12 posts • joined Friday 20th April 2007 23:11 GMT
The statement that "Linux can run X and Y" always comes with a caveat... "If you use WINE/ Virtual PC/Have advanced computer skills" and so on. No wonder Linux is an utter failure on the desktop as well as in the business world.
Being dependant on certain software in order for you to run the programs you're used to using on your PC, taking a gamble any time you buy a new piece of hardware, and being dependant on the good graces and technical support of geeks, who'll love to mock you for your lack of computer expertise, or for using "commercial non-free software" is NOT what your regular consumer wants. Why is it even newsworthy that Microsoft points this out?
It's amusing to read how "simple and easy" Linux supposedly is compared to Windows XP (Another proof of what a failure Linux is... In order for the comparison to be even remotely fair, they compare the newest version of ubuntu/whatever with Microsofts 8 year old OS!) Too bad that regular computer-users somehow manage to use their Windows for years, without ever realizing, that what they really, really want is Linux, lol!
There is no alternative
To Windows... The alternative is so horrible, (Linux) that people don't want it, even if it's free...
And if you appreciate everybody being able to read your documents, thank god for Windows and Microsoft. There is one standard, instead of a hellish brew of different OS, computers and software standards that won't work together.
This has nothing to do with freedom of speech. This has to do with a guy who jumped the line to ask a question, and didn't comply with the police taking him out.
If he'd shut up and didn't resist, he'd never get tasered. Let alone probably get his question answered.
Guess it's the kind of risk, we have to take, to keep a dog-ugly POS operating system like Linux away from our computers...
"And if you actually have a record collection of 40,000 tunes that you absolutely must have on a portable device go get an 80GB iPod classic "
I'd like to, but I'm in the market for a device that doesn't suck monkey balls...
I used to have an ipod, but the POS broke after a year... So much for Apples superior yada-yada. And with the new ipod-nano-fatso, it looks like their highly hyped design also went out the window...
I don't get it...
Why worship an loathsome company like Apple with your money, WHEN YOU CAN DOWNLOAD IT FOR FREE!?!?
Am I a cheapscate? Not really... I just refuse to pay money to NBC or Apple for watching something that I can usually watch for free.
Now a small nominal fee for serverspace etc. I could agree with... Something like 20 or 50 cents.
But paying 2 dollars for the priviledge of being DRMd up my ass by Apple and watching a free TV program? No thanks!
Listen to the clerk: "You know," he said. "They're all upset because it doesn't do some tiny little thing that they're old phone could do."
And read the messageboards, like some the comments above me. Somehow, if someone doesn't love the Iphone, or dares to find faults with its interface, it's a personal insult to a Mac-fanboy... And everybody who has a mac is a fanboi... Trust me, there's just varying degrees to their lunacy.
Korhan, are you smoking something, or are you just pathologically paranoid?
What does Microsoft have to do with anything?!?
The idiocy of the OLPC aside (It doesn't solve any of the 3rd worlds problems, cheap PC's are plentyful) what's so wrong about this? The cheaper/better the computer the better, right? Does it matter if it's Intel inside or not? Of course not!
Well that was bound to happen. Ubuntu probably uses their own shite on their servers, so no wonder a crappy OS like Linux buckled under the moderate pressure.
Yes, light to moderate pressure: There's probably more people out therre that still run DOS/Windows 3.11 than there are Ubuntu-users.
There's no way a couple of hundred basement-dwelling Linux fanbois who want their newest unix-fix, can bring down a website just because of traffic alone. Trust me, it's the OS. It's ALWAYS the OS!
So much for security-through-obscurity. Should be obvious by now, that mac's aren't technically more secure than Windows machines. Especially after the Intel-switch.
The only security advantage, is the fact that it's a pretty obscure platform. Why write an exploit for a couple of million macs, when you can write it for a Windows machine and reach hundreds of millions of victims?
The one period where I was forced to use a mac, it crashed on me a couple of times a week. (The kind of crashes where you have to yank out the powercord to use your machine again.)
It's nice to know though, that switching to a shite platform like Macintosh won't make you any more secure. Should force quite a few people to rethink their porn-habits...
Agh! Here we go again with the dowy-eyed open-saucers and their evangelizing "open" standards and everything non-microsoft. I guess no article on officesoftware would be complete without their comments.
The fact is that Office is the defacto standard, and office 2007 will be the new defacto standard in a couple of years, when businesses are done migrating to it. Microsoft will dominate the officespace in the foreseeable future.
And god bless 'em! Thanks to Microsoft and Office nobody has to worry about the recipient being able to read the document we sent them.
Most businesses and workers only care about:
1. Does my software work properly?
2. Are people able to read what I sent them?
The only people that care about if a pice of software or a standard is "open" or not, are the paranoid, vengeful, rabid Microsoft-haters: The 2-3 percent of users that insist on Linux being a viable option for the desktop.
- Product Round-up Smartwatch face off: Pebble, MetaWatch and new hi-tech timepieces
- Geek's Guide to Britain BT Tower is just a relic? Wrong: It relays 18,000hrs of telly daily
- Geek's Guide to Britain The bunker at the end of the world - in Essex
- Review: Sony Xperia SP
- Dell's PC-on-a-stick landing in July: report