gay?
Printable View
gay?
tru....
Yes, yes it does suck....
The kernel is badass and people will argue till they are blue in the face how great linux is. Problem is, the rest of it sucks. It is immature, all the commands are named after stupid inside jokes. The bar for everything is "hey, there's this new webbrowser on Linux that is fully compatible with IE 3.0". People will brag about the word processor because its "almost as good as Microsoft Word".
Unfortunately free software will always feel like free software. Why do you think MS charges $500 for their office suite? (Well, because they can, but also) because it costs a big pile of cash to write good software. Duh.
Amen man.... Amen, also I have a little something to add... the only reason Linux is so stable is because you can't do anything with it to screw it up... DUH!
No Carl uses linux so its badass
Whaddya want for free? Anyway, watch out for Lindows, coming soon.:D
Hmms, im the only one not recognizing linux in your completely biased opinions? I've been running linux since 97 and have been completely satisfied with it the larger amount of the time.
The only reason i still stick with windows from time to time is that i need the web development tools that are available for this OS (Such as Dreamweaver).
True, linux might not have so "many" apps, freshmeat.net just has over 18'000 different applications for linux and other unix tastes. And i'm sure that linuxapps.com has even more of them.
Sure, you need to know what the h*ll you are doing to get linux and other unices to work as they should.
I ran into a guy who said he had tried linux and then 'escaped from the room almost screaming how bad it was', he then uninstalled it 30 minutes later...If you are those people, don't say a word on how bad linux is, you have to, as on any system learn how it works and get into it.
Windows might be well used, but it's neither secure n'or stable.
Linux is not that much used, but is stabler and more securer, but it sure lacks the extra apps that is needed to take the throne from MS and Windows.
Linux is great for running as servers and similiar, also as powerful workstations, it may not be as good as windows when it comes to user-friendliness or useabilty but it kicks windows *** when it comes to speed and such.
The newest XFree86 releases has been great, i can agree that the 3.x.x releases sucked, but all 4+ releases has been great.
Don't say a OS is **** until you have tested it for more then a couple of months. I have run BeOS, qnx, windows (ever since 3.1), Linux, Freebsd, openbsd, OS/2 and others. And i can just say that each and every of these OS'es has been great, FOR THE PURPOSE THEY WHERE MADE. you can't expect that a linux machine shall have all the games and all the apps that windows has, cause it wasn't made to be a gaming OS, it was made to work as a server or a powerfull highend workstation.
And for that it rules....And you should note that this is from a person who has original CD's of 95/98/2k And XP....
To sum it up: Linux is great for It's purpose, it cant take on the role of doing All the things windows does, but it takes on some of them and it does All of those things better...
Why not install Linux, install WineX or similiar (buy it first ofcourse) and slam up some apps...or why not buy lindows when it comes, it's said to run Windows apps as fast or even faster than on a windows machine...
I'm not partial to any particular OS. I like to tinker with them all, from the mainframe down to the pc. They all have their merits.
Linux is popular due to the fact that anyone can customize the code and play with the internals. You can't do that with most of the other OS's.
Keep an eye on Linux. IBM just announced a "mainframe" that runs Linux. Linux is becoming a serious contender in the market place.
The only reason I don't run Linux full time is because I like to play the intensive games that only run under Windows.
Linux is great for servers but mostly blows for the desktop environment.
hoodedrat have you ever actually installed Linux or are you just trying to stir up emotions?
Well I must say the only think that your ranting about shows is your ignorance on the subject. This happens often to newbies.
"... can't do anything with it to screw it up..." ? I wish. Unfortunately due to the ability to "mess" with the Linux Kernel you can do a lot of messing about! But hey don't worry your little head because it's way to complicated for you to grasp! Stick to playing your Windows games. One advice: reset your computer once in a while because it might freeze on you. Even those great Microsoft programmers that write good software and cost a lot to pay that fishninja007 talks about can't explain why Windows (ALL VERSIONS: 9x, ME, NT, XP) "eats" up its resources after some opening and closing of apps!! Even MS admits it’s a good practice to reset the OS every once in a while.
Your thinking: "finally I caught a Linux fanatic to flame!"
Well it just so happens I mostly develop applications for the Windows environment and believe you me: I have had my share of MS bugs that could last me a lifetime!
Ever since I managed to get a drastic drop in maintenance time on my file-servers after going from Novell to Windows 2K to Linux/Samba I turned into a Linux supporter.
Those of you who only want to fiddle with your joysticks are better off with Windows. But try and keep your biased thoughts to yourselves. They benefit nobody!
I ran a linux firewall for about 4 months without restarting it. The longest I have seen a windows machine go was about a week before getting a BSOD. Its a hell of a lot more stable but the UI needs a lot of work.
I'm running Linux as I post. Works fine for me. The KDE interface looks just like Windows. It comes with a SDK. All for the cost of the distribution. For $40, I have a DVD with 4.2Gb of applications, games and the operating system and all the source code. What could be more fun than that?
Obviously you either haven't used Linux or just suck with computers. Everyone who's saying Linux blows on the desktop and the UI sucks, hmmm....you're wrong. If you dont like the GUI, dont blame LINUX. Blame the developers for KDE, Gnome, Blackbox, Fluxbox, Window Maker, TWM, Sawfish, Enlightenment, shall I go on? Oh, so Linux also sucks with programs too eh? Not enough stuff, programs suck, whatever ya think. Name off a few programs and I'll show ya Linux progs that most likely will perform better. (and dont tell me you're all flash developers. if you use flash, then ya got me there. I dont know of a linux equiv)
Lets kinda think back to when you started using Windows and how hard it was. I don't think you were a guru with it in 3 days. Point and click was the best you could do.
Don't get me totaly wrong, Windows is a good OS. Easy to use (like Linux), a lot of pgorams (like Linux) and easy for basic config. The reason I use Linux is because it has more of the programs that I need daily, it loads faster, is a LOT more stable, and free. I fire up Linux once in a while if I need to check how my web pages look in IE or play an occasional video game.
One more thing. Linux can't play all the games Windows can. haha! Get a darn life guys. Video games are fun and all but you can't spend every moment on your computer playing a darn video game. Most of us have jobs and such so thats the last thing we think about. If ya want games though, use Windows or get a playstation or something.
I suggest that all the people that say the OS plain sucks actually sit down and try to use it. If you're really not interested in that, dont say it sucks. Just point out the parts you've seen of Linux that don't reallly appeal to you. I dont really like Windows XP, I've tried it a few times and I dont like it too much. Do I hate it? No. That particular OS is just not for me.
I checked a linux box at school today because I knew it had been up for a while and I was curious so I did uptime and it had been up for 189 days. This machine backs up 30 gigs of data daily and serves a webpage and email as well as exports about 10 gigs of diskspace to about 10 users. I agree linux is not as user friendly as windows but windows just does not have that kind of stability.
Linux, its a real cool gang & your not part of it :)
You are just insecure.Quote:
hoodedrat gay?
Ahh with your trully half a$$ed argument you are really spoiling us. Most dos commands are based on *nix commands. What is so stupid about calling the copy command "cp" or the move command "mv" or even the remove command "rm". i know they are kinda far out names but hang in there.Quote:
fishninja007 Yes, yes it does suck....
The kernel is badass and people will argue till they are blue in the face how great linux is. Problem is, the rest of it sucks. It is immature, all the commands are named after stupid inside jokes.
A valid argument but I would tend to disagree :)Quote:
Epyon9283 Linux is great for servers but mostly blows for the desktop environment.
I run linux on lots of desktop sytems & it works great for me. I even play modern games like RTCW.
Its great to see so many positive posts about linux on a non-linux board.
For those of you that are offended by anything I have said, don't be :)
At the end of the day its just an OS & choice is best, just don't bash other peoples choices when you have a really lame argument.
Regards
Eddy
hoodedrat~~ gay I think not. since when does an OS have a sexual preference?
bsamuels~~ see above response
fishninja007~~ about the kernel.. ever heard of a BSOD in windows? that's a problem with the kernel or software interacting with the kernel. don't you wish you could go in and fix it yourself? I know I have lots of times. With open source/GNU/GPL you can do that legally too...
the reason why everything is compared to a MS app is because MS happens to be the big boy in the market currently and in order to be easily used it needs to be compatible.
for example MS Office is the defacto standard of word processing apps therefore for business reasons apps in linux are made compatible with MS word. As for MSIE see above. and actually now they are equivalents of MSIE 5.5
and the good thing about GNU/GPL aka free software. Lots of people look at the code and tweakit/fix it and as a result normally it ends up being more secure and less bugfree than the original release.
Yes I will say that linux is not as carefree of an OS as windows but it's not really meant for a normal "point and click, I wanna play games and surf the net user" It's meant for people who TRULY use a computer and put it thru it's paces.
Not to say you can't do that with a MS OS but you can tweak things to how you like them all the way down to the kernel level.
Hoodedrat (again)~~ can't do anything with linux huh? how come full blown hoolywood level movies have been created on Linux machines? can you say "Shrek" ? parts of "Titanic" special effects.and there are more than that but that is an example.
Also why is Solaris which used to be the defacto standard for internet servers now losing alot of ground to linux machines?
and you can't do anything to screw it up? try this at a console
"su root" then enter root password and start deleting stuff..
bsamuels~~ maybe it is for him because of what he uses his box for.
I've used both Windows and Linux. I like both for different things, but since I do enjoy computer games I use Windows a lot more often.
Why not flame OS X because it doesn't run Windows games? Any OS is a tool, and the key to success is picking the right tool for the right job. Linux would not have developed the following it has if it was a bad OS.
For the people here who say linux sucks, would you say that a semi-trailer truck sucks at driving a twisty mountain road at 80+ mph compared to a sports car? Maybe, but that's not important because the semi isn't designed to do that. It's supposed to be for hauling large heavy cargo over long distances, not high performance racing. I don't know of any Mustangs that can haul a 10+ ton trailer a couple hundred miles(or at all).
Linux and Windows were designed for different reasons. Windows is supposed to have a high easy of use while linux is for stability and security and "boring" computing tasks like web hosting or routing. Only recently has it gained a UI. Windows is for people who want to be able to use a computer without having to know lots of about how the OS and hardware work.
I have Linux (Red Hat 7.2) on my computer along with Windows98/2000/XP. Although I mostly use Windows XP, I do go into Linux to see if I can do something that I read about on the web or to do some web surfing. I can also listen to MP3s and Audio CDs under Linux, which to me, makes it not that bad of an OS.
Anybody who is willing to take the time to run linux for a couple of weeks will find that it is an OK operating system, and one day even be close to Windows for usability. Anyone who calls themselves an "expert" should be able to understand linux.
DON'T FEAR THE PENGUIN!
gnu
gnome
squid
gimp (yes, its an acronym, but its first letter is for GNU, so it counts)
Perl
...
I should have qualified my earlier statement. Linux sucks as a desktop operating system. As a server environment it is getting very very good.
The thing with free software is that its kind of a group effort. Lots of people work on it, a lot of the time with no real central sense of direction. Different people have different styles and different levels of programming ability (though most that contribute to open source stuff are pretty good). Writing good software takes more than just good coders though, it takes people who write good requirements docs. People to write good functional specs. People with the vision to think of (I'm gonna get flamed for this) new things. In the desktop environment nobody has really done much new, its a constant 'be like microsoft' game. Sure, there are some cool ideas, I like in gnome having multiple desktop areas I can go to, but nothing really new. You might argue that thats because whenever anyone starts something new Microsoft buys them and I don't disagree. Problem is, whatever the reasons, it is still true.
<rant>
I would love to see linux get a real good setup for desktop users. Sure, I play with it at home a little here and there for fun and when I screw up my windows install and need a place to fix it from. Thing is, when I need to write a paper, send a fax, scan a picture I use windows. Why? Its easier and after programming for 11 hours at work I don't wanna mess around with RPMs and command lines to get my USB scanner to work, I wanna plug it in, turn on my computer (reboot 10 times :)), and have it all done for me. Until Linux reaches that point (with 10 less reboots, cuz thats a place linux rules in) I will stop saying it sucks.
</rant>
Who knows about Lindows? What is it?
Kurylo
Lindows will be an "out the box" Linux op sys that will be able to take any third party application for windows and run it. Games. browsers, apps, anything.
More here
http://www.theregister.co.uk/content/4/24093.html
Ya know,
Linux sucks so much that this thread is making me put it back on my box.
:)
I like Linux.
Yeah...Linux does suck...
If you have no clue whatsoever about computers!
Half the fun of any OS is learning how to use it. Windows was a nightmare when I first started using it...and now I'm comfortable with it.
Before basing OS opinions on 1 hour of usage (including the installation) play around with it and see what you can do. There's nothing more rewarding than finally getting something to work right. I'm trying to configure my dialup connection on a laptop running RH 7.2 and I'm having a blast (but it's still not working).
And, Linux is great for me as a programmer because at school we program in a Unix environment...once I get the dialup working, I can just scp (kinda like ftp) my files over to their server.
Go back to your Minesweeper.
Jason
BTW - saw this on a t-shirt:
Mac for Productivity
Linux for Development
Unix for Connectivity
Windows for Solitaire
Mac for Productivity
Linux for Development
Unix for Connectivity
Windows for Solitaire
myths, myths, myths! That statement is false. Mac for Productivity. Well dosen't PhotoShop, Pagemaker, InDesign, Quark Express, Illustrator, Freehand and others run on Windows? I beleive they do, in fact I know they do. Also the Intel and AMD processors are faster then the Macs and the displays of PC is just as good if not better then Macs. In fact with the Mac G4 you get a geforce2 MX card. Yuk! give me Matrox or ATI. Windows is better for productivity.
Linux for development? Not so Windows has more and better developement tools. Also if you want money you will develop for Windows.
Unix for connectivity. Most high end servers are Windows.
Bottom line: Windows is the best for productivity, development, connectivity and solitaire. Since Windows 2000 has been out for 2 years and now XP is out Windows is the King of stability as well. Windows is the best for every single last thing and its uncles ***, period.
Learn how to use it.
Well time for my opinion. I here that people say that Linux is more stable, well I say, ummm ya right. I don't have exact numbers but I am guessing that of all these billlions of computers in the world about 90% or more are windows/dos(microsoft) machines, now where do u think people are going to take numbers from. Well out of all these billions of windows machines, this many or that many crash, ya know why because there is more, if there were equal amount of Linux machines out there I would say well they are probubly even, actually I would say MS products would be more stable/crash less.
No u may say I am being one sided but, look at it this way, u got millions of programmers out there and they are making programs that support MS because there is a much bigger market, and u know why MS operating systems have so much BSOD/crashes ,about 95 or more percent because of bad programming. It would be kind of hard to make a Operating system compatable with all these programmers that will not ever crash, wouldent it. That is why nothing is compatible with Linux, if it was Linux would have more problems.
My business example............That, yes that linux box is awesome, it u just sits there and runs and runs(not much on it proxy and data storage),now- knowone knows how to use it --go figure no wonder it wont crash, knowone knows how to use it, how is someone going to get in there and mess it up......dahhhhh.
Now on a windows system, it is more user freindly, and more people can get in it, and screw with it/not a server of course(ya right servers have people on them configureing things or what not). All I have to say is look at the big picture, no I mean the BIG PICTURE, think about it. Linux kind of reminds me of DOS, now will a DOS box be stable if u just sit it there and let it be a firewall/proxy/data server, i think it will, and I would bet if u set it side by side next to Linux box they would both run the same amount of time, and yes so will that windows system for that matter. I just checked the processes on my WIN2000 Server box, CPU time says 10223:24:17, now I do not know how long that is but i know it is over a year. Well u say maybe I have good luck with MS products(and I m just one person), I know how to use MS products, just like Linux users know how to use Linux.( by the way, my 2000 box does Active Directory, IIS,FTP,RRAS,VPN,NAT, and data storage)
I am working on my MCSE, my next test is 216, wish me Luck. I also do tech support for a business 24 hours a week, and 90% percent of probs on these "Windows 9x " clients are user error, the other 5% is bad hardware. Anyone have any valid opinions am open. But I will never use a linux product if I can help it, been working with MS to long to learn somthing new, and I don't want to anyway( not stubbern, just don't have the time, life is to short, have to have some fun, hehe).
Another thought, who do u think is going to make a better operating system. All the Programmers in the world who hate MS and love tweaking the bugs out of Linux(yes bugs), to make it better. Or MS's programmers who are getting paid the BIG bucks to do something they like/love to do.(I don't want to hear anything about stealing/borrowing of software u mught think MS did, -different subject), I know that if I liked doing something, and then got paid big bucks for it, it would make that programm that much better. A previous comment was made, and it is in-my-opinion is true about everything in life, in one way or another-- U get what u pay for. -->The END
The only thing I would trust that is free, is AIR(not everwhere), well I guess trust is a big word , but u know what i mean.
IN MY HONEST OPIONION-thats all, nothing else.
Eric
Hi kids,
I'm a Computer Science Junior at Georgia Tech (http://www.gatech.edu). I spend the better part of each day in front of a terminal window, usually coding in C.
From all my experiences with this interface, and the various GUIs I've used, I have concluded an important point:
Any version of Unix: Solaris, Redhat, etc. really does suck for the end user. It has an interface similar to that of PCAOL 1.5 and couldn't help to easily automate a process if its poorly documented, open source life depended on it.
I don't care if Windows has securities issues. I've never been the victim of one.
I don't care of Windows becomes unstable. It's offered to me more functionality than any GUI or utility in Linux has, application suites included.
Being different does not make you cool. If you use a flavor of Unix because others have taught you that it's wrong to like Microsoft, you're losers. If you use a version of Unix when you could use Microsoft for the same process, you're hurting yourselves.
Learn to use a standard that has good documentation and support. Stop being idiots.
Microsoft Rules.
Also the Intel and AMD processors are faster then the Macs <- Tssk, get your facts straigth, sure, a 2000+ may be faster than a G4 1Ghz, but the G4 kicks the *** of a 1Ghz AMD or Intel processor
Hmms, why do i not recognize myself in everybodies complaints about the GUI in unix? first of Console ROCKS, I just use X to surf the web or other things that really need a GUI.
And what about WindowMaker, Gnome and KDE they all rock, and are really easy to use....get a life, don't come down on a group of OS'es just because you can't handle them...
Hmms, what was it? "If you do something in UNIX that could also be done in Windows, stop hurting yourself?" or how was it? Hmms, Some things i do in Unix and Linux I couldn't have done whatsoever in Windows, like bash-scripting, how the hell to do it on a WindOoooze machine? And what about the 'Freeness' of Linux and other unices, why pay $120 or something for Windows when you could get Linux for free, and do everything you can on windows? Sure, it may be a little bit harder to do it, but it gets done, and often even better.
Also the Intel and AMD processors are faster then the Macs <- Tssk, get your facts straigth, sure, a 2000+ may be faster than a G4 1Ghz, but the G4 kicks the *** of a 1Ghz AMD or Intel processor
I agree that mhz for mhz Mac beat AMD or Intel but I was not talking about that. I am talking about the best Intel has to offer is faster then what the best Mac has to offer the same with AMD as well.
Also an important point I forgot to make PC is much cheaper then the Mac and you can built your own PC. That is a huge bonus.
Hey Boggs,
"... get a life, don't come down on a group of OS'es just because you can't handle them... "
I can handle them just fine. I spend a good bit of time in them. They're not more powerful; they're ****.
"I just use X to surf the web or other things that really need a GUI. "
I can't remember how many times I've had to do a kill pid_num on netscape because it froze. The issues with that browser are not limited to to a particular distro or configuration. Wasn't there this thing called the internet that propelled information distribution and retrieval into whole new level?
"Some things i do in Unix and Linux I couldn't have done whatsoever in Windows, like bash-scripting, how the hell to do it on a WindOoooze machine?"
From Windows:
ssh unix_machine_of_your_choice
Then you're dumped into a console (in an emulated terminal). Wow, that was hard. I REALLY need Unix on the frontend now.
The real question that should be asked is why the consumer needs bash-scripting, or any other console service. I believe Microsoft had a similar feature about fifteen years ago, with many equivalent commands, some being exactly the same. There was plenty of (needless) control, and a setup that alienated many from using computers. Now I was young, so my memory may be off, but I believe they, like Apple, also determined that computing could go beyond that interface, and in doing so, opened computers to many, many more.
Using, understanding, and programming an OS with more control and less automation doesn't make a person a more "powerful" user. In many cases, it wastes time. The mainstream will never be convinced to use a version of Unix as a desktop solution until it can improve a good many things. The problem, however, is that any variety of Linux will never be a viable business solution ( Redhat stock anyone?), meaning that such development will never occur. So desktop-wise, it'll remain a hardcore solution for zealots that at some point have either been told or brainwashed that "Linux is all you need," and through poor judgement decided to agree.
I'v noticed that alot of people just dont' seem to understand that linux isn't a desktop environemnt, it's a KERNEL!!
Windows has integrated: drivers, UI, window manager, shell, libraries, etc...
Linux is a kernel, once the kernel boots, you can set it to use whatever shell you want, with whatever services you want. You can choose a different X server, with different window managers and panneling systems, sound systems, etc...
When I install something in windows, I feel as though I'm just adding to this big pile of ****. You have no clue what's going on in the background, what it's modifing, and why it just stops working once and a while.
The ONLY reason anybody would want to use windows on the desktop is cauz it has more applications developed for it, that doesn't make it better.
I use linux for my server and as a desk machine. But I also have a windoz machine for games, photo editing and downloading (KaZaa, morpheus, limewire, bearshare...). The Piece 'O **** can't even stay running for 1 night without a crash. I refuse to run XP cauz there is no way in hell i'm installing an OS that needs 2 ****ing gig on space on my machine. That's retarded.
Windows has MANY problems too; security, performance, memory hog, stability, etc... WMP 8 sends info to MS about the media you listen/watch, Outlook is a spawning pool for viruses, apps like winzip could crash the whole OS, it's dificult to clean windows drives, etc... Hell, in linux you can't even get a virus if the user who 'put' the virus on the machine isn't root.
Lets face it, windows is a joke, they just make it look good.
~Paul
Then you're dumped into a console (in an emulated terminal). Wow, that was hard. I REALLY need Unix on the frontend now.
Wooow, by my knowing i asked how to do it On a windows machine, not letting another computer do the job for you...
Hmms, let's say you want to automate some things in windows without learning VB, (or vbscript if you want), then you ssh to another unix machine? Hmms, well, by my knowing you then let the machine on the other side to do it for you, not the machine you use locally, what if the files or the things you wanted to do Must be done on the machine you sits by...
Well it was just an example...Windows looks good and has a lot of **** inside, Linux (or the whole GNU project), may look terrible but it is full of joy :)
"Linux Sucks"
True That.
Linux, it has all of zero useful programs. Stability? Well thats what they said about the WTC.
Linux blows, it has zero benefits over windows, and makes life more difficult, but i guess for you few soles who believe using an OS out of the norm makes you technically superior, who am i to say different..
Win2K is One with me, and I am One with Win2K
Hmm...
ngc457:
I was just saying that's what I saw on a T-shirt. And to emphasize: Macs are THE platform of choice for many graphics designers. Just because you prefer MS OS's for your productivity doesn't mean everyone does. I'd love to have a 22" LCD for my PC. (Love to be able to afford it too :)) I have used Unix, RH Linux, Windows 2K, and Windows 9x to program in and I still prefer the *nices. For some reason (just personal preference) I like the command line interface - and being able to choose my own filenames and extensions right off the bat. Plus, I don't like all the "features" that are included in Visual Studio (as an example). As far as high-end servers being Windows-based: Last time I checked (a few months ago, so I know the numbers could be slightly off, but not by much) I read an article that said roughly 40% of corporate servers were based on Windows, and about 55% were Unix servers. The other 15% were Linux servers. Windows is almost universally acknowledged as the best PC platform for gaming.
Ranma:
I started using Unix on Solaris because I had to, or I wouldn't pass my classes. I enjoyed the different things you could do from the command line and was intrigued by another option in OS's besides Windows. I agree that security issues are rather overemphasized. The main reason that all of the *nix GUIs are difficult (sucky?) for the end user is that most end users are trained to do everything in Windows first. Sometimes standards are good. But standards should apply to an industry, not only using one company
Heh, Looks like Pikey actually LIKES getting BSODs lol
Linux is going back on my box tonite - although it is a completely different setup then when I installed it last time.
Just hope I dont have to fork out for another external Modem
I guess the system just takes time to learn - I used Redhat 7.1 on and off last year, and really have had no regrets.
The only problems that I have had, is trying to get rid of Windoze afterwards - it really hates being uninstalled !
:D
ok here is my 2 cents.
first off how can you tell someone else what OS is right for them?
isn't an OS a personal Choice?
Sure i have linux but i don't use it as much as i'd like to i don't ahev a working modem for it. But i can make my server box connect and share it to it. (maybe i'll do that tonight) Out of the windows i have used i like 98 3.1 and 2k. some day i will get around to using XP but the last time i tried to use it i couldn't get it to install (upgrade from 2k) then i got it to work and it would explorer error just sitting there on the desktop man that pissed me off. anyway enough about me.
Still i want to know how YOU can say one OS is better then another OS? Sure maybe one is better for you but maybe not for him, or me. So don't rant on and on and on about how one sucks and the other rocks. Beacuse there will allways be someone out there who thinks the other way, takes the time to learn how to use it properly. Beacuse you don't like it dosn't make it that way. who died and made you GOD? yes I think i'm ranting now but its about you people that think your the best and everyone else is wrong, well guess what your not the best and everyone else is not wrong. O man i'm getting upset just writing this i really hate when people do this.
Again leave OS choices To a personal choice.
PLEASE.
Oh i forgot to add this but have you ever seen 2 people fight over which dist. of linux is better?
it's fun to watch.
You windows Newbee...... ! : (
They come here and say linux sucks just to justified the fack that they suck with computers or used linux for 10 minutes !
Linux "slackware" as been the MOST reliable OS i have used so far
and for the none linux guru YES you can run all windows games into linux !!!! http://winehq.com "thats right it works"
I can run all the pathetic windoze apps into my ROX linux BOX
So linux sucks han i dont think so.....
"LOL / ROFL" Make my laught :D
TRU!!!!!!!!!!!!Quote:
Microsoft Rules