PDA

View Full Version : Is Windows bad?



bjngchn
March 12th, 2014, 12:41 AM
Windows may be bad, because it is not opensource, so its code is hidden. But there are thousands of engineers worldwide who knows what is inside Windows. Doesn't this mean it is almost opensource: We endusers may not know what is inside, but there are many eyes watching. Situation seems close to opensource version.

QIII
March 12th, 2014, 12:44 AM
Moved to The Cafe.

No. Not even close to open source.

And no, it's not bad. Despite what one loud and self-righteous voice in the FLOSS community may say, there is nothing immoral, unethical or bad about the OS or using it.

And even if Jono Bacon comes out later and apologizes to that voice for disagreeing, I don't feel like I need to when I disagree.

Now, if you want to talk about whether Windows is a good OS in terms of performance, everyone is entitled to their own opinions. If it doesn't work for what you want to do, don't use it.

With regard to the company that produces it, well, I'll keep my opinion to myself.

CharlesA
March 12th, 2014, 01:14 AM
Windows ftw! But also Linux ftw and OSX ftw!

*runs and hides*

Irihapeti
March 12th, 2014, 01:40 AM
If windows is bad, them I'm bad because I use it sometimes.

And, FTR, I heartily agree with QIII.

OrangeCrate
March 12th, 2014, 02:00 AM
If windows is bad, them I'm bad because I use it sometimes.

And, FTR, I heartily agree with QIII.

That.

PondPuppy
March 12th, 2014, 03:39 AM
Agree -- not bad, in either the ethical or the functional sense of the word.

Maybe there's a bit of discussion about corporations ... like Microsoft, whose greatest good is to make money, and on the other hand FOSS developers, who do it...well, why? Because they need a program and so they make one, or because they want to contribute to the community, or because they are students and crazy about programming. Or just crazy, I don't know!

But my opinions are personal, and not always logically defensible.

23dornot23d
March 12th, 2014, 05:08 AM
Depends how you look at the situation with getting hardware manufacturers to lock out the competition.

In that sense of being bad ...... would it be seen in a different light if Linux managed to get manufactures of

Hardware to change in such a way that it started to lock out the competition ?

Logical to want a computer to do what we want it to do - the best way it can do it - quickly - efficiently and without

advertizing bloat ..... maybe things are changing on this one though - money changes the way people think about

what it is a computer should do best.

Delivering more links to Music and Games which makes it more of a recreational gadget ......

The question about bad - not really as it did more than anything else to get the amount of users

we see today into computing ....... is it turning bad as it dies a death with Ubuntu now taking

over some of its main functions ........ gaming machine which Linux never really targeted before

this in itself could change the desktop arena.

* ( 2 things stop it ...... graphics cards manufacturers supporting Linux and hardware manufacturers making it simple to add Linux )

Is the cause of these 2 things ethically controlled or has money changed hands to ensure that one firm gets priority - who knows.

mastablasta
March 12th, 2014, 09:29 AM
the engineers you talk about, probably see only part of the code. furthermore from experience in dealing wiht large corporations - oftenly left arm doesn't know what the right arm is doing in them. so while someone there may screen the code there is no guarantee that nothing is inserted on final screenign (e.g. backdoors, listening devices and such). there is simply no way to knwo as process is not open and transparent.

a good exampel is for example most governments - though many people see how their funds are used the population usually do not know about each and every purchase. some are even deliberatelly marked as top secret. you would just see how the budget was cut but usually not how it was spent. so this is not opensoruce.

in contrast to this we had a footbal club and a town that went open and registered publicly each and every cent spent. even bill for pencils... (financial difficulties prompted this and this is how they reassured people and investors that the funds are not missused). both flourished after these measures. as investors got confidence in the club while the town governemnt got support from population as they could see how money was spent. and it was spent for the good of the people.

buzzingrobot
March 12th, 2014, 12:54 PM
Windows isn't bad or good. Neither is FOSS. It just is.

Some software developers do believe an ethical issue is at stake regarding open access to source code. That's their right. (It's also in their own self-interest, but then, few of us adopt beliefs that we think are contrary to our interests.) But, that doesn't make Windows "bad" any more than the existence of vegans makes meat "bad".

And, the openess of FOSS doesn't make Linux "good".

If someone thinks making software profit is "bad" they do not have to buy it. But, to be consistent, they should also stop shopping for food, clothing, etc.

Bottom Line: Judge software on its merits as software. FOSS says it can deliver better software than the commercial world. We should not cut it any slack. We should not cut the commercial world any slack. Use what works best for you.

PondPuppy
March 12th, 2014, 01:41 PM
Judge software on its merits as software.

Yes. Absolutely.

Be aware, however, that the goals of a for-profit corporation may not coincide with your best interests. Selling software is no worse than selling zucchini or shoes. But stealthily dumping herbicide on other farmers' zucchini plants, or blocking the road so their zucchini can't be delivered to market -- these are not in the consumers' best interests. Microsoft and Google, for instance, have both run afoul of the law with regards to unethical business practices.

I guess my own personal view is, corporations have evolved to take your money just as sharks evolved to bite. Software is software, and Microsoft has made some great stuff. But as far as "good" in the sense of "trusted to not screw me over" -- nope. That's a value judgment on the company, though, and not on the software we call Windows, so not really what the OP was asking.

buzzingrobot
March 12th, 2014, 02:13 PM
Corporations haven't 'evolved' to make money. That's why they exist in the first place. Profit is the lifeblood of the market because it is the way resources are, in the end, replenished and allocated. Any conceivable alternative must have an equivalent, which is sometimes forgotten. Even FOSS volunteers need to eat, and someone's buying that food.:p

So, corporations do what they think is in their best interests. So do consumers. Sometimes those interests coincide, sometimes they don't. Society is, after all, a collection of competing interests. Caveat emptor.

Dragonbite
March 12th, 2014, 03:36 PM
It's an operating system. How can an inanimate object (I want to see my Windows software walk over and close the door) be "good" or "bad"?

nunecas123
March 12th, 2014, 03:47 PM
It's an operating system. How can an inanimate object (I want to see my Windows software walk over and close the door) be "good" or "bad"?

But we can also choose animate objects in our lives. :P

stalkingwolf
March 12th, 2014, 04:24 PM
the first step to answering this question is to define exactly , what is bad? in my opinion windows is bad. but for reasons of operability. when i want to install a program,
i find it extremely irritating to be asked 20 fing times if i want to also install this or that tool bar or set my home page to this or that and so on. i want to install a specific
tool and get on with it.

And if i am told i have to install this or that "extra" to get what i want i usually find another solution.

Dragonbite
March 12th, 2014, 05:21 PM
the first step to answering this question is to define exactly , what is bad? in my opinion windows is bad. but for reasons of operability. when i want to install a program,
i find it extremely irritating to be asked 20 fing times if i want to also install this or that tool bar or set my home page to this or that and so on. i want to install a specific
tool and get on with it.

And if i am told i have to install this or that "extra" to get what i want i usually find another solution.

I must be doing something wrong. I get asked once for the administrator's password and then things go on the usual way (where to install, select options, etc.).

Now, when the installer also tries to bundle in some crappy toolbar or something-or-other, that makes me irritated at the software provider, but Windows has nothing to do with that.

CharlesA
March 12th, 2014, 05:30 PM
Now, when the installer also tries to bundle in some crappy toolbar or something-or-other, that makes me irritated at the software provider, but Windows has nothing to do with that.

Wait, I thought you were just supposed to click on the "next" button until it went away. :p

Sidenote: Installers that do that annoy me, especially when they make it seem like you need to install the extra junk to install the program you want.

newbie2244
March 13th, 2014, 02:48 PM
The thousands of engineers world-wide usually do not have a say in what system they would like to use.
As a general rule, engineers do not like the Windows environment, I speak from experience.
Windows look and feel has gotten better, but it doesn't compare with high end hardware and software based on Unix.[/*]
And as the last poster pointed out, Microsoft's predatory practices such as insisting that OEM's bundle a half-functional Windows OS with hardware is offensive to one's intelligence - something that most engineers usually have a lot of.[/*]
Then taking control of your system to ram updates into it - even when you've opted to first review and then decide on your own if you want those crappy updates -- is criminal. [/*]

In ordinary daily life, this type of behavior is called "breaking and entering" and "trespassing". We as a society punish trespassers and burglars. Windows as a piece of s-ware is not morally bad, but Microsoft's practices are.

stalkingwolf
March 13th, 2014, 03:35 PM
but Windows has nothing to do with that.i dont have that when i install in ubuntu or mint. nor do i have to reboot every time i install a piece of software.
In fact i usually install multiple programs at one time.

buzzingrobot
March 13th, 2014, 03:58 PM
The thousands of engineers world-wide usually do not have a say in what system they would like to use.

As a general rule, engineers do not like the Windows environment, I speak from experience.
Windows look and feel has gotten better, but it doesn't compare with high end hardware and software based on Unix.[/*]
And as the last poster pointed out, Microsoft's predatory practices such as insisting that OEM's bundle a half-functional Windows OS with hardware is offensive to one's intelligence - something that most engineers usually have a lot of.[/*]
Then taking control of your system to ram updates into it - even when you've opted to first review and then decide on your own if you want those crappy updates -- is criminal. [/*]

In ordinary daily life, this type of behavior is called "breaking and entering" and "trespassing". We as a society punish trespassers and burglars. Windows as a piece of s-ware is not morally bad, but Microsoft's practices are.

Microsoft, Apple and Canonical are making software for consumers, not engineers. If engineers want "high end hardware and software" they should be shopping elsewhere.

I agree, also from experience, that engineers disdain Windows, for legitimate reasons and for cultural reasons. That's neither here nor there, though.

Frankly, I've never noticed that Windows "look and feel" is a sore point for the Windows users I know. It is what it is, which, for them, is the definition of what personal computing looks like.

Pre-installs are a great convenience for consumers. Few people have the interest or competence to install an OS.

Ditto updates. Few people have the competence, or the interest in acquiring the competence, to discern "good" updates from "bad" updates.

Many things about Microsoft and Windows that the FOSS community loves to rant about are either invisible to most consumers, don't matter to those consumers, or are seen as positive benefits. After 30 years of failed efforts to get people to use FOSS because it is FOSS, you'd think some lessons might have been learned. (Canonical has learned, and is bashed for it on a regular basis.)

CharlesA
March 13th, 2014, 04:15 PM
Many things about Microsoft and Windows that the FOSS community loves to rant about are either invisible to most consumers, don't matter to those consumers, or are seen as positive benefits. After 30 years of failed efforts to get people to use FOSS because it is FOSS, you'd think some lessons might have been learned. (Canonical has learned, and is bashed for it on a regular basis.)

Funny how that works isn't it?

OrangeCrate
March 13th, 2014, 04:27 PM
I quickly commented earlier in this thread, but, I'll add one final thought...

I've been using opensource software for many years now, but, I also own Microsoft stock. IMO, the minions will continue to use whatever comes on their new computer, and there will never be the "year of the Linux desktop". My personal interests and my investments generally don't conflict, and they certainly don't in respect to this topic.

Interesting thread.

newbie2244
March 14th, 2014, 05:48 PM
I would also like to add a comment to my previous post.nnAlthough I prefer to use Linux, I will still keep Windows on my dual boot system. nnWHen I locked myself out of Ubuntu by "playing" with .XAuthority and ICE, i was able to recover very quickly by reinstalling Ubuntu. Then I simply mounted my old root.disks, and was up and running.

JKyleOKC
March 15th, 2014, 06:04 PM
the engineers you talk about, probably see only part of the code. furthermore from experience in dealing wiht large corporations - oftenly left arm doesn't know what the right arm is doing in them. so while someone there may screen the code there is no guarantee that nothing is inserted on final screenign (e.g. backdoors, listening devices and such). there is simply no way to knwo as process is not open and transparent.Back in the day, a bit more than 20 years ago, I was part of a relatively small and not formally organized group of people who delved into the "undocumented" areas of MS-DOS. In 1989 I contracted to do an update of a book called "DOS Programmer Reference Manual" and as part of that update, I added a chapter telling much of what I then knew about such undocumented features.

That led, directly, to my being invited in early 1990 to join a small group that was preparing another book for a different publisher, eventually coming out as "Undocumented DOS" and almost immediately going into the Top 20 list of tehnical books ranked by number of copies sold. The five of us enjoyed handsome returns from our efforts for a year or two in the early 90s.

Unfortunately a thing called the DMCA got passed into law and made such research illegal in the USA. I'm sure that folk still dig into the mysteries behind the scenes, but making their discoveries known can now lead to severe penalties, so nobody publishes any more or even admits to doing such things. For the record, when Windows took over the world starting in the mid-90s, I quit digging. It simply became too arcane for my tastes! A few of the other folk in the "Undoc DOS" team did continue their efforts for a while, but eventually gave up before the DMCA criminalized their efforts. It just took too much work for so little return...

llanitedave
March 18th, 2014, 05:05 AM
And to that, I would say that the DMCA is bad. Windows isn't bad, but I'm glad I have access to something better.

monkeybrain20122
March 18th, 2014, 05:16 AM
I would also like to add a comment to my previous post.nnAlthough I prefer to use Linux, I will still keep Windows on my dual boot system. nnWHen I locked myself out of Ubuntu by "playing" with .XAuthority and ICE, i was able to recover very quickly by reinstalling Ubuntu. Then I simply mounted my old root.disks, and was up and running.

Why do you need to dual boot for that?

sammiev
March 18th, 2014, 05:17 AM
Every OS has it's pros and cons. I have used Linux for years now but I do keep MS on my HD. Will likely never use it but it's there.

forrestcupp
March 18th, 2014, 02:12 PM
Windows isn't bad or good. Neither is FOSS. It just is.

Some software developers do believe an ethical issue is at stake regarding open access to source code. That's their right. (It's also in their own self-interest, but then, few of us adopt beliefs that we think are contrary to our interests.) But, that doesn't make Windows "bad" any more than the existence of vegans makes meat "bad".

And, the openess of FOSS doesn't make Linux "good".

If someone thinks making software profit is "bad" they do not have to buy it. But, to be consistent, they should also stop shopping for food, clothing, etc.

Bottom Line: Judge software on its merits as software. FOSS says it can deliver better software than the commercial world. We should not cut it any slack. We should not cut the commercial world any slack. Use what works best for you.Exactly. It's about the intent behind the software. I remember several years ago when somebody put out a Linux script that would delete your root partition. If you don't know how to read the code, or you don't take the time to do it, it doesn't matter if it's open source. Obviously, it doesn't last as long because someone will see it, but the fact that it was open source doesn't make it inherently good or moral. On the other hand, we have proprietary software, like e-Sword, where the author wanted people to be able to study the Bible without having to pay top dollar for professional software.

It's not as much about the license as the intent behind the license.


Wait, I thought you were just supposed to click on the "next" button until it went away. :p

Sidenote: Installers that do that annoy me, especially when they make it seem like you need to install the extra junk to install the program you want.Lol. But it's not any different in Linux with people blindly entering their root password without even really caring what they are doing.

QDR06VV9
March 18th, 2014, 04:59 PM
Lol. But it's not any different in Linux with people blindly entering their root password without even really caring what they are doing.
Not All! But Yes too many do.;)
@ JKyleOKC You made me remember better days.
Also Thanks for the read! Is there any copies of your book out there?

JKyleOKC
March 18th, 2014, 05:48 PM
@ JKyleOKC You made me remember better days.
Also Thanks for the read! Is there any copies of your book out there?Which one? I've written a total of 21, but the only one that's still in print (so far as I know) is "Btrieve Complete," first published in 1995 by Addison-Wesley and still selling a few copies every year. The "Undocumented DOS" project was also from A-W but so far as I can tell has been out of print for years. You might find a copy via a Google search for the title, though.

QDR06VV9
March 18th, 2014, 06:02 PM
Which one? I've written a total of 21, but the only one that's still in print (so far as I know) is "Btrieve Complete," first published in 1995 by Addison-Wesley and still selling a few copies every year. The "Undocumented DOS" project was also from A-W but so far as I can tell has been out of print for years. You might find a copy via a Google search for the title, though.

Thank You Mr. Kyle:)
Undocumented DOS: Programmer's Guide to Reserved MS-DOS Functions and Data Structures Here (http://www.abebooks.com/servlet/BookDetailsPL?bi=7779898445&searchurl=ds%3D30%26isbn%3D9780201570649%26sortby% 3D13)

help_me2
March 19th, 2014, 12:45 AM
I just prefer not to use windows unless absolutely necessary. Bad? Depends on your opinion/situation.

PartisanEntity
March 20th, 2014, 11:26 PM
In the 8 years that I have been part of this community I have seen tons of discussions along the lines of "XYZ OS is bad/good.."

It all boils down to your personal needs and which OS can best serve those needs.

Windows has a wide footprint in the market because it was able to capitalize on a long head start. But now other alternatives have come a very long way and are very viable alternatives.

lorcastrand
March 23rd, 2014, 07:53 PM
In my staunchly open-source worldview, to willingly use Windows is sacrilege!
Yes, it is bad, on so many levels!
Would you care for me to list them all?

Elfy
March 23rd, 2014, 07:57 PM
In my staunchly open-source worldview, to willingly use Windows is sacrilege!
Yes, it is bad, on so many levels!
Would you care for me to list them all?

Not really - I doubt if there's anything new.

slooksterpsv
March 23rd, 2014, 07:58 PM
In the 8 years that I have been part of this community I have seen tons of discussions along the lines of "XYZ OS is bad/good.."

It all boils down to your personal needs and which OS can best serve those needs.

Windows has a wide footprint in the market because it was able to capitalize on a long head start. But now other alternatives have come a very long way and are very viable alternatives.

^ +1

moster
March 23rd, 2014, 10:15 PM
JKyleOKC, very interesting what you say about criminalizing efforts too dig into DOS or other closed software. Now, after all that happenings with NSA and finding out that computer camera can be turn on without user knowledge.... It all making sense now for me.

mattlach
March 24th, 2014, 07:11 AM
Bad is a very absolute term, and IMHO doesn't apply here at all, and it means different things to different people.

Many in the Linux community are open source zealots, and Windows is certainly not open source. While I prefer the open source community, my take these days is to simply use what works. For instance, I use closed source Nvidia drivers on my Linux Desktop, and I even have a virtualbox install with Windows 7 in it (as well as a bare metal Windows 7 dual boot) for when I need to run software that doesn't work natively. (I gave up on Wine... I could never get most software to work properly)

If we set the closed vs open source software development debate aside for a moment it really comes down to what works.

Linux distributions certainly tend to be more secure, stable and lighter weight than Windows machines are, and they have come a long way in useability - even to people who - unlike myself - don't have decades of computer geekery behind them as a hobby.

That being said, Windows has improved vastly since the bad old days. Memory protection becoming mainstream starting with XP was a huge leap forward for stability, and UAC introduced in Vista (and improved win Win 7 and 8) brought Unix-like user accounts and security to windows which was a huge leap security wise for Windows.

The biggest benefit Windows has is near universal software compatibility. This is a tough one to beat for the casual user. Any program you want, it probably runs on Windows. The same is far from being true for Linux.

Personally I am willing to put up with occasionally running something in a VM, or rebooting on the rare occasion I play a game, in exchange for better security, more stability and more flexibility, but there are a lot of people who aren't and I fully understand that, and don't belittle that point of view in the slightest.

The lucky part is that either choice you make, there are fewer drawbacks than there ever have been. Linux is more user friendly and has more software (or at least work-a-likes) than it ever has. Windows - today - is also more stable and secure than it ever has been. And dual booting is nowhere near as painful as it used to be before there were SSD's. :)

I - for one - am hoping Valve hits the ball out of the park with their new SteamOS, and it serves to expand the linux userbase dramatically, resulting in more software being written natively for (or at least ported to) Linux, as well as better vendor hardware support. All distributions should benefit from this.

In the meantime, I use Windows when I have to, but prefer my Mint 16 desktop install.

There is nothing BAD with either choice, they are just different choices for different needs.

AllenGG
March 24th, 2014, 05:35 PM
.........and wonderful opinions.
Well Microsoft has finally dumped the bald ugly loudmouth.
Originally MS/DOS seemed to turn in Windows and then WINDOWS 3 for Workgroups. Personaly, Iliked it.
The programmeers or script kiddies in the next office had fun with it. But it was OK.
MS got greedy and mean.
From then on it produced crap.
So maybe Windows is "BAD".
But MS holds more Patents than any company that I am aware of. It spends as much on ads and promtion and FUD as GM.
"MS Steve" Balmer may have strongly contibuted to The terrible reputation that Microsoft has worldwide.
http://www.groklaw.net/staticpages/index.php?page=2005010107100653

It is my firm belief the Microsoft is headed for extinction. NOT because "Windows is Bad", but MS's attitude is the problem.
Will everyone switch to Linux? Nope.
Apple is following in MS's footsteps but not going down.
Google is the e/player to watch.
regards from Mazatlsn,
Allen.

mattlach
March 24th, 2014, 05:56 PM
It is my firm belief the Microsoft is headed for extinction. NOT because "Windows is Bad", but MS's attitude is the problem.
Will everyone switch to Linux? Nope.
Apple is following in MS's footsteps but not going down.
Google is the e/player to watch.
regards from Mazatlsn,
Allen.

Microsoft is in trouble long term, but I think that has more to do with completely missing the boat on mobile, and Windows 8 being too little too late on the mobile front, and trying to shove a mobile type user interface down the throats of desktop users (but hey, isn't that what Ubuntu did with Unity? :p )

If they can save Windows 8, and better differentiate it so both mobile users and desktop users are happy, I think they have some long term viability. If they can't, they are done for. Not immediately. It won't be spectacular. As TS Eliot wrote in the Hollow Men: "Not with a bang but a whimper." A long, long drawn out whimper.

The problem is if Ms goes away, what will take it's place? Sure, most of us will use Desktop Linux, but I can't imagine that getting more than a small bump from an Ms demise. Chrome OS is a joke on the desktop, and OSX is poorly maintained from a security perspective, and closed to overpriced flashy hardware with soldered on RAM that can't be upgraded...

Desktop computing may not be growing like mobile near-computing is, but it will never go away completely, as there is just too much you can't do on a consumer near-computing electronic device, like an Android or iOS tablet or phone.

If Microsoft were to fail, maybe someone would step up and fill the void, but who knows who that would be at this point...

Dragonbite
March 24th, 2014, 06:30 PM
Microsoft is in trouble long term, but I think that has more to do with completely missing the boat on mobile, and Windows 8 being too little too late on the mobile front, and trying to shove a mobile type user interface down the throats of desktop users (but hey, isn't that what Ubuntu did with Unity? :p )

The problem with these type of predictions is that it assumes the group in question doesn't ever realize this or make adjustments and try to address them.

Microsoft is making changes and while they are in some trouble, I don't see them as disappearing completely. People whined about the "start menu" and so it is coming back with "Windows 9". Will it be enough to keep their position? Alone, that will not, but there are a lot of other factors they are likely working on and the combination of everything may mange to keep them near top, or at least competitive.

At most I see them drop in size and having to share the "king of ...." crown with some other companies (Google, Apple, Ubuntu Linux, Firefox and probably others...).


The problem is if Ms goes away, what will take it's place? Sure, most of us will use Desktop Linux, but I can't imagine that getting more than a small bump from an Ms demise. Chrome OS is a joke on the desktop, and OSX is poorly maintained from a security perspective, and closed to overpriced flashy hardware with soldered on RAM that can't be upgraded...

Like I said, I don't think Microsoft will die fully, but may reduce their hold on the desktop market. Who will take their place (/marketshare)? As much as you don't like them, Chrome OS is actually rising to be the upstart to take a significant portion. While so many people poo-poo them computer manufacturers are planning and delivering Chrome OS devices (Chromebooks and Chromeboxes), while they are still offering Windows devices.

Ubuntu has the potential if they run their marketing and product placement right, but they are actually starting behind (like Microsoft is with mobile) so anything can happen. One benefit is that Ubuntu is working those markets outside of the USA, where Microsoft and Apple have less of a stranglehold. The other Linux distros don't have the same potential yet (on the desktop, subject to change without notice).

Apple's OS X is not Apple's focus anymore and to increase the market share too much would actually hurt their "elitism" some and change the nature of their customers. Apple's focus is on iOS, and less on OS X and their biggest competitor is Google Android, not Microsoft. So Microsoft's demise or reduction won't effect them too much (at this point)


Don't forget, too, that everybody is moving to cloud-services and in that front they are competitive and if they can leverage their existing Enterprise product status they could shift playing fields and become the (near) top dog again.

JKyleOKC
March 24th, 2014, 08:11 PM
JKyleOKC, very interesting what you say about criminalizing efforts too dig into DOS or other closed software. Now, after all that happenings with NSA and finding out that computer camera can be turn on without user knowledge.... It all making sense now for me.That might be more of a conspiracy theory than actual fact, though I don't know for sure either way. The DMCA came into existence because the conventional journalism businesses wanted to make sure they could maintain their paywalls without anyone breaking in legally, and I believe that criminalizing research into closed software that wasn't primarily dealing with security was just an unexpected consequence of wording the law broadly. However I could be wrong about this...

mastertig1985
March 25th, 2014, 01:07 AM
As a farely new Ubuntu user and still a Windows user as well, I think they both have their place. For instance, Windows is easier (note i didnt say better, just easier) to load games on, but Ubuntu, for me, is better for everything else. So I run a windows laptop with minecraft and halo and dirt, and use my ubuntu netbook for literally everything else. This makes my world a happy place.

Luch_Don
March 30th, 2014, 05:20 AM
I think windows is quite good except for various virus infections:(

Xentime
March 31st, 2014, 07:10 AM
For me it all comes down to what I am doing. I love Windows and Ubuntu equally.

Gaming will always be on Windows, no matter what. I can't live without both mainstream and independent games. Add Razer Synapse for fine-tuning mouse controls across all your games seamlessly pretty much nails the coffin shut.

For everything else, Ubuntu will always be my choice. I grew-up on Apple products and hated their iron-fist control over the hardware. Ubuntu is simply the best when it comes to the *NIX families in my opinion.

Warren Hill
April 2nd, 2014, 01:31 PM
Is Windows bad?

No its a perfectly usable OS with a large base of software and millions of users. I personally don't like it so I use Linux where possible. I'm typing this in my lunch break at work however using a Windows 7 machine so I do use both.

Are Microsoft in trouble?

Yes.

Why?

The PC market is in decline as the technology has improved. I no-longer own a desktop PC because my laptop does all I need. Many people now don't even need a laptop.

For what a lot of people do: Check email, Watch funny videos of cats on YouTube, a tablet or smart phone is all you need and I don't believe Windows will ever dominate that market in the same way as it dominated the PC market.

Will Apple suffer?

I don't think so few if any Windows users choose Windows: they buy a PC and just use the OS that comes with it but this is not the case for Apple. With Apple its a choice. Apple have a fan base which Microsoft doesn't have. Apple PC users will by an iPhone or an iPad. Windows PC users don't think the need Window 8 phone they may buy a Windows 8 phone but they are also likely to buy any other OS phone.

Nicholas_Marquess
April 2nd, 2014, 10:39 PM
I run ubuntu on my VPS, but have Windows on everything else, windows may not be open source but there are tons of programs made for it that are. And honestly their operating systems are getting cheaper and they are offering monthly and yearly services when it comes to Microsoft office now.

Yozuru
April 6th, 2014, 08:09 PM
Well it depends on what your use and purpose for it is. Mac is generally easy to use, Windows is on a intermediate level unless you have been with the OS family for years.

monkeybrain20122
April 6th, 2014, 08:17 PM
Yes it is if you try to dual boot especially Windows 8, as it imposes all kinds of restrictions on how you can install your Linux system(s). So I really cannot agree with advice for dual booting. Put up with the necessary evil only if you actually need Windows, if not, get rid of it as it makes installation, partition and cloning etc very inflexible. It is foolish to tie a heavy mill around your neck just because 'you paid for it'.

I would say MicroSoft is bad, it is one of the worst enemies for opennesss and open standard. Apple at least is a self sustaining ecology and doesn't go out of its way to undermine open standard,-- at least not as much, despite the control freak behaviour in its own domain. MS tenicles are everywhere. So because MS requires secure boot all of us have to play along even though we may not even want Windows on our machines. MicroSoft is an unimaginative, uninnovative monopoly that screws and gobbles up everything in its way, it is the poster boy of predatory capitalism.

mattlach
April 6th, 2014, 10:34 PM
Is Windows bad?

No its a perfectly usable OS with a large base of software and millions of users. I personally don't like it so I use Linux where possible. I'm typing this in my lunch break at work however using a Windows 7 machine so I do use both.

Are Microsoft in trouble?

Yes.

Why?

The PC market is in decline as the technology has improved. I no-longer own a desktop PC because my laptop does all I need. Many people now don't even need a laptop.

For what a lot of people do: Check email, Watch funny videos of cats on YouTube, a tablet or smart phone is all you need and I don't believe Windows will ever dominate that market in the same way as it dominated the PC market.

Will Apple suffer?

I don't think so few if any Windows users choose Windows: they buy a PC and just use the OS that comes with it but this is not the case for Apple. With Apple its a choice. Apple have a fan base which Microsoft doesn't have. Apple PC users will by an iPhone or an iPad. Windows PC users don't think the need Window 8 phone they may buy a Windows 8 phone but they are also likely to buy any other OS phone.

Mostly agree.

I don't necessarily think the PC market is in long term decline though.

Sales have slowed throughout the economic downturn, but so have most other durable goods, and I think the all the doom and gloom for PC sales is a little premature.

Mobile ARM based phones and tables are DEFINITELY a larger and faster growing market (by quite a wide margin) but that doesn't mean that the traditional PC is going away, or even going to shrink from a userbase standpoint. I foresee a future PC market that continues to grow, just not as fast as phones and tablets.

In a way it's like how the PC gaming market changed with the advent of more capable consoles. PC gaming continued to grow, but was outpaced by console gaming, and the content gradually changed over time. More and more titles on the PC were ports of original console titles rather than the other way around. (admittedly to the dismay of many seasoned gamers on the PC platform) Does that mean PC gaming is dead? On the contrary, it's alive and has more titles and more powerful hardware than ever. Good PC exclusive titles continue to be released taking advantage of the significantly more powerful PC hardware, and to that we also have a plethora of console ports to distract ourselves with.

On the business side of things, I think there will be a need for full fledged x86-type computing for many decades to come. The percentage of desktops will give away to a percentage of laptops which will give away to a percentage of tablets and phones, but I don't think any of them will go away completely or even shrink in absolute numbers.

As for me? I don't own my own Laptop. I get one through work, otherwise I wouldn't have one. I'm a home-built desktop (and server) guy all the way, and I can't imagine changing my ways. Do I own a smartphone and tablet? Yes I do (LG G2 and Nexus 7 2013) but I mostly use them for little silly things, like vegging on the couch while watching a movie, or in car navigation using Waze. Whenever I have to do any real work, type anything longer than a sentence or (which I rarely have time for anymore) play a game, only a PC will do, and preferably by far my desktop.

I know I'm a rather atypical user, in that I have two desktops (Main rig in my office, plus HTPC connected to my TV in my living room) as well as a server in my basement, a laptop on loan from work and a tablet and smartphone, but not too long ago just owning a PC AT ALL made you an atypical user, and the PC industry still was able to survive with plenty of hardware and software diversity.

PC use will change, no doubt. I just doubt it's going anywhere. Market percentage will (and has) undoubtedly shrink, but absolute market size (both in dollars and in units) will probably grow.

Time will - however - tell.

Dragonbite
April 7th, 2014, 07:43 PM
Yes it is if you try to dual boot especially Windows 8, as it imposes all kinds of restrictions on how you can install your Linux system(s). So I really cannot agree with advice for dual booting. Put up with the necessary evil only if you actually need Windows, if not, get rid of it as it makes installation, partition and cloning etc very inflexible. It is foolish to tie a heavy mill around your neck just because 'you paid for it'.

I would say MicroSoft is bad, it is one of the worst enemies for opennesss and open standard. Apple at least is a self sustaining ecology and doesn't go out of its way to undermine open standard,-- at least not as much, despite the control freak behaviour in its own domain. MS tenicles are everywhere. So because MS requires secure boot all of us have to play along even though we may not even want Windows on our machines. MicroSoft is an unimaginative, uninnovative monopoly that screws and gobbles up everything in its way, it is the poster boy of predatory capitalism.

What has Apple provided Open Source lately (CUPS was years ago)? Heck, even Google hasn't done too much other than be willing to support Flash in its Chrome browser when Adobe abandons developing for Linux. But have they given Linux users the promised Google Drive and not forced using a 3rd party app? Microsoft is no friend to open source, but heck they are open sourcing .NET recently.

thevypr
April 7th, 2014, 10:54 PM
All operating systems are good, in their own ways. It's like choosing a type of pen, one type is for calligraphy, one type for writing, and one type for drawing. They all have their pros and cons and work for a specific type of person.

kurt18947
April 7th, 2014, 11:28 PM
Mostly agree.

I don't necessarily think the PC market is in long term decline though.

Sales have slowed throughout the economic downturn, but so have most other durable goods, and I think the all the doom and gloom for PC sales is a little premature.

Mobile ARM based phones and tables are DEFINITELY a larger and faster growing market (by quite a wide margin) but that doesn't mean that the traditional PC is going away, or even going to shrink from a userbase standpoint. I foresee a future PC market that continues to grow, just not as fast as phones and tablets.

In a way it's like how the PC gaming market changed with the advent of more capable consoles. PC gaming continued to grow, but was outpaced by console gaming, and the content gradually changed over time. More and more titles on the PC were ports of original console titles rather than the other way around. (admittedly to the dismay of many seasoned gamers on the PC platform) Does that mean PC gaming is dead? On the contrary, it's alive and has more titles and more powerful hardware than ever. Good PC exclusive titles continue to be released taking advantage of the significantly more powerful PC hardware, and to that we also have a plethora of console ports to distract ourselves with.

On the business side of things, I think there will be a need for full fledged x86-type computing for many decades to come. The percentage of desktops will give away to a percentage of laptops which will give away to a percentage of tablets and phones, but I don't think any of them will go away completely or even shrink in absolute numbers.

As for me? I don't own my own Laptop. I get one through work, otherwise I wouldn't have one. I'm a home-built desktop (and server) guy all the way, and I can't imagine changing my ways. Do I own a smartphone and tablet? Yes I do (LG G2 and Nexus 7 2013) but I mostly use them for little silly things, like vegging on the couch while watching a movie, or in car navigation using Waze. Whenever I have to do any real work, type anything longer than a sentence or (which I rarely have time for anymore) play a game, only a PC will do, and preferably by far my desktop.

I know I'm a rather atypical user, in that I have two desktops (Main rig in my office, plus HTPC connected to my TV in my living room) as well as a server in my basement, a laptop on loan from work and a tablet and smartphone, but not too long ago just owning a PC AT ALL made you an atypical user, and the PC industry still was able to survive with plenty of hardware and software diversity.

PC use will change, no doubt. I just doubt it's going anywhere. Market percentage will (and has) undoubtedly shrink, but absolute market size (both in dollars and in units) will probably grow.

Time will - however - tell.

I know desktop & laptop sales have slowed. It's harder to measure use though. Any midrange desktop or laptop P.C. purchased in the past 5 years or more is perfectly capable of performing 98% of the tasks of 90% of users. It's no longer necessary to upgrade machines every 3 years because the current machine is inadequate. I have 2 mid 2000s Core2duo laptops, one early 2000s PIII laptop, an HP netbook and 2 mid 2000s desktops. All the laptops except 1 were cheap or free. Any of the listed machines except the PIII laptop will perform any task I need. I'm not helping sales figures much, though. Once smart phones/tablets become 'good enough' and development slows, I wouldn't be surprised to see that market cool as well.

Dragonbite
April 8th, 2014, 06:42 PM
I know desktop & laptop sales have slowed. It's harder to measure use though. Any midrange desktop or laptop P.C. purchased in the past 5 years or more is perfectly capable of performing 98% of the tasks of 90% of users. It's no longer necessary to upgrade machines every 3 years because the current machine is inadequate. I have 2 mid 2000s Core2duo laptops, one early 2000s PIII laptop, an HP netbook and 2 mid 2000s desktops. All the laptops except 1 were cheap or free. Any of the listed machines except the PIII laptop will perform any task I need. I'm not helping sales figures much, though. Once smart phones/tablets become 'good enough' and development slows, I wouldn't be surprised to see that market cool as well.

Windows is finding serious competition from Chromebooks and that is in part because people don't need more power anymore... mid-range systems are more than capable of handling things especially when so much of it can be done in the cloud.

jedispork
April 29th, 2014, 01:10 AM
I think it depends on what you mean by bad. Windows has been solid for me. However I tend to agree with Richard Stallman on some things. Our privacy is in serious danger and its not good that a single company has such a huge chunk of the desktop share with proprietary software.

As for the decline of the desktop? I guess but its only because computers are becoming smaller. Touch screens might be ok on a phone or tablet but not something I would want to use at home on a regular basis. I couldn't get my wife to use ubuntu but she is crazy about the chromebook. I could see myself moving from desktop to laptop someday.

I would like to see most devices not require a pc at all anymore. Many items still require you to plug into a windows pc. Updating a garmin, firmware updates for my neato vaccum, etc.

jbaerboc
April 29th, 2014, 02:31 AM
Windows costs me lots of money, Linux does not [but I can donate if I want]. To me that's what matters :D

jbaerboc
April 29th, 2014, 02:32 AM
Windows costs me lots of money, Linux does not [but I can donate if I want]. To me that's what matters :D

And on the flip side I have a Windows Phone because it was cheaper than any Android or iPhone. So to me it's getting the most usability for the lowest cost.

Warren Hill
April 29th, 2014, 01:04 PM
I would like to see most devices not require a pc at all any more. Many items still require you to plug into a windows pc. Updating a garmin, firmware updates for my neato vaccum, etc.

That will change. Everything requires Windows today because it dominates the desktop but that's changing I know plenty of ex XP users who instead of getting a new computer or upgrading the OS have decided to throw it out and get a tablet instead.

A lot of people just don't need a PC but they still want to have a facebook page and to watch funny kitten videos on youtube for which a tablet is ideal.

As more people switch there will be an Android App for things like firmware updates.

Some people however do need a computer and I expect that includes most of us on this forum so the PC wont go away but will continue to decline for some time to come.

DreddTrekkiter
April 29th, 2014, 01:36 PM
Windows is EPIC!!

Alright, as you say it isn't open-source but why would you want open-source?

And, yes, there have been some(a lot) of complaints about Windows 8(all rubbish to me), which is strange in my mind because it's beautiful and easy to use, but, to be honest, it depends on what you want it for;

Gaming = Lubuntu because it's lightweight

Programming = Programmers like to use Linux (no idea why)

Surfing the 'net = Windows 8

To sum it up I'd just use Windows all the way.

Bye,
DreddTrekkiter

kyle19
April 29th, 2014, 01:53 PM
Windows isnt bad for not having open source, They just dont want people to take theyre ideas and use them as theyre own,
If you want a faster operating system i suggest lubuntu, Its fast and simple (and open source like all other linux OS)

Dragonbite
April 29th, 2014, 02:00 PM
A lot of people just don't need a PC but they still want to have a facebook page and to watch funny kitten videos on youtube for which a tablet is ideal.

And type emails and occasional documents... which makes Chromebooks a great alternative as well.

monkeybrain20122
April 29th, 2014, 03:08 PM
What has Apple provided Open Source lately (CUPS was years ago)? Heck, even Google hasn't done too much other than be willing to support Flash in its Chrome browser when Adobe abandons developing for Linux. But have they given Linux users the promised Google Drive and not forced using a 3rd party app? Microsoft is no friend to open source, but heck they are open sourcing .NET recently.

There is a difference between not open sourcing your product and going out of your way to undermine open source competitors. Apple is closed, fine, don't use it and you are free. You don't need to use google drive as there are other options and as far as I know google doesn't go out of its way to make it hard to use alternatives.
MicroSoft is unique in trying to force its proprietary stuffs on you and its tenacles are everywhere, look at the way it screws with document formats and secure boot.

mattlach
April 29th, 2014, 03:36 PM
Windows is EPIC!!

Alright, as you say it isn't open-source but why would you want open-source?

And, yes, there have been some(a lot) of complaints about Windows 8(all rubbish to me), which is strange in my mind because it's beautiful and easy to use, but, to be honest, it depends on what you want it for;

Gaming = Lubuntu because it's lightweight

Programming = Programmers like to use Linux (no idea why)

Surfing the 'net = Windows 8

To sum it up I'd just use Windows all the way.

Bye,
DreddTrekkiter

I don't disagree that for many (most?) people Windows is the best choice, but I think you have your usage scenarios all wrong.

Gaming:
Currently no computer operating system beats Windows from a gaming perspective. Valve is making inroads when it comes to Linux, but the title offerings are just pathetic compared to what is available for Windows. Over time, this may no longer be the case, but currently it is, and probably will be for some time, unless Valve has more success than expected with their SteamOS.

Programming:
You got this one right. Development is much more effective on Linux. Hands down.

Surfing the net:
I'd disagree here. If web browsing and email is all someone cares about, Linux is best here by a wide margin. It uses fewer resources browsing the web than Windows does, at the same time as it is more secure. There was a time when it was impossible to get various web plugins to work in Linux, but that time is thankfully behind us.


Some other usage scenarios to consider:

Content Creation:
While Windows has caught up a lot in the last 15 years, video editing, publishing, graphic work and photography and music creation are still stronger on Macs. Windows is about 95% of OSX here, but Linux falls far behind, with poorly featured work-alikes (Gimp vs. Photoshop, for instance)

General computer/Office work:
You know, Office documents, being able to buy a shrink wrapped piece of software and install it, etc. etc. Windows is still king here. Yes Libre Office (formerly Open Office) and Star Office are better than they've ever been, but they still leave a lot to be desired compared to the real thing, Ms. Office. And nothing beats the broad software compatibility of Windows.


In the Linux community we like to get all hot and bothered about the benefits of Open Source software, etc. etc., but the truth is, this doesn't matter to most people at all.

Most people want something that just works, in which they can run all the software they want when they want without dealing with compatibility layers, emulators, etc. etc. For this, nothing beats Windows. Not OSX, and Linux isn't even close.

Linux has many technical advantages. More efficient use of system resources, better security, more stable, but none of this amounts to a hill of beans to most users if they can't use the exact software they want. The average user does not want to put u with open source work-a-likes. They want their favorite branded closed source software exactly the way they are used to seeing it, and little else matters.

We used to also talk about Linux user friendliness, but that is really not a concern anymore. Linux is just as user friendly as Windows (if not more so) these days, as long as you don't want to do some very specific advanced stuff, that requires finding text config files and editing them, but most users never do this.

For people like me, giving up some software compatibility for a secure, stable and efficient system is worth it. For most it isn't. Desktop (or laptop/whatever) Linux will only be really successful once commercial software is developed for it, just like it is for Windows. Then people will not lose anything by switching, and they might just do it. Until then, it will be in the realm of us ~1% who value that sort of thing.

RichardET
April 29th, 2014, 03:40 PM
There is nothing intrinsically wrong with secure boot. as far as .doc formats go, the issue is not Microsoft, its the userland companies who insist on standardizing with MS Office; I work in big pharma - I assure you that none of them will ever use Openoffice over MS office. Thus why should MS waste developer resources supporting standards which are not in its interest, or where it derives zero ROI? Sun originally promoted Openoffice, and of course, since they were well behind #3 in the list of tech companies, they wanted an open doc standard, but I assure you that it was pure hypocrisy.

Dragonbite
April 29th, 2014, 04:00 PM
There is a difference between not open sourcing your product and going out of your way to undermine open source competitors. Apple is closed, fine, don't use it and you are free. You don't need to use google drive as there are other options and as far as I know google doesn't go out of its way to make it hard to use alternatives.
MicroSoft is unique in trying to force its proprietary stuffs on you and its tenacles are everywhere, look at the way it screws with document formats and secure boot.

Microsoft is in no way "unique in trying to force its proprietary stuff on you".

When iPods came out you had to use iTunes and only iTunes. Heck, they didn't want to open it up to Windows users, but they realized that was where the money and adoption was. Open Source reverse-engineered it which worked but each new version of the iPod "broke" whatever worked before and so it would have to be reversed again.

It became a game to watch and see how long it took after each new Apple product released (when they did) for somebody to hack it to work in Linux. Apple didn't provide any of this.

What format does iWork save in? Can .pages be opened in OpenOffice, LibreOffice or even Microsoft Office?

Microsoft has been working with the Samba group lately. They have opened up more parts of C# and are working with Xamarin on cross-platform .NET. They bought Skype and didn't kill it for Linux like so many people thought they would. You can run Linux on their Azure platform. You can connect to Active Directory and Exchange from Linux. OneDrive can be set to automatically save in ODT format instead of Microsoft's own.

Microsoft has worked with SUSE and Red Hat on interoperability.

Both Apple and Microsoft requires you to use their OS to develop for their mobile platform. Chromebooks require Google account to really do anything (other than log in as guest). Even Ubuntu One was only fully integrated in Ubuntu, and was not released to other distributions (though one did work a neat python applications that allowed FTP access to Ubuntu One, but all that's a moot point now). That all sounds like vendor lock-in attempts.

If you don't like Microsoft Office, Active directory, .NET or Azure, then don't use it and you are free. But that doesn't make any company better or worse.

Eggnog
April 30th, 2014, 12:45 AM
Windows is not bad. For every linux installation, I have a Windows VM. But I don't want Windows running my machine, though.

Gilad_Pellaeon
April 30th, 2014, 09:41 AM
I tend to look at Windows and Linux as two different beasts. Linux being the more secure one and Windows being the OS so full of holes and flaws it's no wonder malware spreads like it does. And with Windows 8 ignoring 30+ years of user interface research - http://toastytech.com/guis/win8.html, you definetly know Microsoft doesn't have a clue it seem's. If you're like me and grew up loving computer's since the late 80's and is not afraid of the occasional command line usage and wants to shy away from Microsoft as much as possible then you like Linux a lot and tend to use it a lot more then Windows except where needed for some application that may not run well under a Virtual Machine or WINE, in which case you have a dual boot setup to boot into windows.

Then, on the other hand, you have what I feel IMHO is unfortunately a large sum of the world population, especially at home, who runs Windows, and can't be bothered, or willing, to learn about the dangers of not having a good firewall on windows, perhaps a good anti virus as well even most AV software bogs down the system, and unfortunately, a decent anti-malware scanner to remove the malware they come across, and where do you pick it up?

It's from *ALL* those ad server's on the internet serving up all those wonderful text, picture, flash, and video ad's, often on compromised server's to distribute malicious code as it is to infect windows machines as much as possible. And if they use Internet Explorer then I tend to say "may someone have mercy on your soul" especially when it was recently announced that the US and UK governments have recommended to stop using the IE browser for now.

It's gotten to the point that you literally need to run Mozilla Firefox along with an updated Adblock plus addon, and if you couple that with Noscript and Ghostery you pretty much have a much more pleasant browsing experience, free of ads and free of that code to distribute malicious malware as it is, and with a malware scanner you can in most cases remove crap such as PUP's that tend to crop up even with free windows programs that doesn't always ask your permission whether to install it or not.

So yeah no windows is not open source not by a long shot, it's sure open like a block of swiss cheese with lots of holes for sure. No one except coder's at microsoft can look at the source code for the operating systems, and I suspect it's a case of the left hand not knowing what the right hand has been doing, and has been for years, which result's in a big mess.

And funny thing is, v1.0 of Windows came out in 1985, long before Linux was even created, and honestly I feel if perhap's IBM and Microsoft had stuck together instead of seperating before Windows 3.0 came out, and which for some reason became such a big "hit" with the average joe, then the computing world today may have been somewhat different with perhap's a blend of OS/2 and Windows and an operating system that's not so blatantly screwed over nowaday's with malware and viruses and crapware that literally makes a system unusable that the "average joe" has no clue.

LastDino
April 30th, 2014, 11:41 AM
Windows is not bad, I might not agree with some of MS policies but it is one essential OS which is probably proving to be most helpful in order to spread computer influence worldwide. I used it for like 11 years on my own desktop. Even now, I need windows on my work PC for operating most of the commercial software I need to do my work. Little unrelated but I even prefer using windows phone over android.lol

However, my choice of OS at my home is Linux, and I suggest it to most who come for my advice depending on their requirements and budget.

It is all about what you need and what you prefer.

Dragonbite
April 30th, 2014, 01:34 PM
"The difference is in the source" ... open source I mean. ;)

Danny_Barbz
May 1st, 2014, 02:15 AM
The only advantages I see Windows has over Linux is video editing software and game compatibility.

RichardET
May 1st, 2014, 03:12 AM
I tend to look at Windows and Linux as two different beasts. Linux being the more secure one and Windows being the OS so full of holes and flaws it's no wonder malware spreads like it does. And with Windows 8 ignoring 30+ years of user interface research - http://toastytech.com/guis/win8.html, you definetly know Microsoft doesn't have a clue it seem's. .

what is toastytech?

fkkroundabout
May 1st, 2014, 11:03 AM
is windows bad ? no. you can do alot with it, and people have put alot of work into it

do i think there are faster operating systems, which feel more curious to use ? yes, definitely

happywise
May 1st, 2014, 08:31 PM
Windows is not really bad... He just don't want to share their recipe....

RichardET
May 1st, 2014, 10:13 PM
I use Ubuntu everyday and I use Windows 7 & 8 everyday. In a perfect world, I wouild stick with Ubuntu, but if one needs MS Office, or SAS 9.x, then one needs Windows, so I use both as I can.

monkeybrain20122
May 2nd, 2014, 12:58 AM
I use Ubuntu everyday and I use Windows 7 & 8 everyday. In a perfect world, I wouild stick with Ubuntu, but if one needs MS Office, or SAS 9.x, then one needs Windows, so I use both as I can.

I have OpenSuse in VB. I have no idea why everyone says it is newbie friendly, I find it very confusing. What is the difference between "online update" and just update? Why is that updates don't show up in the package manager and sudo returns "command not found" etc? I don't think I am stupid though as I have no problem with supposedly more "difficult" distros like Debian and Fedora, even arch once set up.

P.S. It is in VB because I could not even set it up as a dual boot with Ubuntu, kept complaining that it could not create a / partition because it was already created (the Ubuntu / partition) The installer's interface is well, very confusing with lots of options and I am unclear what they do, I was too nervous to mess with my hard drive with it.

SuperFreak
May 2nd, 2014, 01:35 AM
Windows may be bad, because it is not opensource, so its code is hidden. But there are thousands of engineers worldwide who knows what is inside Windows. Doesn't this mean it is almost opensource: We endusers may not know what is inside, but there are many eyes watching. Situation seems close to opensource version.

Windows Bahh, bah, bah252728

sammiev
May 2nd, 2014, 03:13 AM
I have OpenSuse in VB. I have no idea why everyone says it is newbie friendly, I find it very confusing. What is the difference between "online update" and just update? Why is that updates don't show up in the package manager and sudo returns "command not found" etc? I don't think I am stupid though as I have no problem with supposedly more "difficult" distros like Debian and Fedora, even arch once set up.

P.S. It is in VB because I could not even set it up as a dual boot with Ubuntu, kept complaining that it could not create a / partition because it was already created (the Ubuntu / partition) The installer's interface is well, very confusing with lots of options and I am unclear what they do, I was too nervous to mess with my hard drive with it.

I like OpenSuse a lot but the RPM is a little to get use to and the way they install the packages. I test it often but it has been a few months now.

monkeybrain20122
May 2nd, 2014, 03:15 AM
I like OpenSuse a lot but the RPM is a little to get use to and the way they install the packages. I test it often but it has been a few months now.

Well RPM is not my problem, I picked up Fedora and Centos quite easily, but opensuse confuses the hell out of me.

Gilad_Pellaeon
May 4th, 2014, 12:54 AM
what is toastytech?

It's a site where a man has a passion for taking screenshots as well as reviewing old and newer operating systems and software including some rare software and operating systems. I liked his review of Windows 8 and 8.1 simply because he's right and if I had to use it on a daily basis I think i'd go insane!

fkkroundabout
May 4th, 2014, 10:24 PM
^ found the toastytech windows 8 review quite amusing

LastDino
May 5th, 2014, 05:40 AM
Oh, the windows 8. I thought Nokia Lumia UI was somehow used on my desktop with every single app icon having some link to something I had no idea about running. I'm shocked that people think it is user friendly, not to mention touchscreen desktop input is not usable for longer durations.

rodel_catajay
May 8th, 2014, 07:12 AM
Now that I am discovering Linux (ang using it--Ubuntu), I would prefer Windows as a drug, you got hooked up and its really hard to get over with. Linux might not be a total nirvana, but it is the start of total awakening. It is really good to have a choice. and be wise.;)

RichardET
May 8th, 2014, 04:31 PM
Windows is usually so easy to use that it rarely gets in the way of whatever you are doing, related to work. That's not always a bad thing, if one is mainly just a user of various software such as MS Office or similar products. But the converse seems to be the desired end-state with many Linux users - they revel in the complexities of configuration files, and shell scripts which need to be either written, or found online, before they can use software applications, or even their overall system. This is certainly not Ubuntu's vision and thats why I chose to use it. It works well, and I can get work done well.

buzzingrobot
May 8th, 2014, 04:45 PM
Windows is usually so easy to use that it rarely gets in the way of whatever you are doing, related to work. That's not always a bad thing, if one is mainly just a user of various software such as MS Office or similar products. But the converse seems to be the desired end-state with many Linux users - they revel in the complexities of configuration files, and shell scripts which need to be either written, or found online, before they can use software applications, or even their overall system. This is certasinly not Ubuntu's vision and thats why I chose to use it. It works well, and I can get work done well.

My non-Linux experience was almost all with OS X and not Windows, but it seems to me that both of the latter are easy to use so long as you do things as the developers and designers intended them to be done. This makes a lot of sense, since both are intended to be easy to use. (The use of OS X's Automator to link together a series of individual excutables without requiring any scripting or command line use is, I've always thought, rather impressive.)

Many Linux users seem to equate the "free" component of the software with the freedom to tweak and configure as much as they want. That's why we see complaints when something they know how to tweak changes into something they dont know how to (or can't) tweak.

I've never used a Linux -- and I've used it for years -- that actually required users to create shell scripts. The shell is there. It's the program that reads and processes command line entries, whether those come from a user or from the interpretation of the scripts essential to the operation of the OS. Windows has developed a quite capable, but quite different, shell and scripting capability of its own.

RichardET
May 8th, 2014, 04:54 PM
Several years ago, back in the days of openSUSE 11.4, I had to run some script which I culled from a forum poster, which recompiled various VMWare kernel pieces before VMWare would run. I did not have to do this with the Windows version of VMWare. That's one example of what I meant.

monkeybrain20122
May 8th, 2014, 05:00 PM
Several years ago, back in the days of openSUSE 11.4, I had to run some script which I culled from a forum poster, which recompiled various VMWare kernel pieces before VMWare would run. I did not have to do this with the Windows version of VMWare. That's one example of what I meant.

It sounds like it has to do with the way VMWare is packaged for OpenSuse than the OS itself. There are examples that work the other way, for example Sage (a very powerful mathematics computation environment) doesn't even need setting up in Linux (at least for Debian and Redhat and derivatives) but I was told it isn't so easy to get working in Windows.

buzzingrobot
May 8th, 2014, 05:28 PM
One legitimate issue with Linux is that the differences between distributions present a roadblock to any commercial vendors who might actually want to release and support a Linux product. They are confronted with different packaging schemes, different and rapidly changing library requirements, etc., etc. They have to pay people to package and provide support for each specific release of each specific distribution they want to sell for, and then track all the updates to be sure nothing breaks.

The typical response is to just not do it, especially given what they will see as the damaging encumberances of the GPL licensing, and their belief that few Linux users are willing to pay for software. At best, they might release something -- like Nvidia -- wrapped in a shell script.

Windows is a much, much simpler and much more profitable target.

abraham5
May 8th, 2014, 05:37 PM
Well, I know this is not actually my place, cause I am not a professional, and a total new user and member of Ubuntu and the community, but I guess it is actually a very wide scope, I mean before anything else we have to define 'bad'. bad or not, there are people using both of them. I myself actually enjoy the fact that I am in charge of every single aspect of my operating system (while working with ubuntu), well, the fact of the matter is that whenever I press the "ON" button on my computer, I feel responsible, I feel that the system can crash completely if I make bad decisions, and I believe that this fact makes me a better user than my Windows-user version, with windows, I don't know what happens inside the system, and I don't care, and I know that for the most part I can relax. That is why when I boot to ubuntu I am healthier than before, but when I am using Windows I look like a sick addicted person, who is just playing with a mouse. But with Linux I look sharp and ready. Anyways, I know that in Linux I have to be eyes all the time, and to be careful and a lot of other stuff, but still I like it, I enjoy my relationship with Ubuntu. Well, Windows ofcourse can be of use at times, but I prefer never booting into it again, and since the day I got ubuntu running on my PC (four or five days ago) I have never logged into Windows7 even for a second, cause I don't feel the need, also my Ubuntu needs to be taken care of. Well, it is not that Ubuntu has no problems, we have our moments, sometimes I am at the point of just giving up, fo example Ubuntu freezes a lot on my system, I don't know why, after which there is huge ammount of uploading (which I guess are the error logs), I get errors during the updates or installations, among several other things (you should also know that on Win7 I got a looooot of blue screens, so I am guessing this is a hardware problem, so don't blame it on my dear Ubuntu please) but Ubuntu is still here, and we are living together peacefully. So I will choose Ubuntu over Windows(7 8 9 or 666) but again I won't lable any OS as bad or good. :)

EnglishElectricAndy
May 8th, 2014, 09:23 PM
Windows 8 is what persuaded me try try out a Linux distro, I found W8 to be cumbersome and non-intuitive in a desktop/laptop environment, but I will take ownership of that experience and not use it to form an objective view about whether Windows is good or bad. I used to run Vista, and it wasn't half as bad as folklore would have people believe.

I was lent a USB stick with Xubuntu 13.04 on it, spent the best part of two weeks booting into live sessions, decided this OS was more to my liking and went ahead with an install.

I agree with the viewpoint that Microsoft were caught on the back foot by the rise of the iDevices and the emergence of the Android ecosphere. They (Microsoft) will struggle to to achieve the same level of dominance in the portable device realm as they managed in the desktop market, simply because they were too late to capture a meaningful presence.

Some earlier posts in this thread discussed the disappearance of Microsoft. I can't see that happening, but I'll go out on a limb and predict a major (and painful) restructuring, in some respects comparable to the automotive manufacturing giants of the 70's and 80's who found that their market had moved on, with consumers looking for lighter, smaller and above all, more efficient products.

As a personal preference I like a clunky-clicky keyboard to comunicate with my device. I can't imagine trying to input a long, convoluted command into the terminal using a 3" or 4" touchscreen.

fkkroundabout
May 10th, 2014, 07:52 PM
^ actually, i've read that windows mobile are now around 10% of the market share in the UK. although admittedly, i think this is more because they chased market share by selling more powerful processors and hardware than the competition. the lumia 520 is the entry level and the best selling windows phone at the moment, and i doubt the profit margins on it are anywhere near as high as the iphone profit margins.

outside of the UK windows mobile is still small, but not as small as blackberry, and i doubt windows 8 will pick up a heavy tablet share in the face of android. i have heard tablet and mobile sales have, just recently, started slowing down as oppose to constantly climbing, which does give their desktop market some leeway

anyway

alan26
May 14th, 2014, 02:38 AM
The only thing I really don't like about Windows is that the usability seems to be stuck in the 80s. My Mac has much easier tasking for most normal tasks and I enjoy the control you get with Linux distros. I don't really have a problem with either, but when I constantly go back and forth I find myself trying to copy and paste using Windows keystrokes on my Mac and trying to take screen captures on my Windows machines and trying to access the command prompt easily on both ... LOL.

RichardET
May 14th, 2014, 03:34 PM
Two ways Windows is bad: 1) Many applications only function well if one is logged in as an administrator - very bad.
2) Appdata is spread around everywhere in an inconsistent manner, thus application removal never fully cleans up after itself,
and it is an effort to do it oneself.

With Linux, just remove the hidden folder form your /home folder and appdata is removed.