Find the answer to your Linux question:
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 11 to 20 of 28
Enjoy an ad free experience by logging in. Not a member yet? Register.
  1. #11
    Just Joined! Randicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    China
    Posts
    74

    Quote Originally Posted by SL6-A1000 View Post
    I know i said it was the best money can buy but i am only referring to the 2010 edition which i believe is a big improvement compared to the last one. However on that same token, being the best for your buck doesn't imply its perfect or without issues, Because that simply isn't true.
    Its simply a statement that if i was to buy an Office Suite it would be MS Office over the others out there (if any others exist apart from the open-source ones?).
    I missed something when I posted. We can both be correct. MS Office can be both garbage and the best money can buy. Since the good programmes are free.

    As for,
    "There is none of this waiting for a security patch from the company."
    Imagine if Microsoft was the only OS. They would probably charge a fee for the patch.

  2. #12
    Linux Newbie SL6-A1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by Randicus View Post
    I missed something when I posted. We can both be correct. MS Office can be both garbage and the best money can buy. Since the good programmes are free.
    Yeah i know. Just wasn't sure if people would read that so i thought i would make it clear

    It rather an ironic statement. Yeah you can't beat open-source. Heaven forbid though if you mixed closed-source and open-source that's like mixing oil and water, they just don't go, it would spoil the flavor :P. Which is why you keep MS Office on MS Windows and Libreoffice on UNIX/ UNIX-like OS's. :P

    Quote Originally Posted by Randicus View Post
    Imagine if Microsoft was the only OS. They would probably charge a fee for the patch.
    No no, that would require a new release or at minimum an upgrade disc and fee of $150...!
    Or if its Apple it would require you to bend over and kiss there ass and a surcharge of $300 (for what they see as a pleasurable experience); or perhaps an entirely new computer, as they believe yours was running a non-apple program which is forbidden

  3. #13
    Quote Originally Posted by SL6-A1000 View Post
    caravel

    Is that you hate them, hate them (like a personal hate)? or
    Hate because they have made very successful multi-billion dollar corporations? or
    Hate their ideal?
    The word "hate" was not actually used in my post.

    Quote Originally Posted by SL6-A1000 View Post
    I disagree with your last sentence. You gotta know how it works in order for it to make money (whatever area it is). So in that respect they do deserve some credit.
    You need to know enough, most importantly you need a razor sharp business sense and you need to be ruthless. You do not need to be the "genius" or the best software engineer. Some people seem to be under the impression that Gates and Jobs sat down and coded Windows/OSX themselves from scratch... that's quite sad...

    Microsoft, Google and Apple got where they are today by buying out the little man, registering thousands of patents and being extremely ruthless, not by sheer "genius". If you cared to look into the origins of a lot of existing Apple and Microsoft software (including Windows and Mac OSX) you'd find a trail of different smaller companies and individuals, all who got the rough end of the sick and faded into obscurity. These people were used, trampled and discarded to get the likes of MS, Apple and Google where they are today.

  4. $spacer_open
    $spacer_close
  5. #14
    Linux Engineer hazel's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2004
    Location
    Harrow, UK
    Posts
    1,454
    I didn't actually intend this to be the usual "Linux is better" thread. Most of us think Linux is better. What intrigues me is the difference between the way most Windows users (certainly all the ones I know) regard Windows and the way we regard Linux. Windows is just "what you have on your computer". Nobody says "I use Windows because I love it!" whereas you often find people saying that about Linux or Mac/MacOS.

    However I do remember actively liking and enjoying Windows 95 after definitely disliking DOS and Windows 3.
    "I'm just a little old lady; don't try to dazzle me with jargon!"
    www.hrussman.entadsl.com

  6. #15
    Just Joined!
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Location
    Dallas Texas
    Posts
    81
    I think Windows is a fairly good OS. Like the other people have said, upgrading costs are over the top and some of the upgrades are not even very good. But so many programs run on Windows which makes Windows a very important OS. I have Windows 7 and Ubuntu and I find myself contstantly switching to Windows to do stuff that either I have not figured out yet in Ubuntu or Ubuntu can't do. I definitely don't hate it.. bu it is definitely not the best OS.

  7. #16
    Quote Originally Posted by hazel View Post
    What intrigues me is the difference between the way most Windows users (certainly all the ones I know) regard Windows and the way we regard Linux. Windows is just "what you have on your computer". Nobody says "I use Windows because I love it!" whereas you often find people saying that about Linux or Mac/MacOS.
    Perhaps its because the "I love it!" enthusiasts travel in different circles, and don't often visit the forums where they haven't any interest. I tend to exclude the "what you have on your computer" crowd; as mentioned in your initial post, they generally see the box as an appliance.

    When building my system, Overclockers was great for modding ideas; MajorGeeks is great for apps and support when helping friends trouble-shoot malware; TechSupportGuy and BleepingComputer are also good for support... they're mainly Windows enthusiast sites.

    You might enjoy some of the comments here:
    Newegg - Microsoft Windows 7 Home Premium 64-bit

    I don't have an axe to grind with the other OSs. I don't like some of it but they're only doing what every other large, international company does, and hating them won't change a thing. As for the people who use other OSs... if it works for them and does what they want, more power to 'em.

  8. #17
    Just Joined! Randicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    China
    Posts
    74
    Quote Originally Posted by caravel View Post
    Microsoft, Google and Apple got where they are today by buying out the little man ...
    The guy I feel sorry for is the person who created DOS and sold it to Gates and Allen's fledgling company called Microsoft for $10,000.

    @ hazel
    I didn't actually intend this to be the usual "Linux is better" thread. Most of us think Linux is better. What intrigues me is the difference between the way most Windows users (certainly all the ones I know) regard Windows and the way we regard Linux. Windows is just "what you have on your computer". Nobody says "I use Windows because I love it!" whereas you often find people saying that about Linux or Mac/MacOS.
    I believe you answer your question with, "Windows is just 'what you have on your computer'." For most people, Microsoft is the non-understood, and at times annoying, but necessary tool that makes the computer run. Just like most car owners do not understand how the engine works. It is the thing that makes the car move. Linux and BSD users have a better understanding of their operating systems, which leads to greater appreciation. Apple users? I am unfamiliar with their thinking.

  9. #18
    Linux Newbie SL6-A1000's Avatar
    Join Date
    May 2011
    Location
    Australia
    Posts
    121
    Quote Originally Posted by caravel View Post
    If you cared to look into the origins of a lot of existing Apple and Microsoft software (including Windows and Mac OSX) you'd find a trail of different smaller companies and individuals, all who got the rough end of the sick and faded into obscurity. These people were used, trampled and discarded to get the likes of MS, Apple and Google where they are today.
    That's harsh, and unnesecary! I wouldn't have made the comment if i didn't know about Microsoft and Apple, more so i wouldn't be running Linux if i didn't have some understanding of both those companies and how linux works. So the fact that you say if i cared is irrelevant because both my actions and comments clearly suggest otherwise.

    In any sense, my point was clear that it wasn't about there intelligence but simply giving them credit they deserve. By denying them credit your pretty much saying that the technology world would be a better place without them.

    If they were not the ruthless businessman than we probably would still have all those smaller companies or it wouldn't be known as Microsoft or Apple but the end result would still have been similar.

    Lets not forget that it not as black and white as you make it out to be. It isn't that Bill Gates or Steve Jobs went up to these companies and said "i own your intellectual property and this company you are all expendable now and will be discredited for your work". Those smaller companies allowed Bill Gates (Microsoft) or Steve Jobs (Apple) to buy them out through a merger agreement; which is why they are known and why it wasn't a tyrant forcing oppression. They have been given credit for their work; the companies wouldn't have merged otherwise if no agreement was reached.
    That by no means says that they haven't done wrong, its stating the truth and a known fact. Demonising a company doesn't help anyone!
    Last edited by SL6-A1000; 03-03-2012 at 03:43 AM.

  10. #19
    Linux Guru Lazydog's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jun 2004
    Location
    The Keystone State
    Posts
    2,798
    Quote Originally Posted by Randicus View Post
    The guy I feel sorry for is the person who created DOS and sold it to Gates and Allen's fledgling company called Microsoft for $10,000.
    That person/company was IBM. The same can be said about the first GUI that was invented by Xerox which MS bought from them as they didn't think anyone would use it.


    Quote Originally Posted by SL6-A1000 View Post
    It isn't that Bill Gates or Steve Jobs went up to these companies and said "i own your intellectual property and this company you are all expendable now and will be discredited for your work". Those smaller companies allowed Bill Gates (Microsoft) or Steve Jobs (Apple) to buy them out through a merger agreement; which is why they are known and why it wasn't a tyrant forcing oppression. They have been given credit for their work; the companies wouldn't have merged otherwise if no agreement was reached.
    How true this is. Smaller companies were/are looking to bought out as they have the chance to make a boat load of money up front rather then waiting the years it would take to make the same.

    Regards
    Robert

    Linux
    The adventure of a life time.

    Linux User #296285
    Get Counted

  11. #20
    Just Joined! Randicus's Avatar
    Join Date
    Sep 2011
    Location
    China
    Posts
    74
    Although some small companies may have been happy to have been bought out, Microsoft did force other companies out of business, by forcing them to accept being bought out.

    Personally, I think Bill Gates is a business genius. He knew how to use corporate muscle to eliminate competition. Although Microsoft did not bully and strong-arm all the competition, denying that Microsoft is a ruthless corporation is a very optimistic viewpoint. Even now, almost having a monopoly, a couple years ago they began a PR campaign attacking Linux. Being on almost every computer is not enough. I would not call them an altruistic and benevolent organisation.

    Not everything Microsoft has done was bad, but they are not saints either.

Posting Permissions

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