Main "Hating Microsoft in a nutshell" thread - Page 8


View Poll Results: Do you think making Linux and MS interactable (kinda) a good idea?

Voters
11. You may not vote on this poll
  • Yes, this is a great idea

    3 27.27%
  • Yes, it's an ok idea

    1 9.09%
  • It wouldn't hurt

    3 27.27%
  • No, Linux should stick to Linux and Microsoft should stick to Microsoft

    4 36.36%
  • Or just use CrossOver Office

    0 0%
Page 8 of 76 FirstFirst ... 4567891011121858 ... LastLast
Results 106 to 120 of 1139

Thread: Main "Hating Microsoft in a nutshell" thread

  1. #106
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Inner City Dublin.
    Posts
    356
    Supporting Windows 95 & 98, turned me to Linux.

    What's more, I have first hand experience of Microsoft's corporate 'upgrade' model, which can be summed up with
    "All you're monies are belong to us".

    As an entity it has no concept of customer service, merley exercising of it's dominance in the market place.

    In this sense Linux is one of the best kept secrets in the IT industry. If people knew how easy Linux really was on the desktop, M$ would be out of business in months!
    #define malloc_piix4(n) n=malloc(sizeof(wallet));

    malloc_piix4(the_money);
    Hug a tree.

  2. #107
    Join Date
    May 2003
    Posts
    1,241
    Originally posted by Piix4
    In this sense Linux is one of the best kept secrets in the IT industry. If people knew how easy Linux really was on the desktop, M$ would be out of business in months!
    I'm not so sure. A lot of users just "memorize the steps" they need to take to read e-mail or go online. I'm not sure they will be able to adapt so quickly.

    As for the rest of the users, they would of course go to Linux...


    Just my $0.02

    ~psi42
    Last edited by psi42; 07-16-2003 at 02:14 PM.

  3. #108
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    Inner City Dublin.
    Posts
    356
    Adoptation is one thing.

    Being brought up in the Linux environment is another.

    From the Gnome/KDE/StarOffice/Evolution standpoint, there is nothing Windows boxes do, (apart from games) that Linux boxes, don't do, just as well, cheaper, (faster) and less restrictively (vis-a-vis) licencing.

    <At least, that's my impression>

    On the SME server. Forget about it, Linux wins hands down. The only thing holding back (some enlightented) organisations being an existing Exchange Server (a poorly written piece of software *anyway*).

    Gnome, for example (does everything) I could wish for it to do and for most office setups, something easy to setup like Mandrake has many, many benefits and few, if any drawbacks.
    #define malloc_piix4(n) n=malloc(sizeof(wallet));

    malloc_piix4(the_money);
    Hug a tree.

  4. #109
    Join Date
    Feb 2000
    Location
    Arlington, TN
    Posts
    89
    To me, this is a bit of a silly argument. I would be more that glad never to have MS get one more penny out of me but the sad fact is that oftentimes there are no other choices. I have one application that requires SQL Server to run. I personally despise SQL server. It requires some beefy hardware to run and the licensing on it will kill you. But nevertheless, I have no choice. There are no suitable choices out there for this product that run on a 'nix platform. Now I suppose that I could reverse engineer it and port it over to MySQL but then I would have to support it rather than the vendor among other things.

    So it's kind of like buying a car that only uses hydrogen to run. It runs great and cheaply but there is no place to fill it up unlike the car running on gasoline which you can get fuel on any corner. Yet some people just to prove a point would rather sit in their hydrogen powered car empty of gas because they refuse to have a car that uses gasoline.

    The point is that you have to use the best tool is available to you. In some cases Windows is the best product. In other cases, it is the only product. But you do have to consider it.

  5. #110
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    There is no need to consider MS Windows except for humor. MySQL, DB2, PostgreSQL and Oracle run on Linux. Thats plenty of choices for SQL. End of story.

  6. #111
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    So. Cal
    Posts
    652
    Originally posted by Citadel
    There is no need to consider MS Windows except for humor. MySQL, DB2, PostgreSQL and Oracle run on Linux. Thats plenty of choices for SQL. End of story.
    Scenerio 1: Client uses software that requires SQL Server for some reason.

    Scenerio 2: Client has no employees capable of supporting any database other than SQL Server.

    Scenerio 3: Client simply wants SQL Server. Period.

    Keep trying

  7. #112
    Join Date
    Aug 2002
    Location
    North Port, FL
    Posts
    852
    Originally posted by Citadel
    There is no need to consider MS Windows except for humor. MySQL, DB2, PostgreSQL and Oracle run on Linux. Thats plenty of choices for SQL. End of story.
    Some people never give up.

    I just want to add, for those who are reading this thread, thinking this person speaks for all Linux users, he doesn't , most Linux users Prefer Linux, but still use windows as well for one thing or another, not all of them, but most. this Guy is out in left field. IMHO

    What ever happened to the orignal poster of this thread?

    BaVinic
    Last edited by BaVinic; 07-16-2003 at 03:24 PM.
    Registered Linux User #285413
    ----------------------------------------

    Shut the Gates, and Close the Windows
    Linux has arrived

  8. #113
    Join Date
    Jul 2003
    Location
    Canada
    Posts
    258
    Originally posted by nextbillgates
    Scenerio 1: Client uses software that requires SQL Server for some reason.

    Scenerio 2: Client has no employees capable of supporting any database other than SQL Server.

    Scenerio 3: Client simply wants SQL Server. Period.

    Keep trying
    Refer them to Microsoft. MS SQL server is not necessary, infact nothing that Microsoft offers is necessary, that's why it is obsolete.

  9. #114
    Join Date
    Jun 2002
    Location
    Montreal, Qué, Canada
    Posts
    281
    Originally posted by Citadel
    Refer them to Microsoft. MS SQL server is not necessary, infact nothing that Microsoft offers is necessary, that's why it is obsolete.
    With your lack of logic, nothing Linux does is necessary, so, linux could be obsolete.

  10. #115
    Join Date
    Oct 2002
    Location
    Earth
    Posts
    1,616
    Microsoft domination of the world is inevitable.

    http://urbanlegends.about.com/library/blgates2.htm




    -------------
    Folding is Fun

    I thought I made a mistake once, but, of course, I was mistaken.

  11. #116
    Join Date
    Nov 2002
    Location
    Aalborg, Denmark
    Posts
    424
    Originally posted by El_Cu_Guy

    Steve Jobs, as a young entrepreneur, had an interesting vision. Can you guess what is was?
    Naturally the goal of all companies is to dominant, so that consumers will focus on them. Microsoft doesn't just make borked products, the very notion is ludicris. Yes Microsoft products have a reputation of being unstable. My workstation is running WindowsXP, and it runs beautifully. My P4 laptop running Red Hat is also great. I like 'em both. I just prefer the price of Red Hat a bit more than WinXP.
    Office XP is a great office suite, it's definately overpriced, but hey thats the price of two things imo:
    1. World wide piracy (thats what they tell us)
    2. Market dominance
    Saying that you hate microsoft, just shows how little you get out, Im sorry guys, but thats the way it is.
    Debian Debian Debian Debian

  12. #117
    Join Date
    Dec 2000
    Location
    Panorama, CA, USA
    Posts
    1,053
    You hate MS because they stomp out competition and cheap winmodems were built closed-source to run on Windows? Here are a few of my reasons for not running MS Windows:


    1. illegal operations

    2. invalid page faults

    3. memory leaks

    4. lockups

    5. spontaneous reboots

    6. refusal to boot due to corrupt registry/win32vxd or other file

    7. mysterious slowdowns

    8. "crud accumulation" on the hard disk and in the registry

    9. fragmentation of file system

    10. numerous virus/trojan -security holes

    11. need to repair, maintain, secure with 3rd paid party programs

    12. Basic OS comes with little or no applications -not even a spell checker

    13. restrictive licensing

    While I admit that much improvement has been made in the NT generation OSs, I still find MS Windows to be too restrictive and too fragile. I have multiple machines and multiple CPUs and I am not willing to pay the licensing for Windows -and since I don't want to be breaking the law, we have been running several machines on Linux for several years.

    "winprinter" can be defined as a printer that uses non-standard printing language and off-loads a greater part of the processing to the OS and CPU (like a winmodem) and has no UNIX/Linux drivers -since they only work in Windows they are a "winprinter," some of the Lexmark I have used are of this type, and Currently Minolta has a cheap color Laser ($700) that is usless in any OS except MS Windows.
    Last edited by CMonster; 07-16-2003 at 04:56 PM.
    CMonster says, "You can't choose the right OS if you don't have a choice."

  13. #118
    Join Date
    Apr 2001
    Location
    SF Bay Area, CA
    Posts
    14,936
    El_Cu_Guy -- as far as a Winprinter example goes, the Lexmark Z15 is a pretty good one. Most definitely not a native PostScript printer, no Linux drivers, and the native driver is most definitely a secret.

    (Edit: D'oh! I hate it when I don't see there's a page 2!)

    But I would like to see Citadel attempt to answer some of the responses that his comments have gathered... come on, it won't be too painful! Really! And no, I'm about as far from a Windows advocate as one can get, but when I see someone spamming someone else's thread with nonstop nonsense, and then just disappearing when getting called on it, it becomes a bit ... disconcerting. Note to any of the other mods: if you feel the need to close this thread, don't feel like you shouldn't do it just because I've replied -- I won't at ALL care...

  14. #119
    Join Date
    Jan 2003
    Location
    Ontario, Canada
    Posts
    310
    The reason I hate Windows so much is this:

    1. Total lack of control.

    After using linux for so long, going back to windows is like taking a step back in time. I can't control easily which apps load up at boot time. Apps always start themselves without asking me, and other stupid things.

    2. Hard Drive Fragmentation

    Since Microsoft is too lazy to implement proper hard drive access management(like ordering the data requests in the order they'll appear on the disk) the disks get worn out quicker. I'm not sure if that's what causes that stupid clicking noise that you hear when running windows machines and loading stuff, but my linux drive is silent.

    3. Viruses

    While this might be a reason to hate linux in a few years, I don't see it as happening. First of all, if you don't give a user root priviledges, they can only muck their own files up. Then you can tell them that it's their own fault and that you're glad they didn't screw up the entire computer with their own foolishness!

    4. Random crashes, integrated GUI, lack of proper CL, BSOD, Microsoft products not working on their own OS, and planned obsolesence

    The lack of security and stability in windows is amazing. Add to that the bloat, and also the piss poor planning of the OS(integrated GUI), and you've got one loser of an OS. It's like the disfigured guy that you kinda feel sorry for but that's a total ***, so you don't like him.

    5. The fact that everyone thinks Windows is so easy, but then comes calling for me when it doesn't work

    Why can't people just use linux! I can configure it to work properly the first time! Then they won't have to come to me and b**** when things don't work, because they always will! Some people just won't learn.

  15. #120
    Join Date
    Sep 2000
    Location
    So. Cal
    Posts
    652
    DerekKraan, most of those issues have been addressed in the NT line.

    1. Total lack of control.

    After using linux for so long, going back to windows is like taking a step back in time. I can't control easily which apps load up at boot time. Apps always start themselves without asking me, and other stupid things.
    If you want to prevent apps from starting, remove them from the startup folder or from the registry at HKLM\Microsoft\Windows\CurrentVersion\Run

    2. Hard Drive Fragmentation

    Since Microsoft is too lazy to implement proper hard drive access management(like ordering the data requests in the order they'll appear on the disk) the disks get worn out quicker. I'm not sure if that's what causes that stupid clicking noise that you hear when running windows machines and loading stuff, but my linux drive is silent.
    This is somewhat debatable. Wheras Windows needs constant defragmentation, syslog keeps waking up my hard drive in Linux. I doubt either are very good for the drive.

    Then again, unless you have a very shoddy drive (eg IBM Deskstar), the drive won't fail for years unless you physically abuse it.

    3. Viruses

    While this might be a reason to hate linux in a few years, I don't see it as happening. First of all, if you don't give a user root priviledges, they can only muck their own files up. Then you can tell them that it's their own fault and that you're glad they didn't screw up the entire computer with their own foolishness!
    The NT line allows one to run as a restricted user as well. That defeats the majority of viruses. Running as administrator in Windows is as foolish as running as root in Linux.

    4. Random crashes,
    Unless you have a hardware issue, NT rarely crashes. Applications don't take down the OS with it like Linux apps sometimes do.

    integrated GUI[
    There are a lot of 3rd party interfaces you can use. Two examples off the top of my head are Litestep and Bluebox.

    lack of proper CL
    Windows' CLI is pathetic, I agree, but you can fix that with Cygwin.

    BSOD
    Linux has kernel panics. Same difference. Windows has the advantage that it can recover from BSODs.

    Microsoft products not working on their own OS
    I have had issues with very old products, but I can't think of a newer product that MS produces not working on one of their OS's.

    and planned obsolesence
    Mandrake, Red Hat, SuSE, etc all do the same thing.

Posting Permissions

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