Re: Why So Many Negative Linux Articles?
From: Liam Slider (liam_at_NOSPAM.liamslider.com)
Date: Sun, 03 Oct 2004 11:22:30 -0500
On Sun, 03 Oct 2004 01:28:50 +0000, Bradley26 wrote:
> "Liam Slider" <liam@NOSPAM.liamslider.com> wrote in message
>> On Sat, 02 Oct 2004 20:50:47 +0000, Bradley26 wrote:
>> > linux is limited in what it can do, windows is much more versatile and
>> > more code in many ways
>> That's just complete and utter bullshit right there. If anything,
> hey, cows poop too, but they dont brag
They are also quite stupid, like yourself.
> Linux is
>> far more versatile than Windows.
> and by versatile, you mean less versatile,
How so, you can do everything with Linux you could with Windows, and you
can do many things with Linux that you cannot do with Windows. That makes
Linux more versatile.
> worse at installing new
With your average Windows install you have to go through quite a few
steps. Clicking buttons, typing activation keys, confirming where you want
the software to be installed, telling the software exactly where on the
start menu to place the program, gotta read the license agreement and
click on that, reboot, etc...
Your average software install on any recent commercial distro designed
around desktop use does not have all those hoops to jump through to do
something as simple as installing software.
And *uninstalling* software on Windows is an utter nightmare, and often
leads to an unstable system. This problem simply does not exist on Linux
> more bugs, less support
Heh, you're kidding right? There are far fewer bugs in Linux than in
> maybe its just the first time you have have seen the inner workings of
> an OS and think its better?
I don't think you've *ever* seen the inner workings of the OS. You
certainly seem to disagree with most other computer experts worldwide.
> Windows has proven time and time again
>> that it cannot be trusted on mission critical systems.
> excuse me, why would or should Windows be put into a mission critical
> application? its designed for home use and servers.
> car engines are not put into airplanes. I bet you dont know why. one
> reason is they are not suited for aircraft applications, gravity fed oil
> sump, etc
> mission critical applications use reduced code space and redundancy,
> unix varieties can be tailored, its not windows need to be mission
Yet Linux often fills that need perfectly. Score one for Linux.
> Windows has proven
>> time and time again to be a system hog, to be untrustworthy due to
>> insecurity and instability of the OS
> a system hog. thats so technical, I guess I cant imagine what it means.
Then you are an idiot. It means that it takes up far too many of the
system's resources to do even trivial tasks. It's *bloated* software.
> . Furthermore there isn't any type of
>> software that can be programmed in Windows that cannot be created on
> that may be, the operational word is "cant" but reality is "isnt"
> is there a Matlab for linux?
Yes, there is a Matlab for Linux.
> Labview for linux?
Yes there is.
> Maya for linux?
Yes there is.
All that software exists for Linux. You didn't even choose software I had
to hunt down similar programs for...there are Linux versions of all of
> geez, is there even a tic tac toe game for linux?
Yes, lots of nice little games like that actually. Some really nice ones
too, like UT2004, Neverwinter Nights, and many other popular games.
>> > no other computer operating system/platform has been as successful as
>> > the PC with windows
>> Right, no OS has been as successful at spreading viruses, worms,
>> spyware, and trojan horses. No OS has been so hackable on the server.
> if the linux platform was the one making $, the wacko, worthless hacks
> too lazy to work for a living would corrupt linux.
Linux is #1 on the server. The #1 target of worm programs is traditionally
servers. And yet....Linux worms are virtually unheard of....there are a
great many Windows worms however.
> funny how disconnecting a network cable makes windows much harder to
Oh gee, yeah, being completely cut off from the outside world would make
it a little harder to hack you I agree... What does this have to do with
> I guess Microsoft is trying to help people and business by offering
> tools for productivity,
There are many excellant tools on Linux for such work. In fact, Unix and
Unix-like systems were being used for such work long before Windows was
much of anything but a toy. Of course....many, including me, say it still
isn't much more than a toy.
Microsoft's goal isn't offering tools forn productivity, it's stated goal
(from the mouth of Bill Gates himself) is taking control of the world's
computers and information....and thus, the world. Bill Gates has amassed
considerable power. Look at all the crimes he's gotten away with, even
when admitted publically in open court in front of a Judge!
> and the slacker losers just want communism and
> hate anything that smacks of free market economy, or real work, so they
> bash and attack Microsoft.
Yeah, slacker communist losers like IBM, Novell, Sun Microsystems (don't
let the anti-Sun crowd fool you, they're just as tied into Linux as
everyone, even if they'd rather have Solaris be on top. They still offer
support for, and even market Linux themselves), RedHat, Mandrake, Lycoris,
and all the companies that *use* Linux and OSS.
>> If you want to talk commercial success....that's not due to the quality
>> of the OS, that's due *entirely* to the illegal tactics of Bill Gates
>> and Microsoft. Tactics they've admitted to time and time again in
>> courts of law. Tactics which include sabotage, extortion, copyright law
>> violations, fraud, and the list goes on and on.
> no, its because microsoft products are superior, because the best of the
> best work at microsoft and develop top level products...
The best of the best at Microsoft have been jumping ship lately. According
to many news articles there have been a number of people at Microsoft who
have jumped ship over the last few years and joined companies developing
OSS, and/or working with Linux.
Right now the fastest rate of software development is in the OSS
community. Right now the greatest amount of improvement in applications
comes from the OSS community, the greatest innovations, fastest bug fixes,
and least buggy software. Right now, OSS is where it's at.
> like the
> dotnet platform, the best of any OS ever.
Dotnet isn't an OS.
> Mac couldnt even survive, it had to be bought out by Bill Gates. HA HA
Mac has survived, and it's owned by Apple. Apple isn't owned by Bill
Gates. Furthermore Macs are now Unix based as well. They've seen the light
when it comes to building a *real* OS, a solid OS, built on good
principles and a solid working foundation. They will however, continue as
always to cater to the "trendy, fashion market" as well as the "luxury
market" and that explains, and will continue to explain, their fairly
>> > but there are far better processors and mainboards than the PC
>> > design. its very limited and weak, yet remains the de facto standard.
>> It's the de facto standard not due to Microsoft, but due to the opening
>> up of IBMs hardware standard back in the 1980s. The creation of an Open
>> hardware standard changed the face of the computing world forever, just
>> as the creation of a good open OS standard is changing it again.
> its a lousy hardware platform thats weak, IBM hired the cast of the tv
> show MASH to try to launch Microchannel and make all PCs obsolete,
> do you have microchannel in your PC?
> didnt think so.
> quick go to google and do a search.
>> Oh, and as for those other processors out there....Linux runs on them
>> too, Windows doesn't.
> what if I found one processor that windows ran on besides the x86
> DEC Alpha! ouch, linux loses.
Key word....ran. BTW, Linux also runs on the Alpha, and the Sparc, and a
vast number of other platforms you've probably never heard of.
>> > linux is essentially unix, a text based OS. Microsoft windows is far
>> > beyond linux
> LINUX IS ESSENTIALLY UNIX, A TEXT BASED OS.
You can keep repeating yourself, and even shout until you are blue in the
face...doesn't make your correct.
>> I'm using a GUI right now you twit. Unix had a GUI before MS did. In
>> fact, back when Windows was *nothing* the Unix world *defined* GUI. If
>> you wanted a real GUI you used X11 on Unix. Macs were around too of
>> course, and they were nice. But the *high end* GUIs were *always* Unix
> Unix used to be better than Windows. not anymore. Windows 311 was a gui
> and a good OS
Unix was *always* better than Windows. Windows 3.11 was never an OS, just
a GUI shell for DOS.
> Macs? right okay whatever, they are a small competitor.
> GUIs were always unix systems? except the ones that were not?
You didn't *have* to run the GUI....just as you can run Linux without the
GUI. But the high end workstations were always Unix systems, this was true
up until *Linux* came along and started shoving out Unix. Windows *never*
had a significant share in the high end graphical workstation market.
Those Unix systems were however, expensive. Windows was however, cheap,
and ran on cheap hardware, so it could be marketed to the masses. Unix
however was *always* on the higher end, now that's Linux.
> there were systems like the Control Data Cyber with NOS that was not
> unix, are we talking about all computers? or just PC based ones?
Dumbass, now you're bringing in an old supercomputer into the argument?
WTF are you talking about? This had absolutely *nothing* to do with the
topic at hand.
>> And Linux has had a GUI from practically it's very beginnings.
> oh come on, you dont believe that do you?
Yes, because it's true.
> X11 was
>> mated to the Linux kernel and GNU to form the core of the OS fairly
>> early on.
>> > but, linux has forced Microsoft to become better, so I like it.
>> Microsoft may make very slight improvements....but they will not
> the dotnet developer studio blows away any competition
> Microsoft Visual C sharp is the best language ever made
I agree that c-sharp is a fine language. But there is no such thing as the
best language ever made, only the best language for the job at hand.
>> And Microsoft is no longer quick enough to adapt to the marketplace,
>> Linux and OSS far outpaces it. That which does not adapt dies.
> what about adaptec?
Um...what about adaptec? What does adaptec have to do with what I just
Are you on crack or something, you don't seem very coherent at all. Maybe
you've just spent too much time using Windows.