Is Windows bad?

[OrangeCrate]

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]

I would also like to add a comment to my previous post.

Although I prefer to use Linux, I will still keep Windows on my dual boot system.

WHen 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]

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]

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]

I would also like to add a comment to my previous post.

Although I prefer to use Linux, I will still keep Windows on my dual boot system.

WHen 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]

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]

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.

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]

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]

@ 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]

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