I would like to know what you all think about this article from The Inquirer.
I would like to know what you all think about this article from The Inquirer.
Debian 11 "Bullseye"
HP Envy 2021 laptop
Linux user since 1999.
After reading 3 lines it felt if this was written by a windows 'hater' instead of an objective journalist. So I quit reading.
Under Construction • © 1985 - 2009 and counting.
My blog | My Portfolio | My DeviantArt-account | My Mini City (click game) | Howto: the ThinkVantage key under Ubuntu
arch 2008.06
Intel Core 2 Extreme QX6850 | Asus Maximus II Formula | EVGA 8800GT Superclocked | 4GB G.Skill DDR2-1000 | Zalman ZM600-HP
It's heavily biased and the author seems to be very childish. (calling Vista the "Broken OS")
It's no worse than people running XP in a VM under Linux - possibly better if they have stuff to pair it closer to the OS to make things faster. One thing that amuses me is this:
Windows 7 will grab the GPU to run the desktop, and it can't share the device. If it were even possible, you could possibly assign the GPU to XPM, but that would mean you'd lose GPU acceleration for the desktop, CPU use would spike, and things would start to resemble molasses in the winter very quickly. This much brain twisting logic is unlikely to be implemented even if it could somehow technically work. Basically, the host OS, Windows 7, can and must own the GPU fully.
This is pretty much a lie since on Vista atleast, I can run Aero and a 3D game in a window at the same time. No reason why the VM couldn't use the GPU at the same time as Aero.
Another:
I can't say which is sadder, trade press abdication of responsibility, people not questioning what they're fed, or XPM itself. There is one thing that is quite clear, however. If you want XPM now, you can get there at no cost. Go download Ubuntu or Fedora Linux, and use Xen, VMWare or any other free VMM out there with your existing Windows XP licence. You will then have the same end result as using XPM, save money, gain security, and get off the Microsoft treadmill. The choice, and the money you will save, are yours.
Good job you've taught me to question what I'm told, Charlie Demerjian, otherwise I would have believed all this crap. This is the same guy that likes to complain loudly about Nvidia at every available opportunity. His articles are complete garbage.
I'd write more about why the article is bad but I'll leave that to you guys.
"the PC industry press is abdicating its responsibility to report objectively about a vendor's product, and the public is, well, dumb as rocks. It will believe almost anything it's told and never question the source. Yes, I am talking about you."
Fail?
Saw the source and didn't even bother.
Hmm... I didn't know a tabloid for technology stories existed. Now I know.
You can't really trust a negative review from an obvious Windows hater. This one quote is just ridiculous:
Yeah, it's true that if you're running Aero, it uses your GPU. But on the other hand, if you're using Compiz, it uses your GPU for the desktop, too. So I guess by that argument, Linux sucks just as bad as Vista. No, the truth is that the whole argument for compositing in the first place is that it only makes sense to rely on your GPU to process visual things.The Broken OS (Vista) and Windows 7 need a GPU to run their desktops at any speed worth mentioning, that is, they need 3D acceleration.
But despite his totally nonobjective bias, I do share his lack of love for XPM. It's just a virtual machine so it will have vm limitations. And you have to own a license for XP to be able to use it; you don't even get that for your extra money. We've already been doing that for free for years with vmware and virtualbox, etc.
It's definitely a gimmick, and that feature alone doesn't make it worth it to pay more for a version that's greater than Home Premium.
Today you are You, that is truer than true. There is no one alive who is Youer than You. - Dr. Seuss
Linux users defending Microsoft Windows!? This is great!
*Takes screen shot*
Bookmarks