Posts by JEDIDIAH 2525 publicly visible posts • joined 26 Jan 2009
Well, I do care about new Windows machines becoming part of a bit torrent swarm without the consent or knowledge of the end user. At that point, it's not just Lemming self-flagellation anymore. That's something that can impact me if I happen to be sharing a network with a new WinBox. Plus friends and family will be impacted and likely experience "mysterious internet slowdowns".
I'm not a Windows user but I'm often called upon to rescue them.
> I am curious: how did the author manage to type and publish this article using MS-DOS v1.0...?
I used my first spreadsheet, word processor, and mouse driven drawing app on the Apple II.
Some things just don't need to be re-invented every year. Once Microsoft finally got it's act together and had a half decent GUI, a lot of basic stuff beyond that point probably didn't need "upgrading" that much.
What exactly am I paying for in this years version of rehashed software from 1994? Should I even need to care about those things? These questions are usually not addressed. It's just assumed that everyone will buy the shovelware because they think they have to.
...that's funny because I know a business user that complains that the Windows version of Skype is full of ads and steals all upstream bandwidth.
The Linux version of Skype seems like an improvement over that actually.
The cash cow mentality when applied to software creates these strange paradoxes.
All of the 68K's were fine machines, especially considering what the state of the PC clone market was like and what MS-DOS and Windows were like. When I finally defected to monopoly ware in 94, I nearly came straight back because of what WinDOS could do to what was ample RAM on a 68K machine.
Amigas were really not that far behind typical PCs of the time. They certainly weren't behind PCs at all in terms of multimedia capabilities.
They were always a consumer niche product that didn't get any respect from the larger business market. The Microsoft hegemony chipped away at their market share year after year until they were finally relegated to Video toaster enthusiasts.
The same thing happened to them that happened to nearly another alternative to MS-DOS.
Back in the old days, the only mobile entertainment device you really had was a radio. This gave the music industry a tremendous advantage. They had a sort of monopoly in the mobile space. Once mobile devices started adequately playing games and displaying video, they no longer had a captive audience.
We grew up with transistor radios and our children grew up with Nintendo. That's not even getting into the current generation of mobile networked devices.
If they are letting people upgrade in place for free and they don't cripple everyone's machines in the process, that could actually put quite a dent in the PC upgrade cycle. Demand for PCs are already depressed. People are finding that their ancient machines are still perfectly suitable.
Microsoft seems to be ADDING to this perception rather than encouraging hardware upgrades.
Contrary to the constant screeching of the trolls, nearly no one really needs msoffice.
Besides, Microsoft wants you to give up that "local version of office".
...and Linux has a lot of games these days. Some of them are the ones that my Windows gamer friends even get excited over. Not perfect but not totally dire either.
Don't be a moron. ALL cars depreciate.
Also, there's nothing terribly noteworthy about "Mercedes service" either. Although you will likely be forced to use it because of the proprietary nature of many parts of a Mercedes. I sorely wanted to replace the head unit in mine with something a bit more modern. Car companies always lag behind with that kind of thing.
Although the real point is that Apple products come out of the same Chinese factories and use the same parts as any other PC or phone. Besides the extra trim, there is absolutely nothing to distinguish them from the cheapest brand you can name.
iTunes is pants under any OS and yes I have used it under MacOS. It's really not that sophisticated of a program. It's missing little bits of polish that you might even see on a Linux app. It's not really a proper GUI and some of the obvious music use cases are missing. Media management for alien video isn't there at all. It's "jack-of-all-trades" throw everything together in the same app approach is also a bit daft and highly anti-Unix. The storefront is just an 80s throwback turning what should be a modern ecommerce site into something you would have seen on the 3 foot 10 pack.
It's one of the most undeservingly overhyped applications ever.
> I find it fascinating how people seem to translate their own experiences and wants into an absolute requirement for everyone else and denigrate anyone who doesn't agree.
That's rich coming from the fanboy camp.
The OP's remark were a nice solid explanation for why a considerable bulk of the market might be inclined to avoid Apple products. Phone salesmen will even bring these issues up if they see you contemplating a switch back to Apple.
We haven't upgraded our phones in awhile. We really see no need. What exact characteristic of ANY phone including the new iPhones is exactly supposed to be worth the bother (never mind the money)?
It also doesn't help that the S6 is trying too hard to look like an Apple product (no removable battery or SD card).
> I'd say an SSD is essential as a boot/OS drive for basically any hardware or OS now.
I used to think that. I was experiencing a lot of IO waits and blamed it all on Canonical. I juggled things around using multiple units of spinning rust trying to reduce contention. Even contemplated buying a nice fat SSD to replace my boot drive with.
...then it turns out that it was just a failing drive.
Once replaced with spinning rust that wasn't in the process of actively dying, all became well. Need for SSD upgrade averted.
Not all Operating Systems are created equal.
Windows 3.1 and 95 were both pigs until RAM prices finally dropped and I could go from 8M to 32M.
My first Win box started out at 4M and was immediately upgraded to 8M because 4M with 3.1 was just too painful coming from the ST (where 4M is a bloody bonanza).
I would not trust the minimum specs.
> You appear to confuse "easy to use" with "efficient", and there is a VAST gap in between the two.
The OP has correctly pointed out that you have reverted back to a decent command line (Unix) versus a really bad one (DOS). The visual flimflam is just a distraction from this fact.
> Yeah, even more so if you run business software or games ....
...which MacOS is certainly no good at.
If you want to pay for commercial software, Windows is pretty much it. MacOS is the same kind of ugly redheaded stepchild that Linux is. All of the effort put into marketing it (MacOS) hasn't really changed this much.
It's stupid when idiots try to lump MacOS in with Windows. It's more appropriately lumped in with Linux because of market share and 3rd party support.
The only thing Windows has going for it, the only thing it really had going for it, is the fact that it is the monopoly legacy platform. This goes back to the days of DOS.
If you aren't fixated on some WinDOS only program, Windows itself is highly optional and very interchangeable. Even the example of "needing" msoffice is bogus for most people. Although the notion that you can't get away from it is a nice triump of the trolls.
"serious word processing" can be done with anything. This has been the case since before msoffice managed to get itself entrenched. The only thing msoffice brings to the table is the fact that it's a trusted brand name. It may not even be "most compatible" with itself.
This mindless brand fixation nonsense is one of the most annoying parts of Windows. You have this monopoly product that's supposed to offer you literally anything and everything (because of the whole monopoly thing) and it gets wasted because of this herd mentality regarding what apps you can use.
Pitiful.
Microsoft is run from the sales department and not engineering. They have always been deficient. This isn't just a Linux versus Windows thing. This goes all the way back to dog+world versus DOS.
Plus Linux (and Unix in general) is transparent and modular. They're designed that way. So you can tweak to your hearts content and make Linux even more suitable for limited hardware (like the PI).
#1 - I didn't like the Firefox in the last copy of Ubuntu I installed so I downloaded the current release tarball from Mozilla. All I did to "install it" was to unzip the archive. It runs fine. I have Loki games from the dawn of time and 3 distros ago that I still run.
#2 - The package manager handles any dependencies for any app you would care to install. You don't have to worry what API an application was coded with.
#3 - Maya is available for Linux. Don't make baseless assumptions.
No. You're missing the point. Arch is not sold on it's usability to n00bs. What are you going to try and dredge up next? Gentoo? CentOS?
Some distributions are intended to be more "user friendly". Arch simply isn't one of them and it's a piss poor example to base any comparison on.
Although there is something to be said for a system that can be remotely managed from the other side of the planet with a 2400 baud modem.
> The word Nvidia explains everything. Nvidia kit is Windows only, if that.
Nonsense. I've been getting the most out of Nivida kit on Linux for years and years since before the 6200 was shiny and new. Nvidia is very well supported on Linux by Nvidia. Pretty much always has been.
Being a happy customer of their BLOBs is a big part of why I'm so viciously anti-Wayland.
This isn't really a Linux issue. It's a Nvidia legacy support issue. Those older chipsets are getting desupported in the newer driver versions across the board. Chipset driver release numbers are something you have to watch out for regardless. Some are just plain buggy.
Even the early ION era GPUs are getting desupported in the newer drivers and the 6x00's are older than that.
I would expect the libre driver to still worth though. Dunno for sure, I use the proprietary driver.
SSD that can even displace my current spinning rust (regardless of cost)?
I will believe it when I actually see it.
Zero seek times are nice and everything but there's still reliability and failure modes to consider. Will it fail gracefully and allow me time to order a replacement or will it just suddenly kick me in the balls. SSD brands haven't been around long enough to really establish a track record either way here.
I will use whatever makes sense and gets the job done. I don't have this apparent desperate need to see one or the other fail like a notable chunk of the peanut gallery here does.
So what you are saying is that you really just never adapted to the brave new world of Powershell. You could have this all wired by now (or just use someone else's toolbox) but you've just never bothered.
GUIs are nice but they change too much or get booted in favor of something like Metro or Unity.
They have a habit of going missing in future versions or changing their behavior.
> If you know which file you need to change - where it is located - and which line you need to change. Windows is much more powerful and simple in that you change the settings in the Registry or Active Directory
The Windows version is no actual improvement. You've just moved the configuration hive from one type of storage mechanism to one that's far less standard. You've also stripped off the inline documentation or any real sense of order in the process.
The Register 
Biting the hand that feeds IT
Copyright. All rights reserved © 1998–2024
