2nd Rate Operating System--Monopoly$oft

  • Thread starter Thread starter CorporateGeorge
  • Start date Start date
C

CorporateGeorge

Windows, a second rate OS with a first rate marketing scheme. proof that if
you know how to sell crap to Americans, they will happily buy it.
 
CorporateGeorge said:
Windows, a second rate OS with a first rate marketing scheme. proof that if
you know how to sell crap to Americans, they will happily buy it.
Click to expand...

which version of the toy operating system linux are you using? suse?
 
Unparralleled support for cross platform and legacy applications. If you see
Windows just for the stability and speed then you can't be terribly savvy on
corporate IT.
 
Jack said:
Unparralleled support for cross platform and legacy applications.
Click to expand...

And many people think that is one of Windows biggest problems. The code
is so bloated because it tries to be all things for all times.
If
you see Windows just for the stability and speed then you can't be
terribly savvy on corporate IT.
Click to expand...

Yeah, as Windows still needs to be rebooted on a fairly regular basis,
it wouldn't be too savvy to say that Windows is anything approaching
stability.

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."
 
kurttrail said:
Jack wrote:
And many people think that is one of Windows biggest problems. The code
is so bloated because it tries to be all things for all times.
Click to expand...

It's a necessary evil, because trying to be all things for all times is
exactly what makes Windows marketable. That reason is exactly why companies
buy it and implement it into their network - because their network is often
overflowing with ancient, outdated hardware that's long overdue for an
upgrade.
Yeah, as Windows still needs to be rebooted on a fairly regular basis,
it wouldn't be too savvy to say that Windows is anything approaching
stability.
Click to expand...

Like I was saying - companies don't buy Windows for stability. They buy it
because it will work without having to completely overhaul their equipment
and retrain their IT staff to implement it. It's more economic. But better?
Well, I'd never argue that Windows is written better than Linux. I wouldn't
jump on the bashing bandwagon just because of its stability either.
 
Jack said:
It's a necessary evil, because trying to be all things for all times
is exactly what makes Windows marketable. That reason is exactly why
companies buy it and implement it into their network - because their
network is often overflowing with ancient, outdated hardware that's
long overdue for an upgrade.
Click to expand...

And how long do you think this situation can go on? Eventually
somethings got to give. Is the next Windows OS gonna take 10 years to
develop because of its shear size?
Like I was saying - companies don't buy Windows for stability. They
buy it because it will work without having to completely overhaul
their equipment and retrain their IT staff to implement it. It's more
economic. But better? Well, I'd never argue that Windows is written
better than Linux. I wouldn't jump on the bashing bandwagon just
because of its stability either.
Click to expand...

Why not? Especially since MS markets it as a stable software product?

Don't you think that companies should be held accountable for their
lies, er, I mean their marketing?

Or are you the kind of guy that just lays there and waits for the
ass-raping to get over with?

--
Peace!
Kurt Kirsch
Self-anointed Moderator
http://microscum.com
"It'll soon shake your Windows
And rattle your walls
For the times they are a-changin'."
 
kurttrail said:
And how long do you think this situation can go on? Eventually somethings
got to give. Is the next Windows OS gonna take 10 years to develop
because of its shear size?


Why not? Especially since MS markets it as a stable software product?

Don't you think that companies should be held accountable for their lies,
er, I mean their marketing?

Or are you the kind of guy that just lays there and waits for the
ass-raping to get over with?
Click to expand...

If XP were stable, I'd only have to reboot it maybe twice a year. Hell,
as often as not you can't even upgrade applications without a reboot. That
is absolutely insane. The last thing XP is, is stable. At least NT 4.0 used
to
run for months at a time.

I reboot my Linux server exactly never. When the local power company
craps on me the server reboots itself. 200-300 days of uptime is not
unusual.
 
Always with the comparing apples to oranges or how about raisins t
prunes.

How about the smoothness of the ride between a Cadilac and
dozer...about the same comparisions as windows to linux or to mac
 
I reboot my windows worksation once every two weeks . I do it becasue that
is usually when a scheduled round of updates, app patches, or new apps get
pushed out by our infrastructure team.

I have rebooted my windows servers maybe six times in the last two years
because of patches.

If you aren't rebooting your linux systems, it is because you aren't
updating them.

Now go ahead and tell me with a straight face how they don't need patching.

--
Manny Borges
MCSE NT4-2003 (+ Security)
MCT, Certified Cheese Master

There are 10 kinds of people in the world. Those who do understand binary
and those who don't.
 
Back
Top