why windows still beats linux!

[vi edit]

Frankly, outside of the inital upfront cost of purchasing an MS operating system, I have zero compelling reasons to switch over to anything but an MS O/S. You can find several deals floating around offering XP Pro for $45 or so which is nothing really for something you might use 4-12 hours a day, 300+ days a year, for a couple years. It breaks down to less than pennies a day.

I've got good software support. Good hardware support. Excellent compatibility with other programs since it's so widely used. And it is quite stable with the release of Win2k and XP.

It just lacks the geek factor. I grew out of that a couple years ago. I just want something that works well right out of the box.

 

[Mr N8]

Originally posted by: notfred
Maybe you should switch from Windows to PlayStation 2, seems to have everything you want.

Good point. Most popular games have a PS2 alternative. I never gave that a thought. You sir, have opened my eyes to a whole new set of ideas.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Frankly, outside of the inital upfront cost of purchasing an MS operating system, I have zero compelling reasons to switch over to anything but an MS O/S. You can find several deals floating around offering XP Pro for $45 or so which is nothing really for something you might use 4-12 hours a day, 300+ days a year, for a couple years. It breaks down to less than pennies a day.

I've got good software support. Good hardware support. Excellent compatibility with other programs since it's so widely used. And it is quite stable with the release of Win2k and XP.

It just lacks the geek factor. I grew out of that a couple years ago. I just want something that works well right out of the box.

Spoken like someone who actually gets things done for a living :beer:

 

[BatmanNate]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: BatmanNate
That is like comparing a hammer to a screwdriver. Windows is a decent desktop OS, linux can make an excellent webserver/ftpserver/router/gateway/firewall/other sundry network device. I don't think either particularly beats the other in the respect that they seem to cater in design to different tasks. Just my 2¢.

Calling Windows a "desktop OS" is like calling a nuclear warhead a firecracker; it seriously undervalues the power.

Not particularly, I was just distginguising it from a server. There are desktop/workstation systems then there are servers/customized applications and Windows seems to dominate in the former category so I thought it seemed fair. Not to say that it can't to other things, that is just what it is best for. I'm not devaluing Windows, it just tends to be used by a different segment of the market for a different purpose that the "alternative" OS's.

 

[Mr N8]

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Frankly, outside of the inital upfront cost of purchasing an MS operating system, I have zero compelling reasons to switch over to anything but an MS O/S. You can find several deals floating around offering XP Pro for $45 or so which is nothing really for something you might use 4-12 hours a day, 300+ days a year, for a couple years. It breaks down to less than pennies a day.

I've got good software support. Good hardware support. Excellent compatibility with other programs since it's so widely used. And it is quite stable with the release of Win2k and XP.

It just lacks the geek factor. I grew out of that a couple years ago. I just want something that works well right out of the box.

Spoken like someone who actually gets things done for a living :beer:

The thing that gets me is the additional ~$300 for Office, the SQL seat licensing, and the Server seat licence that you have to get to run all of this on a network. Now, granted, I do it because it just plain stupid to run a business without purchasing the licences.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: BatmanNate

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: BatmanNate
That is like comparing a hammer to a screwdriver. Windows is a decent desktop OS, linux can make an excellent webserver/ftpserver/router/gateway/firewall/other sundry network device. I don't think either particularly beats the other in the respect that they seem to cater in design to different tasks. Just my 2¢.

Calling Windows a "desktop OS" is like calling a nuclear warhead a firecracker; it seriously undervalues the power.

Not particularly, I was just distginguising it from a server. There are desktop/wrokstation systems then there are servers/customized applications and Windows seems to dominate in the former category so I thought it seemed fair. Not to say that it can't to other things, that is just what it is best for.

Certainly you won't be deploying XP as a server OS anytime soon (although I know people who do), but 2K 2K3 are extremely solid server platforms; of course, this is assuming one actually maintains the boxen.

There's no panacean platform of course, so as always one will have an advantage over the other given the relevant scenarios.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: MogulMonster

Originally posted by: Descartes

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Frankly, outside of the inital upfront cost of purchasing an MS operating system, I have zero compelling reasons to switch over to anything but an MS O/S. You can find several deals floating around offering XP Pro for $45 or so which is nothing really for something you might use 4-12 hours a day, 300+ days a year, for a couple years. It breaks down to less than pennies a day.

I've got good software support. Good hardware support. Excellent compatibility with other programs since it's so widely used. And it is quite stable with the release of Win2k and XP.

It just lacks the geek factor. I grew out of that a couple years ago. I just want something that works well right out of the box.

Spoken like someone who actually gets things done for a living :beer:

The thing that gets me is the additional ~$300 for Office, the SQL seat licensing, and the Server seat licence that you have to get to run all of this on a network. Now, granted, I do it because it just plain stupid to run a business without purchasing the licences.

I'll admit, I've never felt the pains of MS licensing, because I've either worked for an MCSP or acquired an MSDN Universal subscription. There is also an "Action Pack" that helps mitigate the costs a bit for smaller businesses. I'm a developer, and there's no way I could afford all the software I need to use in order to complete my projects, so an MSDN subscription is well worth the cost. I can download everything I need, legally.

 

[hdeck]

windows xp pro cost me $6 at school, and it does the job for me.

 

[HJB417]

so let me get this straight
if I were to get the academic subscription to msdn (pro)
I will get copies of every NT based os starting w/ NT5?

 

[dexvx]

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
Windows also comes equipt with the "BSOD" feature!

Something that linux has too.

 

[Descartes]

Originally posted by: HJB417
so let me get this straight
if I were to get the academic subscription to msdn (pro)
I will get copies of every NT based os starting w/ NT5?

I'm not familiar with the academic subscription to MSDN, but I believe only MSDN Universal gives you access to the "Subscriber Downloads." The subscriber downloads gives you access to EVERYTHING, and I mean EVERYTHING.

 

[digitalsm]

Originally posted by: notfred
Maybe you should switch from Windows to PlayStation 2, seems to have everything you want.

Thats a moronic statements if Ive ever seen one. FPS, Online, and RTS games are infinitly better on the PC. Consoles have a long ways to go to have PC Quality FPSs, Online Games and RTS games.

 

[geno]

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
Windows also comes equipt with the "BSOD" feature!

Awww, too bad it didn't come equipped with XP, I feel like I'm missing out on something

 

[DT4K]

Originally posted by: Lonyo

Originally posted by: BurnItDwn
Windows also comes equipt with the "BSOD" feature!

I only get a BSOD everytime I try to shut down Win 2k. Nothing frequent
Well, except I shut down every day.

Damn, you f'ed up your system. You suck at computers.
Yeah, MS pisses me off sometimes with buggy crap.

But my Win XP system has had ZERO crashes in one year of use.
My win 2k system at work is six months old and has had ZERO crashes or hangs.

 

[nan0bug]

Originally posted by: HJB417
Just a random thought. I would love to quit paying for windows upgrades and switch to linux, but the one thing that's holding me back is not enough game developers are making linux ports (idsoftware is the only one that comes to mind). There was a company that would rewrite code to linux, but they went out of business . Wine doesn't cut it either. Other than gaming, and visual studio.net ide =), windows 4 has no advtantage over linux (windows is easier to use though).

Wrong forum.

Also, Windows has plenty of other advantages over linux, like *ahem* the fact that more people use it. DirectX is much more than just an API for gaming, its also heavily used in audio apps (which are nearly nonexistant on linux. Im talking stuff like Reason, Cubase, etc). Also, it has a common installer interface, and cut & paste isn't a crapshoot.

I could come up with more but Im lazy and, like I said, this is in the wrong forum.

 

[Tab]

OMG A Thread without illogical MS Bashers! Saying they hate Microsoft just because Bill gates made it and he is the anti-christ!

Group Hug

Running WinXPro solid and stable. I've never had a crash expect when I've o/c'd too much

 

[LAUST]

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Frankly, outside of the inital upfront cost of purchasing an MS operating system, I have zero compelling reasons to switch over to anything but an MS O/S. You can find several deals floating around offering XP Pro for $45 or so which is nothing really for something you might use 4-12 hours a day, 300+ days a year, for a couple years. It breaks down to less than pennies a day.

I've got good software support. Good hardware support. Excellent compatibility with other programs since it's so widely used. And it is quite stable with the release of Win2k and XP.

It just lacks the geek factor. I grew out of that a couple years ago. I just want something that works well right out of the box.

EXACTLY... I've been doin it for 10 years and I see no reason to be a flag carrier for some homegrown OS, Free sh!t doesn't last forever anyway.

 

[lukatmyshu]

My favorite quote about Linux is this --
Linux is only free if you don't value your time.

That being said I REALLY wish that Microsoft would do what Apple did and build XP of a linux kernel. Right now I have the elaborate setup of having a linux server and a XP desktop, and ssh-ing into the server from the desktop.

Originally posted by: LAUST

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Frankly, outside of the inital upfront cost of purchasing an MS operating system, I have zero compelling reasons to switch over to anything but an MS O/S. You can find several deals floating around offering XP Pro for $45 or so which is nothing really for something you might use 4-12 hours a day, 300+ days a year, for a couple years. It breaks down to less than pennies a day.

I've got good software support. Good hardware support. Excellent compatibility with other programs since it's so widely used. And it is quite stable with the release of Win2k and XP.

It just lacks the geek factor. I grew out of that a couple years ago. I just want something that works well right out of the box.

EXACTLY... I've been doin it for 10 years and I see no reason to be a flag carrier for some homegrown OS, Free sh!t doesn't last forever anyway.

 

[TheVrolok]

I play Half Life, Black and White, and Warcraft 3 in Linux.. and they all run close enough to perfect for my tastes.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: RossMAN

Originally posted by: Astaroth33
Remember though, not everyone is a gamer.

Also, part of the problem with Linux is that in the open source model, everyone wants to work on the eye candy and all the fun stuff, but not so much on unglamorous nuts and bolts. Still, I think Linux (and the GPL) is a great idea; Microsoft needs a sharp thorn in the side.

Bingo.

<--- not a gamer

Give me something small, fast, efficient, free, pretty, easy to upgrade, compatible and I'll switch in a heart beat.

The answer.

 

[dmw16]

In all fairness winXP/2k isnt bad at all...pretty stable in fact. And you get games...
-doug

 

[aircooled]

I have to know Windows as I'm in the IT field for a company that is all windows, servers & workstations. (we do have a linux IDS server, which is listed on my resume, but I'd hate to be quizzed on it ).

Windows is just the de-facto standard right now. That may change in the future. just be prepared for change.

 

[n0cmonkey]

Originally posted by: LAUST

Originally posted by: vi_edit
Frankly, outside of the inital upfront cost of purchasing an MS operating system, I have zero compelling reasons to switch over to anything but an MS O/S. You can find several deals floating around offering XP Pro for $45 or so which is nothing really for something you might use 4-12 hours a day, 300+ days a year, for a couple years. It breaks down to less than pennies a day.

I've got good software support. Good hardware support. Excellent compatibility with other programs since it's so widely used. And it is quite stable with the release of Win2k and XP.

It just lacks the geek factor. I grew out of that a couple years ago. I just want something that works well right out of the box.

EXACTLY... I've been doin it for 10 years and I see no reason to be a flag carrier for some homegrown OS, Free sh!t doesn't last forever anyway.

BSD has been around for quite a while...

 

[n0cmonkey]

Bill Gates is the Devil.

 

[her209]

Linux is frustrating to use. It makes me want to strangle every person I see within running distance after 5 minutes of using it.