Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 10 of 12
I started computing with Windows 95 and then windows 98 they both were great at their times . There was some stability issues but they were extremely user friendly and ...
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #1
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jul 2010
    Posts
    47

    Why not give credit to other OSes they deserve


    I started computing with Windows 95 and then windows 98 they both were great at their times . There was some stability issues but they were extremely user friendly and easy to use . And had very good support of available software .

    Windows xp ...I started using windows xp in 2002 . It is beautiful (I wonder why people say it is ugly ) it has good compatibility with software and hardware .
    There are drawbacks : Like viruses , worms , malware and slow downs(may be this because xp is most used OS in the world) .
    But that can be avoided using security software and updating

    Microsoft has fixed many things with windows 7 which is more secure and stable and if you are gamer its your ultimate destination .

    I use Macbook with mac OS X . as it is unix like os it is very secure and stable . Its jaw dropingly beautiful and its great for professional use ( like video editing , photo , music composing editing etc)
    Its cons
    Pretty much no games for it
    Harder to find programs for it Hardware you have to get through Apple

    Linux:
    I love linux because the liberty it has . The idea of free and open source is so good that I use linux most of my normal computing time . Its stable and secure virus free . And most importantly I feel myself a part of wonderful community .
    It still have some hardware and software incompatibility but it is enough for a common user's daily computing needs .

    All is my opinion I am not presenting as fact .

    I like freeBSD and looking for upcomming OS "Haiku"

    I am really eager to know your response .

  2. #2
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Sep 2006
    Location
    Norfolk Island
    Posts
    31
    To answer your question, "why not give credit to other OSes they deserve(?)", the simple answer is: because this is a linux support forum. I guess for the same reason you don't find many references to Linux and it's various flavours on the Microsoft or Mac sites.

    To be honest I don't see what your point is with this question. Maybe you should explain why you want the information.

    cheers

  3. #3
    Linux Newbie glene77is's Avatar
    Join Date
    Dec 2009
    Location
    Memphis, TN
    Posts
    125
    I agree with Ni_Boy.
    This is a Linux forum !!!

    Also, I spent 30 years being paid for my MS skills.
    Now that I am old, I love tinkering with the Open Source systems,
    and wonder why I had not switched before.
    Linux is better than CP/M and DOS, and Unix (SCO), W-98, W-2000,
    and when my tinkering messes things up, I can just re-install.
    Just amazed at how beautifully the GNOME desktop routines splash the screen,
    and Compiz plays with the screen.
    Will be starting Java writing soon.

    I am old and having fun
    This is a Linux forum !!!

    glene77is

  4. #4
    Linux Guru reed9's Avatar
    Join Date
    Feb 2009
    Location
    Boston, MA
    Posts
    4,651
    I personally don't care how technically good whatever Microsoft or Apple does. I won't buy their products because I don't like how they behave as companies. So long as their are viable alternatives I will use those instead.

  5. #5
    Linux User
    Join Date
    Nov 2008
    Location
    Tokyo, Japan
    Posts
    260
    To your question, what do you mean by "credit" they deserve? What more does Windows or Apple's OS deserve that they don't already receive with their vast profit margins?

    They have millions of users who are locked in to their products, and couldn't change to a competitor without facing the loss of vast amounts of data stored in proprietary formats -- Apple and Microsoft are making operating systems not for praise, but to make money, usually by extorting it from their customers by threatening loss of data if they are disloyal.

    I think what you are saying is, all OS's have some advantages and drawbacks, but they all get the job done. So the job of the OS is to manage the hardware, and present an intuitive and easy-to-use interface to its users, whether it be a kid using his first cell phone, in which colorful bells and whistles and fast responsive games are important, a grandmother using it to check e-mail in which a plain, reliable, and easy to understand graphical interface is important, or an expert programmer in which case an array of programming languages and accompanying IDE is important.

    But Linux, because of it's openness, has been hacked and re-formulated into so many uses, that it can accomplish anything for any user base now. Seriously, I am sometimes astounded that anyone takes seriously anything other than Linux anymore. I see Linux absolutely everywhere, *except* for computers used by the vast computer illiterate populace, and with Android and Ubuntu, even that market is slowly but surely changing. Open OS's haven't hit the big time yet, but mostly because of vendor lock-in, and continued efforts of non-open companies to subvert wide-spread Linux use among it's potential customers.

    What I hate about non-open systems is that by forcing users to be loyal, they eliminate the need to compete with each other over their existing customer bases. If you use it, you are stuck with it until you decide you don't need it at all anymore. Fortunately, there is still competition amongst them to pull in new users, without that, we might all still be using computers OS's like Windows 95.

    But Linux changes the rules of the game, and forces companies to compete with better, more innovative software on top of an open platform that could damn-well be called a "standard".

    I wish Apple and Microsoft would compete with each-other in the way Gnome and KDE compete: you could switch back and forth between them on a whim if you'd like. I wish companies like Apple and Microsoft would realize this kind of competition is better for the market and hence better for their business, but if there if becoming open doesn't immediately increase the value of their stock, they won't be realizing anything anytime soon.

  6. #6
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Sep 2008
    Posts
    0
    Quote Originally Posted by ramin.honary View Post
    To your question, what do you mean by "credit" they deserve? What more does Windows or Apple's OS deserve that they don't already receive with their vast profit margins?

    They have millions of users who are locked in to their products, and couldn't change to a competitor without facing the loss of vast amounts of data stored in proprietary formats -- Apple and Microsoft are making operating systems not for praise, but to make money, usually by extorting it from their customers by threatening loss of data if they are disloyal.

    I think what you are saying is, all OS's have some advantages and drawbacks, but they all get the job done. So the job of the OS is to manage the hardware, and present an intuitive and easy-to-use interface to its users, whether it be a kid using his first cell phone, in which colorful bells and whistles and fast responsive games are important, a grandmother using it to check e-mail in which a plain, reliable, and easy to understand graphical interface is important, or an expert programmer in which case an array of programming languages and accompanying IDE is important.

    But Linux, because of it's openness, has been hacked and re-formulated into so many uses, that it can accomplish anything for any user base now. Seriously, I am sometimes astounded that anyone takes seriously anything other than Linux anymore. I see Linux absolutely everywhere, *except* for computers used by the vast computer illiterate populace, and with Android and Ubuntu, even that market is slowly but surely changing. Open OS's haven't hit the big time yet, but mostly because of vendor lock-in, and continued efforts of non-open companies to subvert wide-spread Linux use among it's potential customers.

    What I hate about non-open systems is that by forcing users to be loyal, they eliminate the need to compete with each other over their existing customer bases. If you use it, you are stuck with it until you decide you don't need it at all anymore. Fortunately, there is still competition amongst them to pull in new users, without that, we might all still be using computers OS's like Windows 95.

    But Linux changes the rules of the game, and forces companies to compete with better, more innovative software on top of an open platform that could damn-well be called a "standard".

    I wish Apple and Microsoft would compete with each-other in the way Gnome and KDE compete: you could switch back and forth between them on a whim if you'd like. I wish companies like Apple and Microsoft would realize this kind of competition is better for the market and hence better for their business, but if there if becoming open doesn't immediately increase the value of their stock, they won't be realizing anything anytime soon.
    Having seen the question asked, which drew me to this forum, I can't really agree more with this particular post. It answers the question in the way I would hope to.

    Why give Windows or Mac any credit at all. It's largely because of Linux and Mac that Windows has advanced to where it is.

    Microsoft won't give Linux ANY credit whatsoever, in fact exactly to the contrary, so why should we give them any credit at all.

  7. #7
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Jul 2008
    Posts
    54
    When I was trying to get my Master's degree, I did a research paper on piracy. What I found was over 60 cases where Microsoft was accused of piracy and either lost in court or settled out of court. Given their reputation for litigation, it's safe to say that Micro$loth never settled just to avoid having to go to court or because fighting was too expensive.

    That's the credit Microsoft deserves. Any more questions?

  8. #8
    Just Joined! hunter_thom's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2010
    Posts
    89
    What credit are you wanting to give them? I don't understand your point.

    I do not appreciate Apple/MS primarily because I do not appreciate close-sourced software. However, MS makes an awful kernel which appears to have been written by amatuer kernel creators. I cannot give them credit for a poorly-written kernel.

  9. #9
    Just Joined! PrinceSharma's Avatar
    Join Date
    Aug 2009
    Location
    /Universe/Earth/India
    Posts
    81
    There is a certain ambiguity in your words, at least to me, asifnaz.

    What kinda credit for MS or Apple you're expecting when they already made biliions (*n) making their source hidden.
    No doubt, they had made a general person's life easier by their no brainer, point n click OS's, but then that's paid.

    You must've already got your answer by now through above posts, but I'm stil wandering if I remember your earlier posts where you stated you're using an old P3 with Lubuntu and pissed of of xp and M$ n blah.
    Why suddenly a MAC OS and love for M$ (?) lemme wonder

  10. #10
    Penguin of trust elija's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2004
    Location
    Either at home or at work or down the pub
    Posts
    3,599
    Well, I give MS full credit for calling for calling me a thief every time I boot their operating system; and I challenge anyone to describe DRM and Genuine Advantage more delicately.
    "I used to be with it, then they changed what it was.
    Now what was it isn't it, and what is it is weird and scary to me.
    It'll happen to you too."

    Grandpa Simpson



    The Fifth Continent

Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast

Posting Permissions

  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •