Quote:
never said they did
Well Linux is a far better solution to Windows on the server end. Linux is just lacking on the desktop. The world would be better if everyone was UNIX-based or UNIX-like.
|
Once again...never said it wasn't...
However you are totally wrong in saying Linux is not a good desktop...in recent years it has become excellent...the interface is great, installation easy, and drivers readily available
|
You must work or want to work in an place with ugly things and ugly people. A lot of people dont!
|
sigh...no, i just care more about functionality, performace, and robustness than pretiness. This is more important at the end of the day
|
Most of that grunt goes to processing bloatware.
|
wow...bloatware...another buzzword...but ok, here's a quote from the source you seem to love so much, wikipedia
The question remains, then, why is there so much bloatware is around, even though the usability and commercial viability of bloatware seem lacking.
Joel Spolsky in his Strategy Letter IV: Bloatware and the 80/20 Myth, argues that while 80% of the users only use 20% of the features, each one uses different features. Thus, "lite" software editions turn out to be useless for most, as they miss that one or two special features that are present in the "bloated" version. Spolsky sums the article with a quote by Jamie Zawinski: "Convenient though it would be if it were true, Mozilla is not big because it's full of useless crap. Mozilla is big because your needs are big. Your needs are big because the Internet is big. There are lots of small, lean web browsers out there that, incidentally, do almost nothing useful. But being a shining jewel of perfection was not a goal when we wrote Mozilla."
|
|
Proves nothing and only talks about that 72dpi is not good enough for non-screen display. Windows by default uses 72dpi on the screen. Yes they can be flexible but it normally not changed.
|
Maybe you should go and read that site again...it clearly states that for video, dpi is a non-existant concept
|
Again I care to feed their family because...? I want a computing environment that's stable and secure. If I have to buy software that is unreliable and unstable just to feed someone's family then no thanks. Let them starve.
|
And again you miss the point...just forget the food thing if you can't process a bit of analogy. I was just trying to say that there is more software for PC's because that's where the pay check is for developers
|
Again let I point out to you that Linux/BSD are normally found as web servers and they are the majority as for being web servers and pretty much exposed to the Net most of the time. And yet they're seldom vulnerable to attack. Windows on the other hand is vulnerable. Last I heard a default WinXP client exposed to the net was infected in 12 mins flat.
|
Dude ok...get freakin' servers out of your head...we're not talking about what the best server platform is best here...if we were mac wouldn't even enter into the discussion
|
Windows on the other hand requires a firewall so it wont get fucked.
|
Windows has a built in firewall...same as mac
Quote:
this is an extremely well known issue...quite old too. It was fixed some years ago
I take it before SP2? SP2 aint gamer friendly last I heard.
|
yeah, way before sp2. it was one of the first security holes found...there's an advantage to having a HUGE user base
|
Smaller minority than Linux or Mac users. Again Macs are not marketed to that end. That's why you have spare parts shops.
|
please don't pair linux users and mac users...planets apart baby...planets apart
|
For non-gearheads Windows is bad.
|
AH HA!!! you admit it...for performace seeking people windows is good...so mac is good for grannies and web designers who know nothing about computers
|
Rebates are crap & Apple doesnt use second tier parts.
|
Doesn't really relate to his post...at all
|
Nice to see piracy isn't a Asia-only problem. Linux on the desktop, how quaint.
|
he's not talking about piracy...and linux on the desktop is better than ever these days as i mentioned above
|
A lot of people would want a working PC out of the box without headaches.
|
Here again...i think you're just proving our point. Yes...mac are probably better for luddites and people who are pleased by pretty things. like...AOL users...hairdressers...kindergarten teachers
But we're talking about normal people here
|
Have you used one at any great length of time or own one? I bet if Creative made it you'd drool. What's up with Apple and their designs? Most of their work are iconic
|
i can't speak for alex, but i do have ipod. it's 2nd gen, touch wheel, 15 gb. I bought it 2 years ago because it was the largest size available from any vendor (here in poland). However present day it has become a little dated, with respect to file support, capacity, and price
|
Most programmers recommend Windows because Windows is all that they know
|
I don't think, as a group, you will a group more computer savvy than IT professionals...so windows is certainly not "all they know"
when you go through a comp. sci degree you learn basically everything...and windows is most definitely not the OS of choice for programmers.
talking about me again i guess...don't know why...or even how you arrived at that particular bit of libel
|
I bet if were made by the manufacturer you liked . . . you'd swoon over it.
|
No no...that's you
|
Apple has the advantage of ColorSync which is very important to those into print & media
|
Ok...i've done some assisting in a graphics house my dad was working with...and the first thing any of the designers did when going onto a computer, or getting any piece of hardware, was do print tests and match up the colors. None used macs btw...i think because they didn't support some of the printers they were using (large scale decal, thermal)
whatever, none of that matters, only "first thing any of the designers did when going onto a computer, or getting any piece of hardware, was do print tests and match up the colors."