Windows problems! STOP recommending Linux

BillScarab

Not sure about the others but Excel was released on the PC about 2 years after it came out on Macs.

I've heard that Microsoft did this as part of deal with Apple to allow them to use some of the Mac's GUI design elements in the early releases of Windows. no idea if it's actually true though.

Surely the reason Word's first GUI version was on a Mac wass becasue Windows hadn't been released at that point?

Got to agree with your basic point though, Mac software is generally similar in price to Windows software nowadays. I seem to remember it costing more back in the '80s but then back then I was using an ST and didn't give a stuff anyway.

EDIT: Just to reply to jaydeuk1, great isn't it!

Can't beat a pointless argument to make the day fly by.

My only disappointment is that Leopard hasn't posted a hilarious picture or video of Steve Ballmer from his collection yet. :rolleyes:

Leopard

BillScarab wrote: »

Yes, most days several people post that they are having problems. But then what percentage of the people who are members of this site and use windows is that? A tiny percentage.

The real cause for concern would be the unidentifiable percentage of Windows users whose computer is so crippled by malware that they are unable to post to MSE in search of a solution to their problem.

You didn't reply to davester, you gave a politicans answer by answering the question you wanted to rather than the one he asked.

I disagree totally. He chose the question and I answered it - directly. In so far as I was able to divine it (not made easy by the fact that he doesn't use question marks) he only asked one.

If all you want to do is surf the net and use email why buy a Mac? A cheaper Windows machine will do the job as will a Linux Machine and a Linux machine is just as safe from malware as a Mac.

You can neither surf the net nor use email with a Windows-based computer if it is sufficiently corrupted by malware to which a Mac is immune and davester made no mention whatsoever of Linux in his entire posting – despite the fact that it's supposed to be the topic of the thread. He compared only WIndows-based machines with Macs and received from me the direct answer to the direct question he posed, in the terms upon which it was predicated. (Would that politicians did that.)

Now if you can afford the cost of a Mac and you want one fair enough, go ahead and buy one. However many people can't either afford a Mac or can't justify the expense.

I have never, and would never, suggest to anyone that they buy a computer that they cannot afford. Without wishing to spark off yet another protracted argument as to the relative financial value of a Windows computer package versus an Apple computer package on a like-for-like basis and waged largely by people insufficiently experienced in both platforms to make a valid comparison, I will add only that, in the same way as I feel deeply and genuinely sorry for those who are so poor that they are restricted to coin-in-the slot metered electricity and thus have to pay more for it (which I think is outrageous), I feel sorry for those who cannot afford the upfront cost of a Mac and are thus deprived the long-term overall economy of its ownership when compared to cheap Windows computers.

The bottom line is that neither affordability nor Linux were factors included in davester's question and were thus excluded by me in giving him a direct, non-poitician's, answer to it.



But enough of this. Here, just for you and by specific request, is today's resolution of your expressed disappointment.

Please tell anewhope to close his eyes before clicking on the link: I have no wish to inflict disappointment upon him. With Windows he has enough already.

I'm sure it's genuine.

(But if it isn't, I doubt that it was produced with Linux.)



Oh yes, and just to keep CHR15 happy,

CHR15 wrote: »

As good as Apple is.... the thing which turns me off more than anything is the amount of Fanboys.

It's as if they recruit users like the Hitler Youth or come kind of Cult!!

this is for him.

[Deleted User]

BillScarab wrote: »

My only disappointment is that Leopard hasn't posted a hilarious picture or video of Steve Ballmer from his collection yet. :rolleyes:

He should try stand up with an routine like that.

Oneday77

I do rememeber saying I will admit when I am wrong. Ok so my point on cost and initial development of Mac software has flaws in it. So I will conceed a little. In saying that how many regular Computer Owners(PC/MAC/Selfstyled Monster creations) have CS3/CS4/Pagemaker? Not that many.
The view on Macs being design tools has certainly evolved, however look at the main killer apps for them, they tend to be design packages. As far as being mainstream for online, Safari is good but the Internet needs to support it more so that people can shop properly. Not the Macs fault just website designers.
I have a thought when did this become a Mac based discussion?
It is about giving people very confusing information regarding solutions to problems. If an application on any given platform is giving hassle by all means suggest a different application. Just stop recommending a new platform unless it is justified.
There is certainly room for everyones view on what is best for them. But like all conflict in the World and since the beggining of time. Forcing views on others without a sensible transition of change or without agreement is disasterous. Maybe a bit melodramatic but you get my point.

Is recommending that a non technical user switches platforms, regardless of what they are currently using, because they have a Computer problem the right advice to give? No.

Leopard

But actually...if somebody is having problems with Windows – and particularly in working out how to combat malware – switching to a Mac (if they can afford the up-front cost) is not necessarily a bad idea.

And, certainly, if somebody is just starting out with computers and doesn't want, or doesn't have, anyone to help them, they'd find a Mac much easier to master because it's more instinctive to use and all the free software that comes with it is integrated between applications and with the operating system.

And that's even before you take the problem of malware into consideration.

So, switching to Mac is not always bad advice. Many do, and they seldom return to Windows.

But that's just the Mac aspect of it. The Linux part I'll leave you!

isofa

Oneday77 wrote: »

I do rememeber saying I will admit when I am wrong. Ok so my point on cost and initial development of Mac software has flaws in it. So I will conceed a little.

Just a little :rolleyes: The software I mentioned earlier all revolutionised desktop computing in some way or another, it just so happens that in those examples all the software was first developed for the Mac. I have no axe to grind, I use both platforms, make my living using both and use both as a home user too. Neither is perfect.

Oneday77 wrote: »

In saying that how many regular Computer Owners(PC/MAC/Selfstyled Monster creations) have CS3/CS4/Pagemaker? Not that many.

You'd be surprised, anyone working as a freelance designer, photographer or anything else related will have at least one CS package.

Based on home users, most will have Office, and many will have Photoshop Elements or similar... Most top end software has lighter consumer versions, Photoshop as mentioned, Premier for video and so on. Office has "Home and Student" versions which are missing pro tools such as Access and Outlook for £60 rather than hundreds for the Pro or Premium commercial versions.

Oneday77 wrote: »

The view on Macs being design tools has certainly evolved, however look at the main killer apps for them, they tend to be design packages.

True, but you need add to the mix video, and music. Logic is used by many current bands, Final Cut Pro is from everything from the BBC production to movie creation.

Oneday77 wrote: »

As far as being mainstream for online, Safari is good but the Internet needs to support it more so that people can shop properly. Not the Macs fault just website designers.
I have a thought when did this become a Mac based discussion?
It is about giving people very confusing information regarding solutions to problems. If an application on any given platform is giving hassle by all means suggest a different application. Just stop recommending a new platform unless it is justified.
There is certainly room for everyones view on what is best for them. But like all conflict in the World and since the beggining of time. Forcing views on others without a sensible transition of change or without agreement is disasterous. Maybe a bit melodramatic but you get my point.

I'm not a fan of Safari at all, I use Firefox on all platforms I use.

I've certainly never once recommended a platform over the other unless for a very specific task, I and like many on here, give up a bit of time when we are free, to give some (hopefully) good advice to others.

However what I do object to is the total misinformation about both platforms (and Linux too), from people who only have used one or the other and can't see any advantages or otherwise to another option. Mis-information is the biggest problem with people "giving advice".

Oneday77 wrote: »

Is recommending that a non technical user switches platforms, regardless of what they are currently using, because they have a Computer problem the right advice to give? No.

I do totally agree, someone posted a question about burning a CD on a Mac recently – today someone posted "why not try Linux". This is no help, in the same way any of us recommending a PC user switch to a Mac to do the odd bit of photo-editing, or a Mac user switch to a PC to run a specific database, or any user switch to Linux for xyz reasons, or vice-versa!

asininity

I disagree with the OP. I will keep recommending linux when and if I see fit. About 7 years ago when I knew next to nothing about computers it was in a thread with a minor windows problem that someone recommended linux to me, I was and am very grateful.

What you forget is that new computer users have no preference over which OS they use and they will learn what ever is put in front of them.

Novice windows users are generally ignorant, this is not their fault, not everyone wants to be a computer expert and they dont like change. Therein is the problem. But they are able to follow instructions as is proven here everyday.

With linux I can instantly diagnose a software or hardware issue, something which can be very difficult to do. That is very useful! With linux I can scan a windows hard drive when its not in use and find things that can hide from security software whilst the OS is in use. That is very useful. Not to mention I only need to pay for hardware when building a new computer.

"Stop recommending linux" is like saying "Stop telling people to clean viruses" because the assumption is that the person recommending linux will not be able to provide help getting it running in the same way as Alienrik and others including myself help novice users clean up their computers doing stuff they do not understand because they can follow instuctions.

You are implying the equivalent of this: Replying to a thread titled "Help I have a virus" with "Well get rid of it then" and nothing further.

You imply that removing a virus/solving windows problems are less complicated that installing and running linux which it is not, provided you have the support. Basically what you're saying is if you have a windows problem you have tons of support but if you try linux you're on you're own bucko. Which is patently not true.

You also imply that people are incapable of learning something new and would not be interested in any case.

Assumption is the mother of all !!!! ups.

Points to note if you use opensource software and some free software you can move over to linux very easily as the majority of these are on both platforms.

robt_2

asininity wrote: »

I disagree with the OP. I will keep recommending linux when and if I see fit. About 7 years ago when I knew next to nothing about computers it was in a thread with a minor windows problem that someone recommended linux to me, I was and am very grateful.

Could you explain why you would recommend Linux to someone who is having trouble installing a new mouse under Windows, and why you think it would help them installing their new mouse under Windows.

That is what the thread is about.

asininity

robt wrote: »

Could you explain why you would recommend Linux to someone who is having trouble installing a new mouse under Windows, and why you think it would help them installing their new mouse under Windows.

That is what the thread is about.

I wouldn't, dont be stupid. Reread what I said.

Besides which when has anyone here recommended linux cos someone cant install a mouse driver???

fwor

robt wrote: »

Could you explain why you would recommend Linux to someone who is having trouble installing a new mouse under Windows, and why you think it would help them installing their new mouse under Windows.

That is what the thread is about.

Well... we don't know if the problem is in the software or whether they have been shipped a dud. If that user were to boot their computer from a Linux LiveCD and the mouse did not work then it would be fairly safe to say that the new mouse is faulty, or that they have some other hardware problem. If the mouse works correctly then it would be reasonable to assume that the problem is within Windows - possibly a driver issue.

I'm not saying that this would be a particularly efficient way to diagnose the problem, and I would not put it forward as the preferred method, but it would nevertheless provide useful diagnostic information.