(Apparently Sun believes developers aren't smart enough to realize interfacing with COM components means your stuff won't run on a Mac) No, Java didn't take off in the browser because it didn't work well. Instead Macromedia came out with what they called Flash which had the same concept of running applets, but was a higher level language that was easier to create content with.
The "chilling reminder" is that, is you do ANY business with Microsoft, prepared to be screwed, with no legal recourse.
Once again, the chilling reminder is that strategic litigation and whining doesn't improve your market position.
Just gotta love those Microsoft apologists.... Geesh.
No, you've gotta love people who don't understand the history of the internet and believe whatever sob story someone tells them.
Don't buy the horse puckey that an screwy application should be able to bring down the O/S. A well designed, multi-user operating system should have plenty of protection from that kind of stuff.
No, the horse puckey is the claim that the OS crashed when it was just the application layer.
XP/2000 is NOT multi-user.
Actually it is, always has been.
You can still only be logged in once at any given time!
That's not what multiuser means. Under NT multiple applications run under multiple user contexts. Some of those user contexts are interactive, some of those are not.
Again, this is the problem. People who have little understanding of computing systems making conclusions based on enduser statements.
Obviously you are also one of these lusers who claims "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.
I am, however, a realist: The OS can crash on a desktop - that is understandable. BUT the OS should not fucking crash on a Naval vessel! Period!
Your not a realist, you're a moron who clearly doesn't understand computer system design or troubleshooting.
The description of the problem was stated as a Zero entered into a database field. Divide-By-Zero errors do not cause Operating Systems to crash, however if not handled as an exception they will cause an Application to crash.
A ship automation system is obviously going to continue to read parameters out of the database and act upon them, such that if it does crash and is restarted it will crash again due to the error resulting from the bad data.
I mean this was blatantly obvious back in 1998 when this article came out. It's blatantly obvious today. Anybody who has spent any amount of time troubleshooting applications will understand exactly the circumstances that likely resulted.
How is that Red(mond) Kool-Aid?
You should be asking yourself for beliving this nonsensical trash.
Since the HP and Dell announcements, this is pretty much a moot point anyway.
It's always been a moot point. Sun has always had the capability to license Java through OEMs to include on their machines. Sun simply choose not to pursue this path.
The real problem of all this is that Microsoft has walked away from the whole "let's release an incompatible version of Java", with only a "don't do that" slap on the wrist.
I'm sorry, but that court case was resolved a couple of years ago in a settlement. At the time Sun declared victory, so did Microsoft.
But releasing a "incompatible" version of Java was never a crime, it was a contract infringement. Microsoft had their contract revoked and paid a penalty.
The monopoly remains intact, and unpunished.
Microsoft has a monopoly on Java? How do you figure?
This should be a chilling reminder to anyone that does ANYTHING with Microsoft. If they're gonna screw you, don't expect them to be punished for it, no matter what happens.
This should be a chilling reminder to anybody who forms a Strategic Litigation business unit thinking they can profit by going after Microsoft in court.
You're painfully naive if you believe this tactic was "devised by the right-wing" for Clinton.
Your painfully naive if you believe the right-wing didn't take this to an extreme for Clinton.
It's nothing new to either side.
Oh it's been around a long time. People still believe FDR knew the Japanese were going to attack at Pearl Harbor and did nothing because he wanted us into the war.
But nobody made it into an actual business venture until the GOP did so in 1993.
LOL! I can't believe Linux zealots still have this in their favorites list.
"The source of the problem on the Yorktown was that bad data was fed into an application running on one of the 16 computers on the LAN."
The issue was quite clearly with a custom application written by the vendor.
The only people claiming this was the fault of NT are the clueless Unix wannabes who were upset that they lost a contract. I can't believe anybody is still fucking stupid enough to believe these claims when they've long since been discredited.
If you are concerned with job creation, Microsoft is the wrong company to give money to.
As I sit here, developing a program for our company using VS.NET and linked to a backend SQL Server database, I would have to disagree.
First of all, Microsoft needs much fewer employees than other industries to generate each $1m in revenue.
In other words, as a customer I get far more software value for my $1m given to Microsoft than I would get giving it to any other company. That presents me with greater opportunities to customize the software for my specific business needs.
In addition, since these are probably sales of existing software, there will be almost no job creation from those sales at all.
Where do you think the money goes? A black hole.
Let's say every MS employee now gets a $30k bonus. Each one goes out and buys a new car... now you have job creation at car dealerships and manufacturing plants.
Microsoft has a lot of its jobs overseas, so much of Microsoft's already measly job creation doesn't even take place in the US.
That's ok, the US military has a lot of its jobs overseas as well.
I'm surprised to see the "thousands and thousands" version of the story, intended to swing public opinion against the Iraq war, still being referenced.
LOL! I love it when the tactics devised by the right-wing fall back against them.
People are still claiming a lot of things about President Clinton too, that were long proven to be false.
Better braking on a car is a good example of this. Yeah, you may never need it, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good thing to have.
Except we're not talking about better braking. We're talking about a spoiler on the trunk, chrome trim around the doors and blue led lights under the rocker panels. i.e. non-useful decoration.
I would say it's much more likely that you just got used to the status quo, rather than decided "being able to make the computer do more things == bad".
No, I simply realized that having eyes follow my mouse around the screen wasn't really all that useful.
You might get used to driving a Geo Metro eventually, after owning a Corvette, but that doesn't make them equally good.
Webserver, I can just tell you, Linux will walk away with
You seriously think Linux is better as a web server than Windows?
You willing to put some money down on that one?
I have more experience with Win9x than any other OS, but I criticise it more than any other OS except pre-X MacOS.
That's because Win9x is worth criticizing. Now you understand when we're going to compare web servers it will be running on Windows server, not Win95, right?
Microsoft pays some "Research" group to prove NT is better, and then the Linux blogs post stories showing that Linux is better, written by Linux geeks. I don't trust either side of that.
Well that's a start in the right direction.
Unfortunately you seem to believe that web server claim.
Slashdot Mirror
I mean considering Windows users already have access to ASP.NET and SQL Server, why would they waste their time with PHP and mySQL?
Some people are bound to bring up the $109 Microsoft Visual C++ Learning Edition
Actually it's called Visual C++ Standard Edition.
1. the EULA attached to its library probably does not permit distribution of generated binaries nor public performance (i.e. use on a public web site) of generated binaries
Ahh, a good dose of FUD to go with your whine.
2. because it does not have an optimizer, the speed of generated binaries is closer to that of an interpreted program than to that of a compiled program.
Well the Standard edition doesn't have an optimizer, certainly. I'm not sure what performance impact that has, but obviously if it was important to you you'd have the full version of C++ and this isn't an issue.
If I had any spare time, I'd fix this by porting the build to MinGW.
You had enough spare time to whine about this on slashbot and promote FUD. MAybe you need to adjust your priorities.
Well I keep hoping you will admit you are wrong and apologize, but instead all you seem to do is throw insults when confronted by the facts.
Very sad...
IBM supports OS's and hardware for years after they've gone past their prime.
How many years?
I was curious to validate your claim, so I dod a google search to try to find something from IBM relating to product support lifecycle. Well I didn't find the nice list like Microsoft has, but I did find a letter detailing discontinuance of select S/390 products.
So the one which is probably most comparable is the discontinuance of support for OS/390 Version 2 Release 9. It's about a quarter down the page, says the release is withdrawn from service effective March 31,2003. Towards the bottom it recommends updating to Version 2 Release 10 or the new z/OS.
Ok, so when did Version 2, Release 9 come out? Well I did another search and found this letter. The answer, my friend, is February 29, 2000.
So 3 years. That's how long IBM supports software before forcing you to upgrade.
Doesn't sound much different than Microsoft. The last SP for NT4 was released in November of 1999.
Just because Microsoft isn't supporting NT4 doesn't mean you can't continue to run with it. We ran our IBM mainframes at work for a couple years on older unsupported versions of their COBOL compiler and such. We weren't modifying the systems, so why patch what seemed to be working, right?
Ah ha! I knew it was just a matter of time before some idjit on slashdot would blame Microsoft for the design of SMTP.
Thank you troll.
Microsoft provided software fixes to prevent this style of virus like 3 years ago. Even without those, just running a virus scanner with weekly updates to dat files would be more than an adequate solution.
:)), should we blame on Linux?
and then they received a email with a shell script containing rm -rf / (assuming the user runs as root
Ok, how about 'rm -rf ~'? Wiping out enduser files is going to upset people more than the OS files.
(yea, I know sometimes we should blame on Microsoft, but not everytime)
Oh no, this is slashbot... Microsoft is responsible for everything, including the braindead mechanism of SMTP which doesn't authenticate users before allowing them to relay spam off you.
Yawn. The point is the ship didn't work. Usually that's a sign that something has gone wrong. Call me odd, but that might even be the point where you start troubleshooting.
Well duh.
But the point is, it was the custom software that failed. Trying to blame this on the OS is a bit of revisionist sour grapes.
Have you ever seen an app crash on NT?
Actually no. I've been working with NT for 8 years now. I've supported installations of several thousand machines, and for the past 5 years have worked in internal development at a company with about 5,000 desktops and 200 web/app servers. Have yet to see an application crash NT.
I used to supervise a lab of 200 workstations with the shit on it
Ohhhh, college experience! I used to admin Unix when I was in college. Crashed all the time, big old kernel panics. dump the memory to disk and sit there at the console prompt. Yessir, Unix must suck! Couldn't possibly have had anything to do with students corrupting the filesystem by flipping the power switches, nope... If Unix were a decent OS that would never have impacted it. Yep, that's right, I'm a moron too!
I may be a "moron," but at least I know what happens in the real world when MS fucks up (like it usually does), and I know that real work needs to be done to fix the shit.
Enjoy your Kool-Aid, and hopefully you aren't betting your career on these claims. If you are, the welfare line starts two doors down the left hallway.
From the article:
Did you read this article?
"Human error, not Microsoft Windows NT, was the cause of a LAN failure aboard the Aegis cruiser USS Yorktown that left the Smart Ship dead in the water for nearly three hours last fall during maneuvers near Cape Charles, Va., Navy officials said."
now read carefully "Human error, not Microsoft Windows NT"
Now are you saying that the network functionality was provided by a custom application and not by NT?
No I'm saying "The Internet is Down".
It's an enduser description of the problem, it's not technical. They claim the network crashed, when all that happened was the custom software system running things crashed. As far as the enduser is concerned, it's not working, right?
Oh, and i dont appreciate being called a loser no matter how you spell it.
Then don't act like a luser and start engaging your brain.
The fatal flaw in your argument is that you didn't use a enduser help desk call parser to read the description of the issue. This wasn't written up in a technical journal, it was written up in a government management policy journal.
Again, stop claiming "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.
blatant MS worship here on /.
You confuse pointing out the flaws in ABMers arguments with MS worship.
Back to Activewin with you scumbag zealot.
I must admit I get more informative news at ActiveWin.
But no, my goal here is to stamp out the FUD you and your ilk promote.
You completely miss the point of the lower court ruling. Microsoft licensed Java. They didn't adhere to the contract they signed with Sun. This was part of the remedy of that lawsuit. It was thrown out today.
No, I'm afraid you missed the point of the lawsuit.
Sun already sued Microsoft on contract infringement relating to Java, and settled out of court two years ago.
This is a new lawsuit as part of Sun's Strategic Litigation division. (look for the name Lee Patch and check out his title) Sun is now claiming that they were harmed by the earlier lawsuit they settled, after Microsoft announced they were going to pull all versions of Java out of Windows XP.
Well whatever. Anybody who has been in the industry for a while knows why Java failed no the desktop. It had nothing to do with Microsoft's JVM for Internet Explorer. If you wanted to run client-side Java you had to download Sun's JVM anyway. The Microsoft JVM just let you run Java applets in the browser.
But Java applets in the browser never took off, not because Microsoft made a JVM that allowed developers to hang themselves if they wanted to.(Apparently Sun believes developers aren't smart enough to realize interfacing with COM components means your stuff won't run on a Mac) No, Java didn't take off in the browser because it didn't work well. Instead Macromedia came out with what they called Flash which had the same concept of running applets, but was a higher level language that was easier to create content with.
The "chilling reminder" is that, is you do ANY business with Microsoft, prepared to be screwed, with no legal recourse.
Once again, the chilling reminder is that strategic litigation and whining doesn't improve your market position.
Just gotta love those Microsoft apologists.... Geesh.
No, you've gotta love people who don't understand the history of the internet and believe whatever sob story someone tells them.
Please, people, engage your brain!
Don't buy the horse puckey that an screwy application should be able to bring down the O/S. A well designed, multi-user operating system should have plenty of protection from that kind of stuff.
No, the horse puckey is the claim that the OS crashed when it was just the application layer.
XP/2000 is NOT multi-user.
Actually it is, always has been.
You can still only be logged in once at any given time!
That's not what multiuser means. Under NT multiple applications run under multiple user contexts. Some of those user contexts are interactive, some of those are not.
Again, this is the problem. People who have little understanding of computing systems making conclusions based on enduser statements.
Obviously you are also one of these lusers who claims "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.
I am, however, a realist: The OS can crash on a desktop - that is understandable. BUT the OS should not fucking crash on a Naval vessel! Period!
Your not a realist, you're a moron who clearly doesn't understand computer system design or troubleshooting.
The description of the problem was stated as a Zero entered into a database field. Divide-By-Zero errors do not cause Operating Systems to crash, however if not handled as an exception they will cause an Application to crash.
A ship automation system is obviously going to continue to read parameters out of the database and act upon them, such that if it does crash and is restarted it will crash again due to the error resulting from the bad data.
I mean this was blatantly obvious back in 1998 when this article came out. It's blatantly obvious today. Anybody who has spent any amount of time troubleshooting applications will understand exactly the circumstances that likely resulted.
How is that Red(mond) Kool-Aid?
You should be asking yourself for beliving this nonsensical trash.
If an application crashes and brings down your whole damn network, then the problem is not with the application it is with the OS.
Uh huh.
You're obviously one of these lusers who claim "The Internet is Down" when your modem doesn't work.
Repeat after me... "The OS did not crash... The custom application did"
Since the HP and Dell announcements, this is pretty much a moot point anyway.
It's always been a moot point. Sun has always had the capability to license Java through OEMs to include on their machines. Sun simply choose not to pursue this path.
The real problem of all this is that Microsoft has walked away from the whole "let's release an incompatible version of Java", with only a "don't do that" slap on the wrist.
I'm sorry, but that court case was resolved a couple of years ago in a settlement. At the time Sun declared victory, so did Microsoft.
But releasing a "incompatible" version of Java was never a crime, it was a contract infringement. Microsoft had their contract revoked and paid a penalty.
The monopoly remains intact, and unpunished.
Microsoft has a monopoly on Java? How do you figure?
This should be a chilling reminder to anyone that does ANYTHING with Microsoft. If they're gonna screw you, don't expect them to be punished for it, no matter what happens.
This should be a chilling reminder to anybody who forms a Strategic Litigation business unit thinking they can profit by going after Microsoft in court.
I'm referring to all the neat things you can do in something like KDE, that actually let you work better, not just have a prettier desktop.
Well don't keep them all to yourself. Tell us about these wonderful innovations?
Animated backgrounds? Themes? Dancing happy smiley faces?
Linux is to the desktop what rice boys are to race cars.
You're painfully naive if you believe this tactic was "devised by the right-wing" for Clinton.
Your painfully naive if you believe the right-wing didn't take this to an extreme for Clinton.
It's nothing new to either side.
Oh it's been around a long time. People still believe FDR knew the Japanese were going to attack at Pearl Harbor and did nothing because he wanted us into the war.
But nobody made it into an actual business venture until the GOP did so in 1993.
LOL! I can't believe Linux zealots still have this in their favorites list.
"The source of the problem on the Yorktown was that bad data was fed into an application running on one of the 16 computers on the LAN."
The issue was quite clearly with a custom application written by the vendor.
The only people claiming this was the fault of NT are the clueless Unix wannabes who were upset that they lost a contract. I can't believe anybody is still fucking stupid enough to believe these claims when they've long since been discredited.
If you are concerned with job creation, Microsoft is the wrong company to give money to.
As I sit here, developing a program for our company using VS.NET and linked to a backend SQL Server database, I would have to disagree.
First of all, Microsoft needs much fewer employees than other industries to generate each $1m in revenue.
In other words, as a customer I get far more software value for my $1m given to Microsoft than I would get giving it to any other company. That presents me with greater opportunities to customize the software for my specific business needs.
In addition, since these are probably sales of existing software, there will be almost no job creation from those sales at all.
Where do you think the money goes? A black hole.
Let's say every MS employee now gets a $30k bonus. Each one goes out and buys a new car... now you have job creation at car dealerships and manufacturing plants.
Microsoft has a lot of its jobs overseas, so much of Microsoft's already measly job creation doesn't even take place in the US.
That's ok, the US military has a lot of its jobs overseas as well.
Slashbot's "News for Nerds. Stuff that matters" is right up there with FoxNews "Fair and Balanced" in terms of irony.
I'm surprised to see the "thousands and thousands" version of the story, intended to swing public opinion against the Iraq war, still being referenced.
LOL! I love it when the tactics devised by the right-wing fall back against them.
People are still claiming a lot of things about President Clinton too, that were long proven to be false.
The other thing to keep in mind is that web servers are no longer about serving up static pages.
Any web server comparison is going to have a database and some dynamic page generation.
On our Windows server we're not going to be using CGI or old ASP.
Better braking on a car is a good example of this. Yeah, you may never need it, but that doesn't mean it isn't a good thing to have.
Except we're not talking about better braking. We're talking about a spoiler on the trunk, chrome trim around the doors and blue led lights under the rocker panels. i.e. non-useful decoration.
I would say it's much more likely that you just got used to the status quo, rather than decided "being able to make the computer do more things == bad".
No, I simply realized that having eyes follow my mouse around the screen wasn't really all that useful.
You might get used to driving a Geo Metro eventually, after owning a Corvette, but that doesn't make them equally good.
I'll keep my BMW. Thanks anyway!
Configuration is generally easier (arguably not a simple task) in a Unix or Linux environment and more difficult in Windows.
Not sure how... if you want this repeatable, just script it.
You can install Perl on Windows though and that really helps.
Why bother? You already have the full functionality of WSH and it's far easier to work with than PERL.
Development (definately not a simple task) is far easier on Linux then anything else besides Unix,
Ok, I thought this post was serious now I'm coming to realize it's a troll.
Oh wait, I didn't mispell enough there to qualify for my fake zealot tags...
Ah ha! I knew it. You did well there grasshopper. Stick around slashbot a while and you'll master the Linux trolling skills.
Webserver, I can just tell you, Linux will walk away with
You seriously think Linux is better as a web server than Windows?
You willing to put some money down on that one?
I have more experience with Win9x than any other OS, but I criticise
it more than any other OS except pre-X MacOS.
That's because Win9x is worth criticizing. Now you understand when we're going to compare web servers it will be running on Windows server, not Win95, right?
Microsoft pays some "Research"
group to prove NT is better, and then the Linux blogs post stories
showing that Linux is better, written by Linux geeks. I don't
trust either side of that.
Well that's a start in the right direction.
Unfortunately you seem to believe that web server claim.
Under Linux, he has control of his desktop, and that is an advantage.
Only if you care about such things.
My point was that most Windows/Mac users are perfectly content to leave the desktop with the default color scheme because we just want to run apps.
I used to think all of the options I found in X11 windows managers were cool too, but then I grew out of it.