Anyone Else Have A Disliking To Vista?

asininity

tbird3 wrote: »

Really? That its kernel is wide open to programming, which is the very idea of open-source? You seem to be one of those mad-eyed Linux converts, who does not actually recognise that there are a) other OSes out there, and b) not everyone wants or needs to mess about installing programs to work on their unit. Me? I'm too lazy to take on Linux (whatever distro), as I tend to consider theres not enough hours in the day to waste my time on things that have been "tinkered" with, at low level. Or go searching for a certain program, that if I did it with Windows, seems to do it with the minimum of fuss.
So- you stay over there, in La-la Linux land, and I'll stick my head in the fiendish corporate mentality that is the Beelzebub of OSes, that most evil thing they call Windows. Oh, hail, great Baal of MicroSoft!

Yes it is wide open to programming, wide open to everyone as in nothing can be hidden, how long do you think a security flaw lasts in that sort of environment?? How much harder is it to hide a security flaw??? Its more secure because of its openness not less so. Explain how it makes it less secure, I dont understand.

You seem to be, like the person thanking you for every post, a blinded windozze user who can't see passed the red, green, blue, and yellow flag. I'd say I'm open to all OS's I run XP Vista and various Linux Distros and I'd run OSX if the hardware wasn't out of my price range.

Its funny you mention tinkering I just installed ubuntu on a mates computer took 20 mins and worked out of the box (so to speak) didn't need to tinker with anything. I didn't need to go searching for any programs as they were all either installed as standard or avaliable in the repostitories.

If I'd installed windozze I'd still be doing it downloading security programs, updates, installing the drivers so the hardware worked right and various other programs etc etc. Some I'd have to buy. We could do this all day it'll get us no where so you stay in windows I'll continue to use various OS's.

As usual I didn't start this argument I made an innocent comment an some windows fanatic took offence to the truth.

chunter

PROLIANT wrote: »

My profession and "stable" job is not a delusion, I deal with tw@ts like you every day..."tweakers" who think they know it all yet when it comes down to it you are another rider of the Mickey mouse bandwagon and I have to fix your f uk ups for you...that is why I am the boss man

1. Never drink and post...
2. He must be related to Sir Fred Goodwin with this kind of public relations.

tbird3

Dear Asininity- please note the at the end. I find it a matter of huge amusement everytime one person prefers something over another. Take the PS3/Xbox360 argument, amongst others. Both are good in some respects, both have epic fail written over them in others. As you say, I am a dyed-in-the-wool MS person, mainly because I get all the products for free. Linux, agreed, does have its place, as does Windows. But when they are bad, they are like the girl with the curl- when they are good, they are very, very good, but when they are bad, they're awful!

asininity

Believe it or not I'm not actually a die hard linux fanatic. It just comes across that way as I always end up defending it against people sprouting carp. I'd do and have done the same for windows.

Heres my views:

Linux is a great OS and I really like the philosophy behind the way its made and distributed. This is my OS of choice. I dont think its completely ready for every home user yet but its getting there.

Windows is good I like solving its problems, but in the same respect think these are down to poorly written code and poorly thought out security. I also dont feel the need to hide this.

Macs OSX I've never used though I have tried in when I'm in the apple store getting free internet and I've run BSD before. Hardware wise Macs are now just over priced good looking PCs running a BSD variant that I can't afford or justify to myself buying one after saving up.

Just my opinions.

tomsolomon

chunter wrote: »

1. Never drink and post...
2. He must be related to Sir Fred Goodwin with this kind of public relations.

Perhapse you should listen to some of the senior members on the forum.
They have been here a long time for a reason.
And also you might learn something......

Marty_J

asininity wrote: »

Macs OSX I've never used though I have tried in when I'm in the apple store getting free internet and I've run BSD before. Hardware wise Macs are now just over priced good looking PCs running a BSD variant that I can't afford or justify to myself buying one after saving up.

I wouldn't say Macs are over-priced. They're certainly more expensive than some PCs, but what they offer is important to some people. They're the easiest way to run OS X, which I love like a fat kid loves cake. They're very well built, and they have a much higher re-sale value than PCs tend to.

And of course, they look very pretty. That might sound shallow, but I don't buy ugly furniture, so why would I buy an ugly computer? It's kind of odd that people shop for a nice looking computer desk, but they don't buy a nice looking computer to put on it.

That being said, if I did have to have a PC, I would almost certainly be running Ubuntu on it.

Just my opinions.

Likewise.

libra10

I also find that Vista freezes considerably, never had that problem with XP. Have just reinstalled, which has improved things quite a lot.

It's difficult to find help from the Start button, wondering whether it will be worth investing in new Windows programme when released.

Also Windows Mail and Live Mail aren't as user-friendly as Outlook Express.