Windows kicks Linux to the curb

W

wcoetzee

Expert Member
Joined
Jun 14, 2007
Messages
1,792
Reaction score
1
Location
**** knows
Eh, not an original thought or interesting remark in the whole piece. Microsoft need better PR.
 
Sell the OS cheaper by leaving out the games and useless apps.

Linux and Windows can't kill each other (yet) businesses will continue to use windows.
 
Is it true that Microsoft got some job shedding in process. Maybe they not doing that well against Linux or Mac as ZDNET thinks.
 
The_Librarian said:
Yup. They also lambasted OS/2 back in the days.

Use Windows for games (including breeding virii), and Linux for serious work (when you don't have the time to deal with virii)
Click to expand...
Viruses ;)
 
The_Librarian said:
Yup. They also lambasted OS/2 back in the days.

Use Windows for games (including breeding virii), and Linux for serious work (when you don't have the time to deal with virii)
Click to expand...

That is precisely what I do, and have forced to used Win due to proprietry software that just does not work in Linux.

That article does show a bit of bias, but makes me wonder how a Windows 7/XP article would read on a Linux-biased site. It would be interesting to see.

B
 
Bismuth said:
That is precisely what I do, and have forced to used Win due to proprietry software that just does not work in Linux.
B
Click to expand...

Blame the software writers for that. If they wanted to, they could have written it for Linux...
 
I think the dominance that Windows had over the years is finally closing to an end. The Netbook era that is dominantly distributed with Linux is slowly grooming new Linux users, and as these Netbook users graduate to Notebook and Desktop usage at home or office, they surely will opt for using Linux.

Companies will also follow suit in using what their users are confortible using. It won't just happen over night but it surely is happening. This revolution will force MS to be more competent and we may start seeing reduced pricing and more user friendly releases.

I see Linux making a huge difference and Windows regardless of their dominance and financial power will bow.
 
Xcallibor said:
I think the dominance that Windows had over the years is finally closing to an end. The Netbook era that is dominantly distributed with Linux is slowly grooming new Linux users, and as these Netbook users graduate to Notebook and Desktop usage at home or office, they surely will opt for using Linux.

Companies will also follow suit in using what their users are confortible using. It won't just happen over night but it surely is happening. This revolution will force MS to be more competent and we may start seeing reduced pricing and more user friendly releases.

I see Linux making a huge difference and Windows regardless of their dominance and financial power will bow.
Click to expand...

I honsetly doubt this will happen. Yes, there will be a steady chipping away as the competing OS's grow more user friendly and slick, but unless Microsoft truly stuffs up, Windows won't lose its dominating spot at the top for years to come.

Companies are not going to follow suit as you put it, there are not enough technicians to handle that kind of load. That is why companies standardize on a specific platform. Also, in the USA, they have some very strict compliance acts that require desktop computers to be very locked down. While I'm sure it can be done with Linux, the ability to use Group Policies in a Windows domain really makes things easier.

I like Linux, and I think it has its place in the computing world, but as a replacement desktop for Joe Soap, that's still a way off. Accountants and other people just want to click Pastel Partner/Payroll, and have it run and run well. I'm not sure if there is an equivalent powerful package on Linux, and I don't know how well they would work under Wine.

Above all else, Linux will need to clean up its file system hierachy. /usr/bin, /usr/lib/exec etc isn't very user friendly. Vista for example has Program Files, which makes sense to most people who look at it, as does Windows and Users (aka Documents and Settings) Clean, simple and logical.

Just my 2c :)
 
Asha'man X said:
Above all else, Linux will need to clean up its file system hierachy. /usr/bin, /usr/lib/exec etc isn't very user friendly. Vista for example has Program Files, which makes sense to most people who look at it, as does Windows and Users (aka Documents and Settings) Clean, simple and logical.

Just my 2c :)
Click to expand...
Hmmm, so you reckon that programs live in "Program Files" alone? More often than not, when you remove a program in Windows, there are remnants of it scattered all over your hard drive and in places that Joe Soap wouldn't even dream of looking.

As far as I'm concerned, the file system hierarchy in Linux is far more predictable and flexible than that of Windows. It's really not as intimidating as you seem to think.
 
adrianx said:
Hmmm, so you reckon that programs live in "Program Files" alone? More often than not, when you remove a program in Windows, there are remnants of it scattered all over your hard drive and in places that Joe Soap wouldn't even dream of looking.
Click to expand...

You mean the registry entries and .dll files left in the windows folder?
 
Optioncarduser said:
You mean the registry entries and .dll files left in the windows folder?
Click to expand...
The "Windows" folder has many sub-folders! You find .dlls, documentation, binaries, config files mingled in many places. Some are in "Program Files", some are in "System", others are in "System32"... the list goes on and on.

In Linux, things are more predictable.
 
Yes, Windows installtions leave remnants all over the show, which is either poor design, or poor legacy. What I'm trying to say it that the naming of the filesystem hierachy at it's most basic level is more clear. A lot of users won't necessarily venture into the Windows directory.

What would be nice is if Linux could combine some of the folders to reduce clutter, or simplify things. I've heard of a disto, GoblinX that does this, and does away with the more traditional file system. There have also been many journalists calling for the same thing, including a write up in Computer Shopper magazine once.

Anyway just my view :)
 
I would say the greater problem is that different distros put files in different places.
 
milomak said:
I would say the greater problem is that different distros put files in different places.
Click to expand...
I agree and even though I like to play around with many distros, I stick to one distro for the "important" stuff. Whatever *cough* Red Hat-based *cough* distro that might be. :)

My system-wide config files are always in /etc and files that often change are in /var (logs, caches...). My users' files are always in their /home directories and their (per user) config files are either .hidden files or .directories. Often, when things get screwed beyond repair for a particular user, I just delete (reset) their hidden config files/directories and everything is back to square one, without affecting any other users.

Really, I can't see the problem with the current directory structures, there are a few exceptions, but they are in the minority and you quickly get to know about them.

Putting stuff, all mixed together, in "Program Files", actually confuses the hell out of me.
 
You must log in or register to reply here.
Back
Top
Sign up to the MyBroadband newsletter
X