What would make you go back to Windows?

[shatteredmindofbob]

I'm curious, for everyone whose made the full switch to Linux variants, what could Microsoft do to bring you back?

1. For me, get a file system that doesn't suck (wasn't that supposed to be included in Vista?)

2. Get rid of the registry (I realize that'll never happen...but it's a nice thought)

3. Finally, a retail copy of Windows should include at least three licenses...I refuse to pay several hundred dollars PER computer for an operating system.

[chungy]

1. Become free software.
2. Improve the operating system design to actually make it worthwhile.

[Sugz]

The day Windows Becomes a Safe, beautiful, fast and effeciant Operating system again
Oh BTW, if these supposed the Next version of windows OS will be their last. rumours are true, that means Mac OS will have complete monopoly of future Operating systems market. Surely this will force them to Open their OS to other hardware.
But getting back on topic, Windows needs to ... and i quote from me.

"Build software around the user, not the user around the software" - Sugz

[earthpigg]

1. Become free software.
2. Improve the operating system design to actually make it worthwhile.

they wouldn't have to make the entire OS open source for me... if they want to make windows Freeware (even closed source), and charge me $30 for a DirectX license for gaming, that is ok with me. (assuming the license was very relaxed, and didn't have an obnoxious form of DRM)

thats the only thing that could bring me back to windows. as it is, its not worth $200 just to play the newest games on my computer hassle free when consoles are ~$300.

hell, if they offered to sell a new product called DirectlinuX or something that would make it super easy for game makers to port windows games over (DirectX + all the API stuff, i guess)... i'd buy it as soon as the games started coming out. i'd be willing to pay a little more for the Linux version than the Freeware'd Windows version.

MS really has nothing to offer that i want, except for that.

[fatality_uk]

Nothing

[catatonicprime]

I think once windows stops threatening to sue me for using their software (possibly illegitimately) I'll switch back. In the mean time, free, open, powerful OS's like linux and friends take the forefront. :)

[davidryder]

I'm curious, for everyone whose made the full switch to Linux variants, what could Microsoft do to bring you back?

1. For me, get a file system that doesn't suck (wasn't that supposed to be included in Vista?)


It was called WinFS and it's supposedly coming out with SP2 - but we'll see. If it is ever shipped it will blow away any current FS. Instead of using a linear FAT (requiring the machine to start from the top of the FAT and going through every entry until it finds what it is looking for) it will use a database organized by categories. You could imagine how this would improve r/w access times.



2. Get rid of the registry (I realize that'll never happen...but it's a nice thought)

3. Finally, a retail copy of Windows should include at least three licenses...I refuse to pay several hundred dollars PER computer for an operating system.

+2 there.

And to add to that:

1) More customization. I LOVE eye candy and I love making everything look exactly the way I want it. Customization in Windows currently sucks.

2) Registry. The problem with the registry is if you create a user with limited privileges they can't install programs that rely on the registry - even to their $USER folder. They can keep the registry - I don't care... but programs should be forced (in the future) to store settings in the users directory. It's pretty pointless having a limited user when some programs won't even work because they don't have proper access.

Other than that, Vista is a pretty solid/stable OS IMO.

[lisati]

If Windows somehow turns out to be the best tool for the job.....

In the meantime, we have the option of multiple-boot if we so choose.

[brunovecchi]

I'll go back to windows the day a magical fairy comes down from the skies, tells me all about the future of some strange, unknown land, grants me seven wishes upon a twinkle star. Then, I'd levitate surrounded by a myriad of little dwarvlings, and we all sing a song, drunk of joy and happiness.

Seriously, never.

[yaztromo]

2. Get rid of the registry (I realize that'll never happen...but it's a nice thought)


Isn't it irksome that Gnome has a kind of registry of its own? Complete with it's own regedit (gconf-editor)!

[lian1238]

Maybe, on the day Windows become as easy to use, as free, as secure, and as fast as Ubuntu (just my flavor), I'll go back. But just to see how fast Windows is still behind. When the day comes where Windows is as secure as Linux, Linux would have become an iron vault compared to the glass Windows. Then compiz would have become an interface like those you see in science-fiction movies, like Ironman and I-robot, with *real* 3D manipulation. Yup, I'm never going back.

[Scruffynerf]

Three things mainly:

1) Rebuild it - from scratch.

And I don't mean copy/paste from what's gone before.

Even Vista Ultimate x64 has all the libraries and API's from windows 3.11 in it. Users even see this - items such as the font selection screen are identical to win3.x.

Along with all the bugs, backdoors and security issues that are out there.

2) Provide decent documentation for the user in the help files. A home user doesn't have a Network Administrator lurking nearby to help them work out why their internet connection won't work.

3) Stop trying to force the world into it's way of thinking about software. What a single company decides to go off and develop is not, and should never be the 'standard' when everyone's decided that the standard is something else that's mutually agreed upon, works better than your product, and pre-exists your product by a number of years.

So essentially, they have to both change their corporate culture, methodology and business practices.

Never happen.

[chungy]

It was called WinFS and it's supposedly coming out with SP2 - but we'll see. If it is ever shipped it will blow away any current FS. Instead of using a linear FAT (requiring the machine to start from the top of the FAT and going through every entry until it finds what it is looking for) it will use a database organized by categories. You could imagine how this would improve r/w access times.

It's coming in Cairo.

[bufsabre666]

still use it, i go months on end without using it but i still have it and dont ever really plan to get rid of it. windows really isnt all that bad, and truth is vista is really nice, but i dont see a reason to get rid of it and i have alot of peripherals that if i feel a need to use id have to boot into windows

[Linuxratty]

Nothing

Same here..There is no way I'd ever go back at this point.

[beercz]

$1,000,000,000 :lolflag:

[smoker]

i don't think microsoft could do anything to make me want to go back to windows, i'm happy where i am :-)

[Vince4Amy]

still use it, i go months on end without using it but i still have it and dont ever really plan to get rid of it. windows really isnt all that bad, and truth is vista is really nice, but i dont see a reason to get rid of it and i have alot of peripherals that if i feel a need to use id have to boot into windows

I know what you mean.


1. Become free software.

Microsoft is a business, a business goal is to make money, would they really give away one of their more popular products for free?

[lukjad]

Become like Linux. In every way. Then I may think of it. Other than that, I really don't have a wish list since I don't like the look, feel, ideal, or safety of Windows.

[L815]

1. They cut out half the crap I don't ever use.
2. Increase the speed a bit
4. Give me a free upgrade to Windows 7 from vista after the disappointment (even though I don't mind vista heh)
5. Their mono funding with Novell is improved so .NET is easily cross platform (at least between Linux and Windows)

[davidryder]

I actually still use it for an HTPC/Gaming PC. One thing Linux is probably many years from...

[Ub1476]

If there's almost anything at all which is better at Windows than Ubuntu I would use Windows. But I use my laptop a lot and carry it around so I can't have any let downs..

The only issue I have right now is that the laptop generates more heat, noise and lower battery life than with Vista, but maybe this can be fixed. I might accept this though..

But, I would never "go back" just use it as a backup plan :)

[BigSilly]

What would make me go back to Windows....?

I suppose any signs that we've just replaced one nasty controlling set of 'stards with another would make me run for the hills! :biggrin:

[aaaantoine]

If I build another gaming PC, it will most likely have Windows installed on it rather than Linux.

But I would still choose my hardware carefully, in case I decide I'd rather run Linux on it.

[uberdonkey5]

If windows streamlined itself, got a different file system (e.g. ext2), you could download it for free off the internet (and the software), became open source, became less virus prone, ran faster...

and yes, if it had a lovely brown theme, and started calling itself ubuntu.

[DrMega]

I can't forgive Windows for nearly making me kick my media PC down the street.

It was recording a one-off updated version of the Dark Side of the Moon concert by Pink Floyd, when it crashed and rebooted itself 5 minutes in. I cam back to see the TV screen proudly presenting me with the standard Windows desktop when I should have seen my TV tuner software proudly reporting that everything was ok.

Apart from when it was recording stuff, it would also bomb during mp3 playback and when playing games.

Windows is great at work, where I do limited stuff (development using MS tools), but it will never win me back at home. It never won me over in the first place to tell the truth, its just that I saw no viable alternatives until fairly recently.

[david_lynch]

There is nothing that could interest me in going back to ms windows on it's own merits. Of course, under duress I could conceivably be convinced to switch - for instance if I were imprisoned and tortured, or my family were imprisoned and tortured, to force me to use ms windows, naturally I would do whatever I had to. :frown:

Short of such improbable scenarios, however, the odds of me ever going back to ms windows are basically nonexistent. :cool:

[david_lynch]

I actually still use it for an HTPC/Gaming PC. One thing Linux is probably many years from...
LOL, I've been gaming on linux, and linux only, since quake 3 arena came out.:guitar:

[malspa]

I would never give up Linux for Windows, but the only reason I'd use Windows at home would be if I needed it for work-related stuff.

[Dragonbite]

Hmm... make Windows as customizable and stable as Linux is, while maintaining their ease and ubiquity of installing new software.

I don't have a problem with most of Microsoft's products, just Windows.

[Shippou]

Maybe if they are bankrupt. Then I will laugh loud. :)

Seriously, I am just joking. But maybe not on the last part. ;)

Well, I think I will go back if:
1. I have ran out of distros to play with.
2. Linux becomes the next Windows (i.e., if Linux sucks as time passes by) and Apple hardware are still for elites.
3. Windows will have sudo apt-get. (Seriously, I am enjoying the command line).
4. Windows make it fast, small and efficient. Fast as in minimum req'ts are 256MB RAM, small as in maybe around 300MB iso file, efficient that programs do not depend on file extensions in order for them to open: the OS itself can determine which ones to open based on the format.
5. Windows will make their OS open source.
6. IE won't be shipped anymore with Windows, but FF or Opera, or Flock will be better.
7. Increase security to the point that it will equate to Unix-based OSs, but without the use of crap like UACs.
8. Windows will become customizable like Linux.
9. Windows will allow you to create and distribute your own OS.
10.Windows will make their OS more entertaining to hack, like Linux.


If maybe half of these things do happen, I would most likely switch back. I repeat, most likely.

[davidryder]

LOL, I've been gaming on linux, and linux only, since quake 3 arena came out.:guitar:

Really? What are some the most recent games you have been playing?

[david_lynch]

I think we've had this discussion before, and as I recall, you dismissed ut2004 as being "too old". Be that as it may, ut2004 and other 3D FPS games in the doom/quake/rtcw genre run every bit as well on linux as they do on ms windows.

There is no magical property of ms windows that makes it a good for gaming. There is only one factor: simply the fact that ms windows has been the most common desktop platform for a good many years, and so the games have been written for it. full stop.

Life is too short for me to spend futzing around with ms windows!:lolflag:

[davidryder]

I think we've had this discussion before, and as I recall, you dismissed ut2004 as being "too old". Be that as it may, ut2004 and other 3D FPS games in the doom/quake/rtcw genre run every bit as well on linux as they do on ms windows.


Ah yes I remember now! I'll just leave it at people have different needs/wants when it comes to gaming. Linux meets yours so I guess for you Linux is a better gaming platform.

[germanix]

I will go back to Windows when all other Doors are closed.

[toupeiro]

When they play better with FOSS, and separate their own integrations of application layer and OS layer functionality.

Opening up their own frameworks a lot more would be a big plus too.

Since this will likely never happen, I'll happily stay with Linux

[Half-Left]

NOTHING AT ALL :twisted:

[semitone36]

NOTHING!!!!!!

...Well. I guess if old Billy Gates held a gun to my head and told me to run Windows I MIGHT run it through virtualbox....maybe. ;)

[Therion]

When they play better with FOSS, and separate their own integrations of application layer and OS layer functionality.
Dear GAWD... ^^ THIS ^^, this, a thousand times THIS.

And quit being evil.
Listen to your user-base.
Quit piling on useless "bits" that destroy any sense of applied cohesiveness as an excuse to release yet another "new version".

[Lord Xeb]

I'm curious, for everyone whose made the full switch to Linux variants, what could Microsoft do to bring you back?

1. For me, get a file system that doesn't suck (wasn't that supposed to be included in Vista?)

2. Get rid of the registry (I realize that'll never happen...but it's a nice thought)

3. Finally, a retail copy of Windows should include at least three licenses...I refuse to pay several hundred dollars PER computer for an operating system.


I second on this. For me it would mainly be for gaming, but I do not game much to begin with so it is a small price to pay. Besides, my computer that I want to build will have Windows as a Gaming OS and thats it. All my other stuff will be done from within linux :D

[aysiu]

If all Linux developers suddenly quit developing and Apple goes bankrupt, I may go back to Windows.

[adamogardner]

If there are computers to use in prison, they would use windows. Incarceration is the sort of circumstance I would have to face to go through an ordeal like computing with windows.

[cardinals_fan]

1. Move to a *BSD base. I seriously hate the Windows filesystem layout, and setting executability with file extensions is just dumb.

2. Stop making me enter an activation code! I seriously doubt if they've prevented any piracy with WGA - it's only those of us with valid licenses who suffer.

[Mr. Picklesworth]

2. Get rid of the registry (I realize that'll never happen...but it's a nice thought)

I still don't get it. What do people have against the registry? We have the same thing going on in GNOME (or any other glib thing) with gconf. The difference between us and them is that gconf doesn't take up 75 MB of disk space or require defragmenting, and it is actually designed for human operation. (For example, setting Mandatory and Default keys).

Having a unified settings system is a completely sound idea. The only thing wrong with Windows' registry is that it is horribly implemented, but that doesn't mean the concept as a general thought is a bad one.

[cardinals_fan]

*deleted*

Responded to wrong post...

[davidryder]

I still don't get it. What do people have against the registry? We have the same thing going on in GNOME (or any other glib thing) with gconf. The difference between us and them is that gconf doesn't take up 75 MB of disk space or require defragmenting, and it is actually designed for human operation. (For example, setting Mandatory and Default keys).

Having a unified settings system is a completely sound idea. The only thing wrong with Windows' registry is that it is horribly implemented, but that doesn't mean the concept as a general thought is a bad one.

I thought gconf was just a graphical editor to change settings stored in text-based files. Is this incorrect?

[Mr. Picklesworth]

I thought gconf was just a graphical editor to change settings stored in text-based files. Is this incorrect?

Nope, that's gconf-edit. Gconf uses plain text files, though, which is also a point in its favour. Gconf settings are stored in a user's .gconf directory as XML. There is also a location for system-wide mandatory and default settings. (Something that could be a lot cooler and a lot more visible than it is right now).

A key thing with gconf (and, in theory, the Windows registry) is applications then poke and peek settings from a single library. In this case that library is justified because it plugs in to glib. Glib is big here. Notice how toggling an option in gconf-edit causes the relevant checkbox in any dialog with that option in it to toggle immediately, and vice versa. It's magical, and fairly easy to implement code-wise. Especially with Vala.

Gconf settings being centralized means they are easy to backup. The big downside here is that they are generally for options - switches, paths and lists. Of course, lots of applications want to store complex things like images and others need to store passwords (which go in the keyring...). That stuff is all stored to the usual .someapp and the like, (thus ensuring pesky users don't mess with the files on their own) so it still goes crazy at some point, but settings in the conventional sense are organized.

Also, things like telepathy account details or panels turn into a right mess by creating their own sections in gconf, which is bizarre from a UI standpoint since usually the sections point to different applications or components of applications. It needs work, but I don't see disorganized text files for everything as much of an alternative. (With the one exception that disorganized text files for everything would probably be kept track of automatically at this point if everyone was resigned to them).

[patrickballeux]

I still don't get it. What do people have against the registry? We have the same thing going on

Have you ever tried changing a setting in the registry keys with notepad? It is imposible. The file format is binary and everything (I mean EVERYTHING) is kept in a single file...

So if your hardisk is failing and that your registry key file happens to be on the bad sectors, just too bad, you have to reformat! You only hope is to have a backup of that file...

I even saw one time on a laptop that it would not boot because the registry key file was corrupted.

The bad thing about windows registry keys is not the concept, but the storage format and having all the keys in a single file.

Ah yeah, you can only edit the registry keys with their tool "regedit32". So if you cannot run it, just to bad, your stuck.


Beside that, I don't care... :)

Microsoft should have done their registry keys like Gnome. Xml file, that can be edited with a simple text editor.

My 2 cents

[worx101]

be the only thing that booted after my motherboard failed and i replaced it...

still had to activate xp, 5 minute call to MS... Just too lazy I guess to setup a new install of linux or anything else :P

... still use linux on my notebook... just my main box that runs winxp...

[talsemgeest]

If vms offered decent graphics accelleration, then I might use windows in it to play my games. Until then though...

[chungy]

Microsoft is a business, a business goal is to make money, would they really give away one of their more popular products for free?

I was talking about the GNU kind of free software (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/free-sw.html), which doesn't exclude the possibility of selling software (http://www.gnu.org/philosophy/selling.html) (they are not incompatible). If Microsoft Windows became free software, it would not exclude the possibility of making money from it; the most likely area they could get money from after such a change is from enterprises paying for the support.

A few years ago, I would have never believe Sun Solaris would become free software either. Look at where we are now, Sun went from being only proprietary stuff to being almost nearly entirely free/open source. Anything is possible, no matter how unlikely.