PDA

View Full Version : You gotta read these comments



nyinge
March 19th, 2007, 05:48 AM
Comments made to the article (http://education.zdnet.com/?p=908) on zdnet:
This guy better be kidding :lolflag:

Here's one.

It wont happenI dont see how this will happen at all.

Vista is far more powerful than windows XP, and runs twice as fast. It is also much harder to pirate, and this point more than anything else has the Linux crowd in a panic.

It wont be long until Windows XP is no longer supported, and when that happens, what is Linux going to do ?

Linux will have to find a way to work under Vista from here on, since it wont be able to rely on XP being readily available anymore.

Linux may seem like a good alternative to Office, but all that is happening in linux is that the windows interface is cleverly hidden away. It still needs the drivers and software services in order to run, and in most cases - that happens WITHOUT a valid windows licence.

This is just plain piracy.

Vista will finally put an end to this blatant abuse of intellectual property, and linux should decline, taking the pirates with it.

Anyone that supports the continuation of Windows XP in place of Vista surely has a hidden agenda .. and you will surely be caught out.(direct link (http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=31199&messageID=579073&start=80))
-- I had to read it twice to understand what he/she was trying to say...

And here's another one.

You are kidding arent you ?Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

That sounds preposterous to me.

If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.(direct link (http://talkback.zdnet.com/5208-12355-0.html?forumID=1&threadID=31199&messageID=579806&start=80))

zorkerz
March 19th, 2007, 05:52 AM
Haha those are great. Its amazing what people think. Yet also too bad.

FuturePilot
March 19th, 2007, 06:07 AM
You are kidding arent you ?Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

That sounds preposterous to me.

If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.
This person is obviously misguided. How dare they call Linux freeware. And yes you don't need Windows to run a computer. If anything the number of Linux users will increase and I like the sound of that:)

H.E. Pennypacker
March 19th, 2007, 06:25 AM
I think the guy is serious, but I am cracking up! LOL

Somenoob
March 19th, 2007, 06:28 AM
Funny to see how the first one reffers to Linux like it's a company. but anyway, they have to kidding.

Kateikyoushi
March 19th, 2007, 07:42 AM
Seems the overall computer literacy is lower than I expected.
I thought people know apple is using OSX and that intel is not microsoft etc.

Good to know that all those companies who do not want to struggle with non working dirvers and the current problems of the vista have something to hide, relliabilty I assume...

floke
March 19th, 2007, 07:52 AM
The worst part was the last post recommended he use Ubuntu, so he may be heading our way - that is if he can work out how to put a cd in the player!

adam.tropics
March 19th, 2007, 07:58 AM
It amazes me, if you trace the post back to the original article, (http://education.zdnet.com/?p=908) which is pretty reasonable, depending on your point of view, that people can somehow segue this far away from reality!

aysiu
March 19th, 2007, 08:03 AM
This got dugg:
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Linux_Needs_Windows_To_Run

Maybe this is a poor attempt at satire? Something like the ShellytheRepublican website? (http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/)

SishGupta
March 19th, 2007, 08:23 AM
It has to be a joke/satire.

nyinge
March 19th, 2007, 08:39 AM
This got dugg:
http://digg.com/linux_unix/Linux_Needs_Windows_To_Run

Maybe this is a poor attempt at satire? Something like the ShellytheRepublican website? (http://www.shelleytherepublican.com/)

Wow, it got dugg 3000+. What made his/her comments amusing, I think, is they're quite subtle at times. I'm still having a hard time deciding if this is for real or just a satire. I have a friend who mainly uses his computer for web browsing and playing WoW thinks Intel and Microsoft are the same. I mean I won't be surprised if these comments are for real.

cantormath
March 19th, 2007, 08:41 AM
isnt windows 2000 still supported?
It seems like each statement in that quote is false, right down to the linux crowd worried about the success of Vista.

nyinge
March 19th, 2007, 08:43 AM
isnt windows 2000 still supported?
It seems like each statement in that quote is false, right down to the linux crowd worried about the success of Vista.
I think so... at least for critical security updates i think... XP will be supported until like 2015 or something like that.

karellen
March 19th, 2007, 08:47 AM
if it's not satire or irony they're simply morons. why waste your time on this piece of crap?....:confused:

Kateikyoushi
March 19th, 2007, 08:56 AM
Security updates for W2K will be avaible till 2010.

kostkon
March 19th, 2007, 12:07 PM
It looks like a well-written satire to me...

dbbolton
March 19th, 2007, 12:16 PM
that was a depressing way to start my day.

awakatanka
March 19th, 2007, 12:59 PM
Love those kind of posts, and more funny is that people realy try to react to it. Love satire

julo321
March 19th, 2007, 01:02 PM
I reckon that guys ill as iv seen loads of computer running linux before.

ComplexNumber
March 19th, 2007, 01:03 PM
i've been reading those outrageous claims over on digg. i don't believe that he actually believes them. maybe hes an attention seeker. i don't know.

hoagie
March 19th, 2007, 01:40 PM
I read the whole article and this guy thinks that he's saying something really clever, while he's failing to realize that he's being dumb. He/She reminds me of people thinking that Internet Explorer is the Internet.

fuscia
March 19th, 2007, 01:49 PM
maybe these guys and that shellytherepublican are just satirists, but i know people who really think like that and i can't tell the difference.

Erik Trybom
March 19th, 2007, 02:50 PM
I think it's a troll, but compared to Shelley the republican or the "Lunix" article, this one is far more subtle.

Why do I think it's fake?

1. The claim that Vista runs twice as fast as XP. No one else claims this; not Microsoft, not even their fanboys. It seems like a deliberate attempt at playing misinformed.

2. The claim that the Linux crowd are in panic. How would he know that if he doesn't even know what Linux IS?

3. "Vista will finally put an end to this blatant abuse of intellectual property". This sounds like a satiric comment to me. No one uses the word "intellectual property" except in official statements from companies and organizations.

4. The (somewhat) detailed explanation of why Linux cannot run on its own. It would be very easy to look things up instead of reasoning his way forward like he's doing.

5. If he knows about IBM and OS/2, how much Microsoft spent on Vista, Apple's move to Intel and so on, I have a hard time believing that he should be so blatantly ignorant about Linux. Most people who know nothing about Linux are just uninterested - this one seems massively misinformed. Where would he get these ideas from?

I could be wrong of course, but the more I look at the posts, the more convinced I get that he's pulling our leg.

Chemist
March 19th, 2007, 03:01 PM
i'm pretty sure they're just joking

Biochem
March 19th, 2007, 05:40 PM
This guy is right! Windows are essential to work on a computer.

Those who say the opposite have never work in a sub-sub-sub-basement closet. Windows is essential for the sanity of the operators and therefore the computer working wright :lolflag:

Lord Illidan
March 19th, 2007, 05:44 PM
I thought Ubuntu ran on Windows? Was I mistaken? Does it run on Doors?

floke
March 19th, 2007, 06:18 PM
It drives me up the wall sometimes. Is that a clue?