Okay...you got, me, good arguments, I wasn't able to counter those, but, I still love windows, I got my reasons.
Okay...you got, me, good arguments, I wasn't able to counter those, but, I still love windows, I got my reasons.
You love Windows, fair enough, I know why you love it and it's fully understandable - each to their own I suppose.
Care to name the administrator who you accuse of deleting threads. Get your facts right before making assumptions. To my knowledge none of your threads have been deleted by anyone.Originally Posted by Aloone_Jonez
BTW, Good thread Boogs. Reel him in. Hook,line and sinker.
=========== Please Read The Forum Rules ===========
Hey guys,thought i would add my 2 cents in a bit.First about the above quote.I wouldnt say that it's impossible to install XP on a system with lower then 128MB of RAM.I once had XP SP1 running perfectly fine (although not quite as fast) on an 800MHZ duron with 64 MB of ram and it ran fairly well considering the limitations of the old PC.I guess it really depends on what you use your PC for.For general internet and e-mail usage and maybe the work of an avergae student using the program for school work it was fine.Windows might be able to be tweaked but Linux can be totally reconfigured and made to do whatever you want, and as I said before you can scale it to suit your system you can install a modern distro on fairly old hardware, now try installing XP on anything with less than 128MB of RAM.
I actually prefer Windows as well probally because i have used it since the 3.1 days.It may not be perfect but windows can be a very good OS if you know how to take care of your system.I once had a copy of XP on my PC for 3 years straight without a single isuue until my HDD went bad in it.
A reinstall and new HDD later i am once again running XP SP2 without any issues.I guess when you get down to it,it all depends on your needs from your PC i have tried Macs,i have used windows and i have even tried slackware linux and Linspire.Never tried a linux yet though partially because i dont have the time to learn it.Sometimes the best route is to have a multiboot system using both windows and linux.
Alot of programs are written for Windows. It has become a vicious cycle. Since windows is used by such a large number of people. It makes sense to write programs for Windows. Since so many programs are written for windows, consumers find it easier to just use windows as games and software can be found readily for Windows.
No Operation System can be the best. Only popular.
"Never seem more learnt then the people you are with. Wear your learning like a watch and keep it hidden. Do not pull it out to count the hours, but give the time when you are asked."
~Chesterfield
Different strokes for different folks....
I am aware of this, I think Microsoft recommends 128MB of RAM and an absolute minimum of 64MB, given that I've used XP on 128MB and it wasn't too snappy and XP uses more and 75MB RAM on my box when nothing's running I'm not sure this is realistic, I know let's ask Paul Thurrott (a long time Windows expert and MS lover).Originally Posted by bhxtyrant
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase...p_sg_clean.asp
And here's my favorite quote:Originally Posted by Paul Thurrott
http://www.winsupersite.com/showcase/windowsxp_sg.asp
Linux is differant, the minimum requirements listed are very conservative, for example they might give a minimum RAM requirement of 128MB and recommend 256MB when in fact you can halve this and it will still work. Vector 5.1 STD recommends 64MB and is faster than XP on this low spec machine and will run ok on 32MB, also XP was released (correct me if I'm wrong) back in 2001 and Vector Linux 5.1 was released this year, now I wonder which year had the most advanced hardware.Originally Posted by Paul Thurrott
Of course it does, Linux is certainly better suited to basic Internet and email usage than running games and it runs better on older hardware which is also best used in this way.Originally Posted by bhxtyrant
I know Windows isn't that bad I've been running it for the last 6 months without anti-virus and it's not given me any trouble, but it's no where as fast as Linux.Originally Posted by bhxtyrant
I know your hard disk going down was probably not Windows related but a re-install is normally the only way to fix Windows when it goes wrong.Originally Posted by bhxtyrant
Slackware and Linspire are two completely differant ends of the spectrum, Linspire is very Windows like and Slackware is UNIX like, I personally don't like Linspire because you have to pay for all of the software for it.Originally Posted by bhxtyrant
WTF?Originally Posted by bhxtyrant
You have - Slackware and Linspire are differant Linux based operating systems.
That's what I do.Originally Posted by bhxtyrant
Thats about the furthest from the truth.....but hey usally it easier at times to reinstall windows, most of the time this can be done faster than installing drivers in LinuxI know your hard disk going down was probably not Windows related but a re-install is normally the only way to fix Windows when it goes wrong.
Sorry can't agree, more distros= more confusion. I have 10 distro's on my desk, which should I use ? Maybe I should spend the last years of my life reseaching forums, and just when I have a grasp the Distro changes/vanashes or a new one pop's up.That's great, Linux is just the kernel, all the other software distributed with it forms the actual operating system - more distros = more choice.
Untill the Linux community gets off the cultist Distro of the Month fan club stuff it'll never be mainstream.
I say rally around Linspire, thats the Distro headed in the right direction, the most likely "mainstream" candidate.
See there you go, and if the majority of the Linux community feels the same I guess Linspire is doomed....there goes "mainstream" alternative to Windows down the drain.I personally don't like Linspire because you have to pay for all of the software for it.
Tell me whats the real point behind all this, is it really a quest for "Free" ? Do you dislike MS because they charge $$$, because employees get a pay check ?
I really think I'm getting the point....Down with MS because "mainstream" should be Free.
Yep I'm ready to jump on that bandwagon, the heck with Global Economy and workers who get pay checks because software companies charge $$. Think of all the possibilities when Free opensource becomes mainstream, we can force all the hardware manufactures into cutting prices or we won't make drivers for them.
Maybe, just maybe, the best OS doesn't really come down to "Technically" superior, fast, stable, secure. Just maybe an OS that supports/creates Human livelihood/prosperity in an area that once was nothing more than a vacuum, is the best.
BTW before anyone takes me wrong, don't, I dual boot Linux & Windows, just got this Point/Counter Point thing going
It of course depends on the distribution, some are easier than others also it helps if you check that your hardware is compatable with it before you install.Originally Posted by FastGame
All distros are based on Linux which is UNIX at heart and once you've learnt one distro you can apply your knowledge to a whole host of operating syetems and I'm not just talking about Linux either I'm talking about BSD, Solaris and the more techy parts of Mac OS.Originally Posted by FastGame
Untill the Linux community gets off the cultist Distro of the Month fan club stuff it'll never be mainstream.
Linspire isn't the only nube friendly distro you know.Originally Posted by FastGame
You misunderstand it's not so much about free as in no $$$ but free as in fredom of choice. The problem with Linspire is they force to to purchase all of the software for their operating system from them even though some of it might otherwise be available for free or even for a smalller fee from a differant vendor. If everyone switched from Windows to Linspire then we'd be in a far worse situation than we are at the moment, lots of people don't have much of a choice but to use Windows but imagine not having a choice of software vendor.Originally Posted by FastGame
Yes but free as in freedom of choice not always price, many Linux distros cost money - Redhat, Suse , Mandiva and Vector Linux Deluxe alll have price tags.Originally Posted by FastGame
If Linux wasn't a profitable product then there wouldn't be some many companies making money from it.Originally Posted by FastGame
May I add offers people the freedom to choose - sorry Windows doesn't fulfil this criteria.Originally Posted by FastGame
Good for you.Originally Posted by FastGame
IMHO I think that if you are looking for more "mainstream" linux distros then you should probably look into Ubuntu (free) or Xandros (pay). I personally think (hope) that Ubuntu stands the best chance of becoming a more palatable mainstream distro to both newbs and hardcore users. Also IMHO I would say that this is the most "flame bait" thread I have seen on this forum. IMHO I categorize this with religion and politics, better not discussed at the dinner table. Like or Dislike Windows not withstanding, I personally really like the choices that are out there in the Linux community as each has a very nice niche. My personal feelings about FOSS can be determined by my previous postings, while I do use Windows and my occupation is in large part dependent on its flaws, I detest all corporate attempts to spread FUD about open source and or trample consumer rights with EULA crap. Competition after all is what keeps prices low for the consumer. Anyway just my .02 cents, end Rant.
Badger
I agree.Originally Posted by 1badger11
Flame bait?Originally Posted by 1badger11
I'm sorry I have to disagree with you on this, I think we've being having quite a cizil discussion (even though I've dissagreed with some people not one insult has been exchanged), go check out some of the threads over on [url=http://www.microsuck.com[/url] for some real hardcore flame bait.
But yes I do see your point, this discussion often does end in flames and I'll try to leave before it gets anywhere near this point.
Well I wouldn't call Linux my religion but anyhow I agree, this debate is very political especially as a lot of it has to do with the US government allowing MS to get away with a so much crap.Originally Posted by 1badger11
Yes, I remember you from the "How to run Windows without anti-virus" thread.Originally Posted by 1badger11
What I meant was that this is a "flame bait" thread, not that anyone was actually flaming anyone else. It is for this reason that I like this forum, things don't usually degenerate (not that we don't have any degenerates hanging around here, myself included).
Badger
Yes it is the best OS. But times change.
Somebody said you can tweak Linux to do anything - like detect all the latest hardware? Like play all the latest games? Some people like to tweak so for them there is Linux, some people would rather spend that tweaking time playing the game or using the latest gadget - they need Windows.
As for Mac OSX - you're joking right?
I'm using Windows 7 - you got a problem with that?
Bookmarks