Go For Windows 7 or Windows 8.1?
- Thread starter ZeeOSix
- Start date
- Status
So you think just a couple of programmers could develop Linux replacements for all of the software used in industry and the business world and develop drivers for all of the hardware that is used? Do you know how much different software is used just by a computer graphics company? Try Adobe Photoshop, Illustrator, Dreamweaver, InDesign, etc. It took many, many programmers working over many years to develop and improve all of that software.
I don't think two guys over a weekend are going to do it.
Microsoft and apple have a lot of programmers. I don't think the Linux programmers are that superior that they can replace all of those people.
Now at work we did have a very bright woman in IT who would listen to what we needed and then write software programs, GUI and all, that would work very well, just like any Windows program. She wrote that software by herself. But writing one simple program is a lot different than writing a replacement for Photoshop.
And if the Linux programmers are so much superior to the programmers at Microsoft and Apple, they need to get busy and write that software and the drivers for the hardware. Then Linux operating systems could replace Windows and Mac OS X.
I don't think two guys over a weekend are going to do it.
Microsoft and apple have a lot of programmers. I don't think the Linux programmers are that superior that they can replace all of those people.
Now at work we did have a very bright woman in IT who would listen to what we needed and then write software programs, GUI and all, that would work very well, just like any Windows program. She wrote that software by herself. But writing one simple program is a lot different than writing a replacement for Photoshop.
And if the Linux programmers are so much superior to the programmers at Microsoft and Apple, they need to get busy and write that software and the drivers for the hardware. Then Linux operating systems could replace Windows and Mac OS X.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
Windows already meets their needs. It would take years and billions of dollars to make Linux operating systems workable in the workplace-in the business world.
That's really iffy. There are an awful lot of people in the business world using computers who do nothing more than create documents and send emails. Windows is necessary for this?
Windows already meets their needs. It would take years and billions of dollars to make Linux operating systems workable in the workplace-in the business world.
That's really iffy. There are an awful lot of people in the business world using computers who do nothing more than create documents and send emails. Windows is necessary for this?
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2010
- Messages
- 9,807
Originally Posted By: hatt
I wonder what would happen if a large company would set aside 10% of the money they send MS each year to pay a couple geeks to customize open source software to meet their needs.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that 10% would pay for what you suggest (it would in no way even be close, but we will assume that it will). Would two guys be able to support that same organization after the fact? Short answer, no way! Even in a business that has
What about compatibility with that businesses clients? Current statistics show that MS owns the market so how would that business easily interact with an MS software using client? Like someone else stated there is also a fundamental lack of applications for Linux and although a small business may be able to "make do", depending on the nature of the business in a large enterprise, I do not believe Linux/Open Source would be able to easily displace MS. Sure there are some examples of Linux/Open Source working well, but those are the exceptions and not the rule. There may come a time when it is true (and I do look forward to it), but that is not reality today. There is a paradigm shift between personal use and enterprise use and that must be acknowledged in this instance too.
I wonder what would happen if a large company would set aside 10% of the money they send MS each year to pay a couple geeks to customize open source software to meet their needs.
For the sake of argument, let us assume that 10% would pay for what you suggest (it would in no way even be close, but we will assume that it will). Would two guys be able to support that same organization after the fact? Short answer, no way! Even in a business that has
What about compatibility with that businesses clients? Current statistics show that MS owns the market so how would that business easily interact with an MS software using client? Like someone else stated there is also a fundamental lack of applications for Linux and although a small business may be able to "make do", depending on the nature of the business in a large enterprise, I do not believe Linux/Open Source would be able to easily displace MS. Sure there are some examples of Linux/Open Source working well, but those are the exceptions and not the rule. There may come a time when it is true (and I do look forward to it), but that is not reality today. There is a paradigm shift between personal use and enterprise use and that must be acknowledged in this instance too.
Windows is used to operate an incredible amount of software and hardware. Some of that software and hardware would be very difficult to replace, at least rapidly. How long would it take and how many programmers would it take just to write a high quality Linux operating system replacement for Photoshop? That is just one very complex program.
And all of the people who are creating documents typically are using Microsoft Office, although WordPerfect is often used in law offices and some government offices (they have to be able to redact and concerns about security and so forth). Microsoft Office is about 90% of the market and that helps compatibility.
And you have to ask yourself what would be the profit in rewriting all of that incredible amount of software and developing drivers for all of that hardware merely so that Linux operating systems could replace Windows. Spend all of that money and for why?
And all of the people who are creating documents typically are using Microsoft Office, although WordPerfect is often used in law offices and some government offices (they have to be able to redact and concerns about security and so forth). Microsoft Office is about 90% of the market and that helps compatibility.
And you have to ask yourself what would be the profit in rewriting all of that incredible amount of software and developing drivers for all of that hardware merely so that Linux operating systems could replace Windows. Spend all of that money and for why?
Originally Posted By: Mystic
How long would it take and how many programmers would it take just to write a high quality Linux operating system replacement for Photoshop? That is just one very complex program.
You tell me. The open source guys created GIMP. Hard to believe it couldn't be improved further to compete with photoshop with some corporate investment. Money goes a lot father when it isn't being used to fund yachts and Lears.
How long would it take and how many programmers would it take just to write a high quality Linux operating system replacement for Photoshop? That is just one very complex program.
You tell me. The open source guys created GIMP. Hard to believe it couldn't be improved further to compete with photoshop with some corporate investment. Money goes a lot father when it isn't being used to fund yachts and Lears.
I tried GIMP. It was a waste of my time. Compared to Photoshop it was laughable.
There are a lot of very wealthy people at Microsoft and Apple. There are some people claiming that Apple has some 100 billion dollars hidden away in foreign banks.
But if the Linux people could replace the Windows and Apple Computer people don't worry-they would be ones with yachts.
Steve Jobs and one other guy started Apple in a garage. The Linux guys could do the same I suppose. And if they had the success that Steve Jobs had they would probably have mansions, yachts, expensive automobiles and all the rest.
It sort of makes me wonder why the Linux guys have NOT had the success of somebody like Steve Jobs. Is it because of some fundamental problems with Linux O/Ss? People were able to get Windows to work. And people were able to get the original Apple O/Ss to work and later Mac OS X. Maybe Linux is flawed by design.
There are a lot of very wealthy people at Microsoft and Apple. There are some people claiming that Apple has some 100 billion dollars hidden away in foreign banks.
But if the Linux people could replace the Windows and Apple Computer people don't worry-they would be ones with yachts.
Steve Jobs and one other guy started Apple in a garage. The Linux guys could do the same I suppose. And if they had the success that Steve Jobs had they would probably have mansions, yachts, expensive automobiles and all the rest.
It sort of makes me wonder why the Linux guys have NOT had the success of somebody like Steve Jobs. Is it because of some fundamental problems with Linux O/Ss? People were able to get Windows to work. And people were able to get the original Apple O/Ss to work and later Mac OS X. Maybe Linux is flawed by design.
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
....
You expected for-profit, closed-source software vendors to contribute to the ecosystem of a free (as in freedom) OS?! That's some time spent you ain't getting back. Freedom is very off-putting to these people. ....
Well sure, why not? If it's all that, why wouldn't they take the opportunity to use it to further exploit the hapless proletariat?
The fact that there was once a native Word Perfect for Linux, offered by Corel, but now there is not, speaks volumes. If it doesn't offer anything that the Windows or Mac apps does not already offer, but one has to go through all the hassles of dealing with Linux to use it, why even bother? Which, undoubtedly, is why nobody did, and Word perfect for Linux went away.
Not sure who offered up the idea of hiring a couple of "geeks", but all that does is enslave one to a different master. Been there, done that, back in the heady early days when I had custom software written to exploit the tremendous multi tasking power of the 80286 as implemented in the Tandy Model 12 (using Xenix, iirc). Once that software is in your business, you're stuck with them, and if you're going to be a slave, one is far better off being a slave to a mega corporation that can't just decide to up and move out of their parents basement and change their phone number, never to be heard from again.
The irony is that the "freedom" that Linux fans cherish, is what makes it mostly useless to the rest of the world that does more than surf the web, write letters, and check their e mail.
....
You expected for-profit, closed-source software vendors to contribute to the ecosystem of a free (as in freedom) OS?! That's some time spent you ain't getting back. Freedom is very off-putting to these people. ....
Well sure, why not? If it's all that, why wouldn't they take the opportunity to use it to further exploit the hapless proletariat?
The fact that there was once a native Word Perfect for Linux, offered by Corel, but now there is not, speaks volumes. If it doesn't offer anything that the Windows or Mac apps does not already offer, but one has to go through all the hassles of dealing with Linux to use it, why even bother? Which, undoubtedly, is why nobody did, and Word perfect for Linux went away.
Not sure who offered up the idea of hiring a couple of "geeks", but all that does is enslave one to a different master. Been there, done that, back in the heady early days when I had custom software written to exploit the tremendous multi tasking power of the 80286 as implemented in the Tandy Model 12 (using Xenix, iirc). Once that software is in your business, you're stuck with them, and if you're going to be a slave, one is far better off being a slave to a mega corporation that can't just decide to up and move out of their parents basement and change their phone number, never to be heard from again.
The irony is that the "freedom" that Linux fans cherish, is what makes it mostly useless to the rest of the world that does more than surf the web, write letters, and check their e mail.
Originally Posted By: Garak
Originally Posted By: Win
I thought banks and ATM's were OS/2's last stand? or has it finally gone off into history?
There may certainly be some that way. However, I've had the pleasure of being allowed to witness a few ATMs booting up over the last couple years, and at least at that institution, the ATM ran on a Linux kernel. Interestingly, all the retail lottery terminals in this province run Linux, too.
I have a new ATM placed in my store, but I've not had the opportunity to see it boot. It would not surprise me if it's running a custom version of Linux, or even Android. It does all its comms over a cellular connection.
I don't know what our lottery terminals run.
The new Windows, with its emphasis on touch screen interfaces, would probably work very well in these dedicated applications.
Originally Posted By: Win
I thought banks and ATM's were OS/2's last stand? or has it finally gone off into history?
There may certainly be some that way. However, I've had the pleasure of being allowed to witness a few ATMs booting up over the last couple years, and at least at that institution, the ATM ran on a Linux kernel. Interestingly, all the retail lottery terminals in this province run Linux, too.
I have a new ATM placed in my store, but I've not had the opportunity to see it boot. It would not surprise me if it's running a custom version of Linux, or even Android. It does all its comms over a cellular connection.
I don't know what our lottery terminals run.
The new Windows, with its emphasis on touch screen interfaces, would probably work very well in these dedicated applications.
Speaking of retail IT, I saw an interesting post in a Macforums thread about how diverse Walmart's IT is in terms of OSes. IBM 4690, SuSE Linux, Windows XP, Windows 2008, Windows CE, etc.
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1686941
http://forums.macrumors.com/showthread.php?t=1686941
Originally Posted By: Mystic
It sort of makes me wonder why the Linux guys have NOT had the success of somebody like Steve Jobs. Is it because of some fundamental problems with Linux O/Ss? People were able to get Windows to work. And people were able to get the original Apple O/Ss to work and later Mac OS X. Maybe Linux is flawed by design.
Ugh. Broken record time with Mystic again.
Who is Linux and what kind of success are "they" lacking? It is free and open-source. How do you expect "Linux" (whomever that is) to compete (let me guess - the competition is base don money) with other software. It is no-cost. People can choose to use it or not. "Freedom", we call it.
There is no corporate entity spending billions of dollars making deals with hardware vendors to pre-install their NO-COST OS. No cost, Mystic. No cost. It is free.
If it is flawed by design, then do not use it. Those of us who do use it and wish to let others know of it (Again - there is NO corporate entity save for Canonical, who are more interested in phone than desktops - with a vested interest in pushing this to people's desktops! It is up to us, the user community, to advocate and explain the concept of freedom in software.) You spend an awful lot of time saying an awful lot of divisive and acrimonious things about people GIVING their time and GIVING their expertise, asking nothing in return.
There is no advertising model inherent in this OS. People like me and the others on this forum and elsewhere in the world wish to share this enlightening concept of community-centred, free-as-in-freedom and free-as-in-no-cost ecosystem with people. If not us, no one does it. Do you find this offensive?
It sort of makes me wonder why the Linux guys have NOT had the success of somebody like Steve Jobs. Is it because of some fundamental problems with Linux O/Ss? People were able to get Windows to work. And people were able to get the original Apple O/Ss to work and later Mac OS X. Maybe Linux is flawed by design.
Ugh. Broken record time with Mystic again.
Who is Linux and what kind of success are "they" lacking? It is free and open-source. How do you expect "Linux" (whomever that is) to compete (let me guess - the competition is base don money) with other software. It is no-cost. People can choose to use it or not. "Freedom", we call it.
There is no corporate entity spending billions of dollars making deals with hardware vendors to pre-install their NO-COST OS. No cost, Mystic. No cost. It is free.
If it is flawed by design, then do not use it. Those of us who do use it and wish to let others know of it (Again - there is NO corporate entity save for Canonical, who are more interested in phone than desktops - with a vested interest in pushing this to people's desktops! It is up to us, the user community, to advocate and explain the concept of freedom in software.) You spend an awful lot of time saying an awful lot of divisive and acrimonious things about people GIVING their time and GIVING their expertise, asking nothing in return.
There is no advertising model inherent in this OS. People like me and the others on this forum and elsewhere in the world wish to share this enlightening concept of community-centred, free-as-in-freedom and free-as-in-no-cost ecosystem with people. If not us, no one does it. Do you find this offensive?
Originally Posted By: Win
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
....
You expected for-profit, closed-source software vendors to contribute to the ecosystem of a free (as in freedom) OS?! That's some time spent you ain't getting back. Freedom is very off-putting to these people. ....
Well sure, why not? If it's all that, why wouldn't they take the opportunity to use it to further exploit the hapless proletariat?
Exploit how? They didn't make money by producing this software so they abandoned it. This is confusing to you? All they care about is maximizing the return of their investments and the open-source desktop OS crowd is a stupid, stupid place to try that. All open-source software aims to do it serve the users of the software, not exploit them at all.
You guys keep talking about winning and losing and success and failure. With whom is Linux competing? It's free, so they'll certainly lose the revenue game, whoever "they" are. Some people simply cannot comprehend when a project exists to benefit people, asking nothing in return, instead of exploiting them. There is no competition; only cooperation, get it? If you do not want to take part, don't.
Open-source software simply exists. It is there for organizations and individuals to either use or not use. Why do you even care what others are doing? If it does not do what you want, don't use it! Who cares? You keep thinking that these software projects are separate from the users, like for-profit companies who view you as a cash cow, from which they aim to extract resources ($) When you use open-source software you ARE part of it, if even just as a user. Some people contribute back code, others designs and artwork, others translate documentation, others simply advocate, others provide hardware and bandwidth. We all work cooperatively to make OUR ecosystem work. There is no competition - Even the differing Linux distros share their code: Bug fixes and feature enhancement are made public for all others to integrate; and the large distros actively encourage others to make derivatives and re-distribute it. How do you measure success and failure now? By popularity on the desktop? GREAT - We lose! Apple and Microsoft WIN WIN WIN. Issue settled. What about Android? Now "we" win; but what do we win? Revenue? A parade? A trophy? What is the point of all this?
Originally Posted By: uc50ic4more
....
You expected for-profit, closed-source software vendors to contribute to the ecosystem of a free (as in freedom) OS?! That's some time spent you ain't getting back. Freedom is very off-putting to these people. ....
Well sure, why not? If it's all that, why wouldn't they take the opportunity to use it to further exploit the hapless proletariat?
Exploit how? They didn't make money by producing this software so they abandoned it. This is confusing to you? All they care about is maximizing the return of their investments and the open-source desktop OS crowd is a stupid, stupid place to try that. All open-source software aims to do it serve the users of the software, not exploit them at all.
You guys keep talking about winning and losing and success and failure. With whom is Linux competing? It's free, so they'll certainly lose the revenue game, whoever "they" are. Some people simply cannot comprehend when a project exists to benefit people, asking nothing in return, instead of exploiting them. There is no competition; only cooperation, get it? If you do not want to take part, don't.
Open-source software simply exists. It is there for organizations and individuals to either use or not use. Why do you even care what others are doing? If it does not do what you want, don't use it! Who cares? You keep thinking that these software projects are separate from the users, like for-profit companies who view you as a cash cow, from which they aim to extract resources ($) When you use open-source software you ARE part of it, if even just as a user. Some people contribute back code, others designs and artwork, others translate documentation, others simply advocate, others provide hardware and bandwidth. We all work cooperatively to make OUR ecosystem work. There is no competition - Even the differing Linux distros share their code: Bug fixes and feature enhancement are made public for all others to integrate; and the large distros actively encourage others to make derivatives and re-distribute it. How do you measure success and failure now? By popularity on the desktop? GREAT - We lose! Apple and Microsoft WIN WIN WIN. Issue settled. What about Android? Now "we" win; but what do we win? Revenue? A parade? A trophy? What is the point of all this?
I lived in a world (I am an older guy) where there were very few computers, and people did just fine. No computer technology and no computer company is my religion.
I like computers. I like technology. I like the internet. The internet is like having a huge library right in my house.
I like being able to do things on computers. Not just internet. Not just email. And you can keep Facebook and Twitter. I want to be able to work on the photographs I take with my cameras. I want to be able to print out some of my photos using a quality PHOTO printer. I want to be able to scan negatives and slides and photos. I want to be able to create videos using my photos with a sound track. I use whatever technology makes all of that possible. If all I was doing was going on the internet and email a Linux O/S computer would be good enough. Since no Linux O/S computer makes possible all of the things I want to do, I use a Windows computer.
Linux is both small time and big time. I am sure the people who develop Linux servers are charging plenty for the support. They are big-time. If the desktop Linux people want to continue to be small time that is fine with me. People can use whatever O/S they want to. I don't care.
But it does bother me when people continuously put down Windows, Microsoft, Bill Gates, etc., and encourage other people to switch to Linux. If a desktop Linux computer cannot meet my needs than it is not superior to Windows.
I am not in love with Microsoft. It is just a corporation. But I will say this about Microsoft-they have never treated me badly in any way in all the years I have had any dealings with them. Sometimes Microsoft people have gone out of their way to help me. They have always been professional and helpful. Bill Gates has donated an enormous amount of money to the poor in the world and people still like to hate him. What does he have to do to earn their respect? Microsoft acts like a professional company and that is what business people like. They like professional companies.
I have also used Apple computers for a long time. Apple to me sometimes acts like its customers are not even there (unless maybe a person is a billionaire-they might listen to you then). To me it seems like they are not too interested in photographers-at least I don't see them coming out with high quality new photo editing software. When photographers are ignored they move on.
Linux at the desktop level always seems like amateur hour. I don't have time for amateur hour. I have things to do. They can stay small time if they want to. Who really cares. They can continue to think that they are smarter than everybody else. Nobody cares.
Just don't tell me that Linux technology is superior to Windows technology if no Linux O/S can enable me to do what I do with Windows computers.
And don't fall back on how Windows has all of this malware and so forth. Today 70-90% of the malware on Windows computers is carried by technology like Java, Adobe PDF Reader, and Adobe Flash. And Java itself seems kind of amateur hour. I can remember when the 'smart people' said that Java was going to replace Windows technology. Now people are trying to get rid of Java. Java is just another failed technology that people are trying to unload. The entire internet would be better off without Java. And there are efforts underway to replace Flash.
When somebody actually does develop an operating system superior to Windows then Windows will gradually be replaced. I think Apple could have done that. But today they seem to be more interested in iPhones.
I like computers. I like technology. I like the internet. The internet is like having a huge library right in my house.
I like being able to do things on computers. Not just internet. Not just email. And you can keep Facebook and Twitter. I want to be able to work on the photographs I take with my cameras. I want to be able to print out some of my photos using a quality PHOTO printer. I want to be able to scan negatives and slides and photos. I want to be able to create videos using my photos with a sound track. I use whatever technology makes all of that possible. If all I was doing was going on the internet and email a Linux O/S computer would be good enough. Since no Linux O/S computer makes possible all of the things I want to do, I use a Windows computer.
Linux is both small time and big time. I am sure the people who develop Linux servers are charging plenty for the support. They are big-time. If the desktop Linux people want to continue to be small time that is fine with me. People can use whatever O/S they want to. I don't care.
But it does bother me when people continuously put down Windows, Microsoft, Bill Gates, etc., and encourage other people to switch to Linux. If a desktop Linux computer cannot meet my needs than it is not superior to Windows.
I am not in love with Microsoft. It is just a corporation. But I will say this about Microsoft-they have never treated me badly in any way in all the years I have had any dealings with them. Sometimes Microsoft people have gone out of their way to help me. They have always been professional and helpful. Bill Gates has donated an enormous amount of money to the poor in the world and people still like to hate him. What does he have to do to earn their respect? Microsoft acts like a professional company and that is what business people like. They like professional companies.
I have also used Apple computers for a long time. Apple to me sometimes acts like its customers are not even there (unless maybe a person is a billionaire-they might listen to you then). To me it seems like they are not too interested in photographers-at least I don't see them coming out with high quality new photo editing software. When photographers are ignored they move on.
Linux at the desktop level always seems like amateur hour. I don't have time for amateur hour. I have things to do. They can stay small time if they want to. Who really cares. They can continue to think that they are smarter than everybody else. Nobody cares.
Just don't tell me that Linux technology is superior to Windows technology if no Linux O/S can enable me to do what I do with Windows computers.
And don't fall back on how Windows has all of this malware and so forth. Today 70-90% of the malware on Windows computers is carried by technology like Java, Adobe PDF Reader, and Adobe Flash. And Java itself seems kind of amateur hour. I can remember when the 'smart people' said that Java was going to replace Windows technology. Now people are trying to get rid of Java. Java is just another failed technology that people are trying to unload. The entire internet would be better off without Java. And there are efforts underway to replace Flash.
When somebody actually does develop an operating system superior to Windows then Windows will gradually be replaced. I think Apple could have done that. But today they seem to be more interested in iPhones.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
But it does bother me when people continuously put down Windows, Microsoft, Bill Gates, etc., and encourage other people to switch to Linux. If a desktop Linux computer cannot meet my needs than it is not superior to Windows.
Why should that bother you?!?! There is nothing wrong with telling people the benefits of Linux and encouraging them to try it out.. it's still their decision if they want to give it a try! I don't force anyone to make the switch, but I will tell them all the benefits, and encourage them to give it a try. If they say no I don't want to, that is fine too. If I went around not telling them the benefits of Linux, nobody is going to come to me and ask me about it. But I can tell you that I have told a ton of people so far, and most of them have been interested in it, a good number of them have said "Yes I want to try it!" and others have said no. The ones that said no I leave alone. If they want to use M$ that is their choice, I really don't care. But I will continue to spread the news of the wonderful open source OS called Linux. Will it necessarily work for everything? No, and I don't think that anyone said it would.
If that bothers you, I don't know what else to say to you!
But it does bother me when people continuously put down Windows, Microsoft, Bill Gates, etc., and encourage other people to switch to Linux. If a desktop Linux computer cannot meet my needs than it is not superior to Windows.
Why should that bother you?!?! There is nothing wrong with telling people the benefits of Linux and encouraging them to try it out.. it's still their decision if they want to give it a try! I don't force anyone to make the switch, but I will tell them all the benefits, and encourage them to give it a try. If they say no I don't want to, that is fine too. If I went around not telling them the benefits of Linux, nobody is going to come to me and ask me about it. But I can tell you that I have told a ton of people so far, and most of them have been interested in it, a good number of them have said "Yes I want to try it!" and others have said no. The ones that said no I leave alone. If they want to use M$ that is their choice, I really don't care. But I will continue to spread the news of the wonderful open source OS called Linux. Will it necessarily work for everything? No, and I don't think that anyone said it would.
If that bothers you, I don't know what else to say to you!
Quote:
Just don't tell me that Linux technology is superior to Windows technology if no Linux O/S can enable me to do what I do with Windows computers.
No one is writing free code to help you. They're doing it for themselves and others like them. Why would they work for free to help you? You're not supporting them in any way. If businesses invested in open source they'd get business products coming out. They don't so they have to pay MS, Adobe, etc. It's not the people who you don't support's fault they not releasing product for you.
Just don't tell me that Linux technology is superior to Windows technology if no Linux O/S can enable me to do what I do with Windows computers.
No one is writing free code to help you. They're doing it for themselves and others like them. Why would they work for free to help you? You're not supporting them in any way. If businesses invested in open source they'd get business products coming out. They don't so they have to pay MS, Adobe, etc. It's not the people who you don't support's fault they not releasing product for you.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
Just don't tell me that Linux technology is superior to Windows technology if no Linux O/S can enable me to do what I do with Windows computers.
So because independent corporations or parties have chosen NOT to make applications to run on the Linux platform that you find acceptable, that has something to do with Linux or Windows, or this or that? You're talking about applications in the middle of a discussion about kernels and underlying operating systems. You know whose "fault" it is that Photoshop doesn't run on Linux?? ****THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE PHOTOSHOP****; not Linux (whoever that is). Linux cannot force people to write software, and why on earth would Adobe commit fiscal suicide by writing closed-source for-profit software and try to sell it to Linux users?! They have lots of cash cattle to milk without having to wade into the nightmare of trying to support "Linux", whatever that is.
If you need an application that runs on this OS or that OS, USE IT. There are millions and millions and millions of people out there who only have very basic needs (internet, email , manage music, organize photos, etc.) that suffer from vendor lock-in, security and privacy issues and THEY DON'T HAVE TO. This is why people like me and others on this forum actively advocate that people take a look at Ubuntu or Mint; to **help** them if they want the help and if the advice is appropriate for them. You obviously have some sort of pathological distaste for these altruistic efforts and the cooperative nature of open-source software in general. You rarely miss an opportunity to interject yourself into a discussion claiming that "Linux attacked you" or that "Linux told you something" or "Linux can't do this or that".
If you don't like it or cannot use your preferred applications on a particular OS, don't use it. If you are bothered by claims that some users may be better off using this or that, that is squarely your problem: This is a discussion board and there are many of us - more and more each day - who are discovering that all of the pains and inconveniences and restrictions of our privacy and freedoms inherent in being pawn-like cash cattle for closed-source software are unnecessary; and our computing experience can be improved dramatically by using a free operating system. Would you wish for us to stop advocating for what we believe is a tremendously positive and helpful thing? What is your point for all of these posts, man? No one is suggesting that **you** use Linux.
We are suggesting, in the most friendly and helpful way, that anyone concerned with...
- the technical pain in the butt of having to worry about antivirus, anti-malware and heaven knows what else has to be addressed being a cash cattle entails
- security
- privacy
- stability
- freedom
- cost
- ease of use
- long-term viability (Remember: If Microsoft or Apple just up and decide to stop making or providing the technologies you presently license from them because they no longer profit sufficiently from you, you are incurably screwed because your applications and date ONLY work with your corporate, for-profit licencor. With open-source technologies you can simply move to another project and migrate your data and use the same applications because anyone can take over or fork a project to continue providing those technologies!)
... take a look at Ubuntu or Mint, who you may never have heard about because they do not have or spend money trying to get your attention, because their offering is free for you to use; even free to re-distribute to your friends and family - even to modify indefinitely to your preferences! They might really find it useful; they might not.
That's all there is, Mystic: A bunch of people who might benefit from being made aware that there is a choice out there for them that they were likely never given to opportunity to become aware of. Where is there harm in this?
Just don't tell me that Linux technology is superior to Windows technology if no Linux O/S can enable me to do what I do with Windows computers.
So because independent corporations or parties have chosen NOT to make applications to run on the Linux platform that you find acceptable, that has something to do with Linux or Windows, or this or that? You're talking about applications in the middle of a discussion about kernels and underlying operating systems. You know whose "fault" it is that Photoshop doesn't run on Linux?? ****THE PEOPLE WHO MAKE PHOTOSHOP****; not Linux (whoever that is). Linux cannot force people to write software, and why on earth would Adobe commit fiscal suicide by writing closed-source for-profit software and try to sell it to Linux users?! They have lots of cash cattle to milk without having to wade into the nightmare of trying to support "Linux", whatever that is.
If you need an application that runs on this OS or that OS, USE IT. There are millions and millions and millions of people out there who only have very basic needs (internet, email , manage music, organize photos, etc.) that suffer from vendor lock-in, security and privacy issues and THEY DON'T HAVE TO. This is why people like me and others on this forum actively advocate that people take a look at Ubuntu or Mint; to **help** them if they want the help and if the advice is appropriate for them. You obviously have some sort of pathological distaste for these altruistic efforts and the cooperative nature of open-source software in general. You rarely miss an opportunity to interject yourself into a discussion claiming that "Linux attacked you" or that "Linux told you something" or "Linux can't do this or that".
If you don't like it or cannot use your preferred applications on a particular OS, don't use it. If you are bothered by claims that some users may be better off using this or that, that is squarely your problem: This is a discussion board and there are many of us - more and more each day - who are discovering that all of the pains and inconveniences and restrictions of our privacy and freedoms inherent in being pawn-like cash cattle for closed-source software are unnecessary; and our computing experience can be improved dramatically by using a free operating system. Would you wish for us to stop advocating for what we believe is a tremendously positive and helpful thing? What is your point for all of these posts, man? No one is suggesting that **you** use Linux.
We are suggesting, in the most friendly and helpful way, that anyone concerned with...
- the technical pain in the butt of having to worry about antivirus, anti-malware and heaven knows what else has to be addressed being a cash cattle entails
- security
- privacy
- stability
- freedom
- cost
- ease of use
- long-term viability (Remember: If Microsoft or Apple just up and decide to stop making or providing the technologies you presently license from them because they no longer profit sufficiently from you, you are incurably screwed because your applications and date ONLY work with your corporate, for-profit licencor. With open-source technologies you can simply move to another project and migrate your data and use the same applications because anyone can take over or fork a project to continue providing those technologies!)
... take a look at Ubuntu or Mint, who you may never have heard about because they do not have or spend money trying to get your attention, because their offering is free for you to use; even free to re-distribute to your friends and family - even to modify indefinitely to your preferences! They might really find it useful; they might not.
That's all there is, Mystic: A bunch of people who might benefit from being made aware that there is a choice out there for them that they were likely never given to opportunity to become aware of. Where is there harm in this?
What was this post about? A guy was asking if he should use Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.
So what happened after a while in the post? The Linux guys show up encouraging the guy to switch to Linux.
Like I have already said the Windows Supersite has been reconfigured somewhat. But in the past these Linux guys and Apple guys would hang out all the time at that website encouraging people to switch to their favorite operating system.
My favorite operating system is whatever operating system enables me to do the things I wan to do. Period. No operating system is my religion. All operating systems are just technology.
And nobody should have the power to try to force one viewpoint on everybody here. Why is it wrong for somebody to discuss a contrary viewpoint? Everybody has to think the same? And what is with the personal attacks? I have a 'pathological distaste?' Have I made any personal attacks on you?
I really like Mac OS X. I wish that Apple technology enabled me to do all the things I currently do on Windows. If that were to happen I would have no problem switching. Running an Apple Computer with Mac OS X is like a breath of fresh air. Until you discover the issues.
You are right that many people have very basic needs on a computer and if all they do is surf the internet, read their email, and use Facebook and Twitter a Linux O/S computer would be fine. But some of us do more on a computer. But it is not allowed for somebody to say that, correct?
But in this post a guy was merely asking if he should use Windows 7 or Windows 8.1. Go back and read the title of the post.
So what happened after a while in the post? The Linux guys show up encouraging the guy to switch to Linux.
Like I have already said the Windows Supersite has been reconfigured somewhat. But in the past these Linux guys and Apple guys would hang out all the time at that website encouraging people to switch to their favorite operating system.
My favorite operating system is whatever operating system enables me to do the things I wan to do. Period. No operating system is my religion. All operating systems are just technology.
And nobody should have the power to try to force one viewpoint on everybody here. Why is it wrong for somebody to discuss a contrary viewpoint? Everybody has to think the same? And what is with the personal attacks? I have a 'pathological distaste?' Have I made any personal attacks on you?
I really like Mac OS X. I wish that Apple technology enabled me to do all the things I currently do on Windows. If that were to happen I would have no problem switching. Running an Apple Computer with Mac OS X is like a breath of fresh air. Until you discover the issues.
You are right that many people have very basic needs on a computer and if all they do is surf the internet, read their email, and use Facebook and Twitter a Linux O/S computer would be fine. But some of us do more on a computer. But it is not allowed for somebody to say that, correct?
But in this post a guy was merely asking if he should use Windows 7 or Windows 8.1. Go back and read the title of the post.
Originally Posted By: Garak
MS, WordPerfect Corp., and others at the time really pushed one to buy each and every version of the software. And if you didn't, your data was orphaned.
Garak,
I have word perfect documents going back to October, 1993, likely created with WP4 (maybe 5) for DOS, that still open and edit perfectly in Corel Word Perfect X6, which I believe is the next to most recent release of Word Perfect. I still have my keyboard set for word perfect 6 for DOS.
The only orphan word processing files I have are old super scripsit files ( although I still have a model IV in the warehouse of junk ), and the files created with whatever office suite came with those last couple of revisions of OS/2 (Star Office?).
I have enough old parts laying around to build an DOS or OS/2 computer, assuming the disks are still any good.
MS, WordPerfect Corp., and others at the time really pushed one to buy each and every version of the software. And if you didn't, your data was orphaned.
Garak,
I have word perfect documents going back to October, 1993, likely created with WP4 (maybe 5) for DOS, that still open and edit perfectly in Corel Word Perfect X6, which I believe is the next to most recent release of Word Perfect. I still have my keyboard set for word perfect 6 for DOS.
The only orphan word processing files I have are old super scripsit files ( although I still have a model IV in the warehouse of junk ), and the files created with whatever office suite came with those last couple of revisions of OS/2 (Star Office?).
I have enough old parts laying around to build an DOS or OS/2 computer, assuming the disks are still any good.
Originally Posted By: Mystic
What was this post about? A guy was asking if he should use Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.
So what happened after a while in the post? The Linux guys show up encouraging the guy to switch to Linux.
But in this post a guy was merely asking if he should use Windows 7 or Windows 8.1. Go back and read the title of the post.
Yeah, that was me. I don't think Linux has enough applications (like Office, etc) that I use everyday to keep me satisfied, and allows me to share all that information with other people who can use the files/data. Microsoft has basically become the "standard" that the vast majority of people use and exchange information with in business and personal use. It's kind of like when VHS tape format took over the Beta format, even though Beta was better technology at the time. Once something basically becomes a "standard" it's hard to upset that or turn that around.
I got Win 7 on the new computer, and will upgrade later down the road to Win 8.x or just wait until Win 9 comes out if it's good. Chances are I'll just use Win 7 until it's not supported by Microsoft anymore, just like I used Win XP for 12 years.
What was this post about? A guy was asking if he should use Windows 7 or Windows 8.1.
So what happened after a while in the post? The Linux guys show up encouraging the guy to switch to Linux.
But in this post a guy was merely asking if he should use Windows 7 or Windows 8.1. Go back and read the title of the post.
Yeah, that was me. I don't think Linux has enough applications (like Office, etc) that I use everyday to keep me satisfied, and allows me to share all that information with other people who can use the files/data. Microsoft has basically become the "standard" that the vast majority of people use and exchange information with in business and personal use. It's kind of like when VHS tape format took over the Beta format, even though Beta was better technology at the time. Once something basically becomes a "standard" it's hard to upset that or turn that around.
I got Win 7 on the new computer, and will upgrade later down the road to Win 8.x or just wait until Win 9 comes out if it's good. Chances are I'll just use Win 7 until it's not supported by Microsoft anymore, just like I used Win XP for 12 years.
- Status
