Microsoft concentrates on the features that matter for the consumer - Like when they quickly integrated USB/USB2 support into Windows. No regular computer using person gives a rat's ass how many bits does the OS or programs have... But they really like to copy their camera pictures on the computer with as less trouble as possible.
If you were to duplicate a car, it would be illegal. That's because the company that first produced the car has a lot of R&D put into the car. They hold IP for it. Even if you duplicate the car with no cost to anyone, you would still be duplicating their IP.
It's basically the same as copying a CD. It's still illegal, but not theft.
Tube amps are not used for nostalgic reasons. They DO sound better as guitar amplifiers, than solid state ones, for example. No, it's not just my opinion:) Most players and just about every major guitar amplifier maker thinks the same way.
Yes, tube technology is mostly obsolete, in radio transmission for example. But it really excels still in some applications...
Good for you. I think valve amplifiers are far from obsolete, I have built two myself last year. Saying tubes are obsolete is like saying oil painting is obsolete, because you can use "better" materials for painting.
Uhh... you can also press the "Reboot later" button in XP/Vista?:)...unless you have set up your Windows so that critical updates require reboot, in which case it really does forces reboot.
I am talking about the fact that Firefox and Thunderbird still update all the add-ons and themes by itself. How often is a new kernel available, or a new version of an already packaged kernel? Seems pretty often to me. Also many core library updates (gcc, libstdc++ come to mind) require a reboot on Linux (well, then really don't but Ubuntu still says you should).
Mind you, I'm not even really complaining about the reboots... Practically no-one cares if he/she has to rebood twice a month because of system upgrades. It's just that people use the SAME reasons "why Windows sucked 10 years ago" still against it. IMHO, OS people need to change their minds from mud slinging to actually improving the Linux OS desktop.
Well, the biggest obstacle from installing another Linux on my desktop PCs is the attitude. Your post is a good example. Let me iterate:
Ubuntu came also with all sorts of crap programs I did not give a "flying fig". So did Vista. You can remove start menu programs in Ubuntu. So you can in Vista.
Ubuntu updater often wants you to reboot the PC. So does Windows Update with Vista but quite rarely. You can set both to NOT to fetch updates. And actually, the number of updates is FAR greater with Ubuntu per month. How is this that much different from having many updating services? And you can usually turn them off anyway. And you don't even have to use those programs. If you don't like programs like Adobe Acrobat, get the free Ghostview.
Many of the Open Source flagship products ALSO include an additional updater service, like Firefox.
In short, the biggest problem is the OS attitude. The same things that "suck" in Windows are seen as great in Linux desktop distributions. If Linux had the same number and diversity in programs that Windows enjoys, I bet Linux desktops would be also "inefficient and frustrating" with their update services.
Yes, but with closed source there are far less people making those security bugs in the first place... The key point is indeed sound engineering as you put it. Too bad it is the second thing that OS projects usually lack, with the first one being sound documentation.
Yes, but you can always remove your data from Facebook, for example... and put it somewhere else. Can you fill your airbag with gravel and put it back?
For me it would not change a thing if life on other planets was found. I already know it's there.
And why would it "change the course of the human race"? Sure we might learn something from them faster, but I bet we would have pick it up eventually by ourselves.
How about WordPad then? And what keeps you from getting a free light weight text editor for Windows? And for the record, what is the memory footprint of KWrite, if there are no KDE/Qt application loaded already, like when using Ubuntu?
Commercial software is IN INSELF a category that free software can not challenge. Because it's pretty hard to sell something and give it away for free at the same time...
So what is exactly stopping you from installing many of all those quality OS application on the Windows Vista:) They are free, after all.
And that "free as in beer" Ubuntu did cost a lot of people a LOT of time and effort. At least Vista and OS/X developers got paid for their work.
So we should all live in small huts in a forest in order to be secure? Everything would be free and owned by everyone?
No my friend, the real freedom is when no one can bother you. It's a state of mind.
So the cockroach is stung once for paralyzation and then again for making it walk again against it's will (Well, if a cockroach has a will...)
At what point does the cockroach turn into a zombie? Seems to me it's just involuntarily walking towards it's doom.
... that people here are educated enough to cry out when someone makes a claim that downloading stuff is stealing (it's really a copyright infringement), but when someone uses some a part of code without promise, it's suddenly stealing?
You really can't see the difference between Google giving up IP address of someone abusing their networks and you murdering someone? Wow. Dexter would be proud.
The original poster compared Windows to Linux. Windows comes with a working desktop GUI for a PC/handheld/whatever. There fore, if you want to compare "Windows to Linux", you should have a GNU/Linux distro with very similar capabilities at hand, and not just the compiled modular kernel.
It would actually be nice to read some objective reviews about Windows CE vs. some small GNU/Linux distro with a GUI. Not that size matters for me but just to get some idea...
And I did give the DSL as an example... and mentioned it being "full blown"... yes? It's a perfectly working desktop environment.
Besides, why are you first saying:
"Furthermore the kernel is designed to be modular so that you don't need to compile in support for everything from all and sundry different file systems to PCI plug and play support if you're just going to install the thing in a router or wristwatch."
and then
"However, it would seem that your argument is that Linux starts at a much higher level and then gets stripped down to fit into embedded environments"
Isn't that then YOUR argument and not mine? Not that it really matters as I agree with that.
If you want fair comparison, you should be cramming a full blown GNU/Linux into that 19Mhz or CPU and 8M of RAM, not just the Linux kernel. Maybe Damn Small Linux or similar.
Slashdot Mirror
Microsoft concentrates on the features that matter for the consumer - Like when they quickly integrated USB/USB2 support into Windows. No regular computer using person gives a rat's ass how many bits does the OS or programs have... But they really like to copy their camera pictures on the computer with as less trouble as possible.
No, but about 99% of P2P is illegal file sharing.
If you were to duplicate a car, it would be illegal. That's because the company that first produced the car has a lot of R&D put into the car. They hold IP for it. Even if you duplicate the car with no cost to anyone, you would still be duplicating their IP. It's basically the same as copying a CD. It's still illegal, but not theft.
Tube amps are not used for nostalgic reasons. They DO sound better as guitar amplifiers, than solid state ones, for example. No, it's not just my opinion :) Most players and just about every major guitar amplifier maker thinks the same way.
Yes, tube technology is mostly obsolete, in radio transmission for example. But it really excels still in some applications...
Good for you. I think valve amplifiers are far from obsolete, I have built two myself last year. Saying tubes are obsolete is like saying oil painting is obsolete, because you can use "better" materials for painting.
Uhh... you can also press the "Reboot later" button in XP/Vista? :) ...unless you have set up your Windows so that critical updates require reboot, in which case it really does forces reboot.
I am talking about the fact that Firefox and Thunderbird still update all the add-ons and themes by itself. How often is a new kernel available, or a new version of an already packaged kernel? Seems pretty often to me. Also many core library updates (gcc, libstdc++ come to mind) require a reboot on Linux (well, then really don't but Ubuntu still says you should).
Mind you, I'm not even really complaining about the reboots... Practically no-one cares if he/she has to rebood twice a month because of system upgrades. It's just that people use the SAME reasons "why Windows sucked 10 years ago" still against it. IMHO, OS people need to change their minds from mud slinging to actually improving the Linux OS desktop.
Well, the biggest obstacle from installing another Linux on my desktop PCs is the attitude. Your post is a good example. Let me iterate: Ubuntu came also with all sorts of crap programs I did not give a "flying fig". So did Vista. You can remove start menu programs in Ubuntu. So you can in Vista. Ubuntu updater often wants you to reboot the PC. So does Windows Update with Vista but quite rarely. You can set both to NOT to fetch updates. And actually, the number of updates is FAR greater with Ubuntu per month. How is this that much different from having many updating services? And you can usually turn them off anyway. And you don't even have to use those programs. If you don't like programs like Adobe Acrobat, get the free Ghostview. Many of the Open Source flagship products ALSO include an additional updater service, like Firefox. In short, the biggest problem is the OS attitude. The same things that "suck" in Windows are seen as great in Linux desktop distributions. If Linux had the same number and diversity in programs that Windows enjoys, I bet Linux desktops would be also "inefficient and frustrating" with their update services.
Windows 3.1 was $130... in 1990. This is 2008. The adjusted price for 2007 would be pretty close to $300 USD.
Yes, but with closed source there are far less people making those security bugs in the first place... The key point is indeed sound engineering as you put it. Too bad it is the second thing that OS projects usually lack, with the first one being sound documentation.
Why are you calling this a scam? Why should any of the organizations actually own a domain like 'milk' or 'meat'?
Yes, but you can always remove your data from Facebook, for example... and put it somewhere else. Can you fill your airbag with gravel and put it back?
For me it would not change a thing if life on other planets was found. I already know it's there. And why would it "change the course of the human race"? Sure we might learn something from them faster, but I bet we would have pick it up eventually by ourselves.
How about WordPad then? And what keeps you from getting a free light weight text editor for Windows? And for the record, what is the memory footprint of KWrite, if there are no KDE/Qt application loaded already, like when using Ubuntu?
There's a difference in just seeking thrills for your personal life, and contributing to a greater good... It's more than just "because it's there".
So why not put that $200 in actual EDUCATION for these people? It really does not pay to have Internet access if you can not read.
Commercial software is IN INSELF a category that free software can not challenge. Because it's pretty hard to sell something and give it away for free at the same time...
So what is exactly stopping you from installing many of all those quality OS application on the Windows Vista :) They are free, after all.
And that "free as in beer" Ubuntu did cost a lot of people a LOT of time and effort. At least Vista and OS/X developers got paid for their work.
So we should all live in small huts in a forest in order to be secure? Everything would be free and owned by everyone? No my friend, the real freedom is when no one can bother you. It's a state of mind.
So the cockroach is stung once for paralyzation and then again for making it walk again against it's will (Well, if a cockroach has a will...)
At what point does the cockroach turn into a zombie? Seems to me it's just involuntarily walking towards it's doom.
4) Do nothing and try to let it blow over.
You really can't see the difference between Google giving up IP address of someone abusing their networks and you murdering someone? Wow. Dexter would be proud.
The original poster compared Windows to Linux. Windows comes with a working desktop GUI for a PC/handheld/whatever. There fore, if you want to compare "Windows to Linux", you should have a GNU/Linux distro with very similar capabilities at hand, and not just the compiled modular kernel. It would actually be nice to read some objective reviews about Windows CE vs. some small GNU/Linux distro with a GUI. Not that size matters for me but just to get some idea... And I did give the DSL as an example... and mentioned it being "full blown"... yes? It's a perfectly working desktop environment. Besides, why are you first saying: "Furthermore the kernel is designed to be modular so that you don't need to compile in support for everything from all and sundry different file systems to PCI plug and play support if you're just going to install the thing in a router or wristwatch." and then "However, it would seem that your argument is that Linux starts at a much higher level and then gets stripped down to fit into embedded environments" Isn't that then YOUR argument and not mine? Not that it really matters as I agree with that.
If you want fair comparison, you should be cramming a full blown GNU/Linux into that 19Mhz or CPU and 8M of RAM, not just the Linux kernel. Maybe Damn Small Linux or similar.