Because Shiny Things Are Fun - The New New Windows v Linux Thread

I used to work on puters until winders 3.1 came out. I then changed careers. I built my first rig about 2003. I put Linux on it not knowing anything about it. I had heard about it but never seen it in real life. I have never bought or installed anything Linux on my systems, EVER. I see M$ OSs when I work on friends rigs or something.

To me, you can't really compare Linux to MS anything. They are both OSs but that is about it.

As a Linux noob, I was (and maybe still am) under the impression that Linux was not quite as "up to date" as the propriety OS's- but that belief had no0thing to do with the actual architecture of the OS...but just rather the belief that various apps and components in Linux (Like media codecs and Flash Player, etc.) would not be as current as the ones in/available to the latest non-greatest Win-D'ohs OS.

As far as the actual OS/kernel, etc. I had already known for a long time that Linux is likely more current than anything from [cr]Apple or MicroSh*t, because of the fact that it constantly being improved by the geeks who use it [], being FOSS.

The idea of Linux being behind the times did not deter me at all. In fact, the idea of constantly needing to upgrade hardware to accommodate the latest version of Win-D'ohs [which everyone always wants to do, because the previous version of Windows always turns to garbage within 6 months] was just another thing which deterred me from Winders.

I liked the idea of Linux working with older equipment. I liked the idea of being able to purchase older hardware when I want/need something new, and not having to get the latest, greatest, high-spec state-of-the-fart [read: expensive] stuff, to just be able to do what my old 10 year-old equipment could do.

In just about any endeavor, I like things that are tried and true and stable.....so even if Linux were an "old OS", I wouldn't care. (This is why I am planning to switch to Debian). I installed Ubuntu 10.04 almost 2 years ago...updated it once after about 2 months...and haven't done a thing to it since. Let someone else work out the bugs of the latest and greatest, and mess with an ever-bloating OS just so they can have all the latest stuff, which I'll never use anyway (which is why I will not stick with Ubuntu)....I prefer stability; compatibility with older stuff; and the ability to only install what I want/need. Seems to me that some branches of Linux are becoming more and more like Win-D'ohs [I know...there's a thread about this subject...], which might be a good thing in a sense, for us noobs to try it out and get our feet wet....but not for long-term use, because I switched to Linux to get away from Winders! [I've been Linux-only for over a year now].

Stability. Backwards Compatibility. Freedom of choice. That's Linux to me.

Originally Posted by Sumguy As a Linux noob, I was (and maybe still am) under the impression that Linux was not quite as "up to date" as the propriety OS's- but that belief had no0thing to do with the actual architecture of the OS...but just rather the belief that various apps and components in Linux (Like media codecs and Flash Player, etc.) would not be as current as the ones in/available to the latest non-greatest Win-D'ohs OS.

You came and give me a good point to start with: codecs!
Some patented codecs need to be "payed" for different reasons or are under "EULA" or Licences incompatible with GPL (or LGLP).
Some distro comes with the option to install non-free software, others NOT.
There are even ather reasons that make some distro looks like not-fully-up-to-date as i.e. the poorness of stability of some packages like Chromium Browser so you'll have a very old version of it only because it's the only tested as stable.
But NO-ONE forbids you to make your own package and use it in your own Linux, or download an updated version and use it, but this will break something and you have to be ABLE to di it.
Freedom is the power to use freedom, not freedom itself.
Linux is not democratic, in this sense, it's autarchic!

Windows 8 Is The Next OS By Micrsoft (der).
It is planed to be a x86_32 x86_64 x86_128 And ARM OS.
Do you think Microsoft is learning from their mistakes from their difficulty of making their original 32-Bit OS (Win95) and 64-Bit (Vista[ug]) OS or do you think they are just trying to keep their monopoly going?

What mistakes, what difficulty, and what monopoly?

World Domination 201 Contains All The Info You Asked For. It Is A Bit Long, Though...

20 years of following Microsoft have taught me to be always skeptical of their actions, if not of their motives.

But it is a very big company; it is not unusual to see elements of very big companies working at cross-purposes and seeming to contradict each other. Their open source people may be sincerely open source while their legal people may sincerely consider trolling patents a legitimate business practice for "protecting market position."

They're just adapting to the market.
That is what most companies try to do you know..

Well to explain what ment about trouble making the 64-Bit Windows (seems to be making confusion). Windows Vista, Terrible, had repeated delays, hardly works, and looks terrible (I'd prefer Windows Classic!), but it was the first Windows to be truly 64-Bit, they had a hard time, they also only had binary 32-Bit drivers for hardware and drivers seem to avoid the compatibility rule (64-Bit Stuff Is Backward Compatible With 32-Bit Stuff), so hardware support was terrible. If there making a 128-Bit OS they have sucured their OS for another 100 years (the first 32bits of the processor took 50 years to exaust the second one (64bit is 32+32) will take 50 years) so it will take 100 years to exaust the second 64bits. Info from inferences from world domination 201.

My notebook have 2 partitions, one for Windows 7, another for Ubuntu.
If Windows 8 is so nice, should I replace ubuntu to Windows 8?

The beta response of Windows 8 had hit 1 million download.

My notebook have 2 partitions, one for Windows 7, another for Ubuntu.

Create a third partition out of the remaining space. [for BSD or Salix]

If Windows 8 is so nice, should I replace ubuntu to Windows 8?

It is up to you. If you think few paid-coders in M$ can outpace what performance-motivated developers all over the world can do to linux, then you may do so.

The beta response of Windows 8 had hit 1 million download.

Make it 10 million, but still I wouldn't waste a single dollar for microsoft --never again.....
I can make donations to FSF but will never pay anything to a proprietary software. Doing so is like seeing an idiot who is made to pay a big sum for a book that teaches you how to assemble your own bicycle; paying for something that you can get for free without being called a criminal!

BTW, it appears you only have Ubuntu for Gnu/Linux. Try Salix OS and enjoy the benefits of Slackware with ease; once a slacker, always a slacker.

In Ubuntu, how to free up some space from its /root partition?

Try Salix OS and enjoy the benefits of Slackware with ease; once a slacker, always a slacker.

Is there dependency resolution while installing software from repositories in salixOS?

Unfortunately for them, Microsoft is losing market share very rapidly in several of their key markets, and they are losing it to Android/Linux. I don't know that there is any long-term solution for their troubles, given that those troubles are self-imposed.

There was a very long time when these two principles seemed inevitable:

1. There is no computer but an Intel-based "PC."
2. There is no operating system for such a computer except Microsot Winduhz.

Microsoft considered their product to be their product, for them alone to entirely develop and to maintain from scratch, whereas every other competitor had more or less embraced open-source, collaborative development of at least the key foundation technologies. This is what enabled every competitor to start leapfrogging Microsoft, even as the company refused to take any of them "seriously." It may prove to be a fatal mistake, even as it almost was fatal to IBM. (And now, given that IBM is one of those many competitors, I have no idea what sort of joy-weed the Board members in Redmond must be smoking now...)

At this point, Microsoft does not have a "monopoly" position, period. They are sailing around in an oxbow lake. The river has moved on.

*edi-t of course miscorsoft is trying to keep the monopoly, or 'current market position' if you prefer. No company in the postion of micosoft has ever just given that market share away.

Originally Posted by Zssfssz Well to explain what ment about trouble making the 64-Bit Windows (seems to be making confusion). Windows Vista, Terrible, had repeated delays, hardly works, and looks terrible (I'd prefer Windows Classic!), but it was the first Windows to be truly 64-Bit, they had a hard time, they also only had binary 32-Bit drivers for hardware and drivers seem to avoid the compatibility rule (64-Bit Stuff Is Backward Compatible With 32-Bit Stuff), so hardware support was terrible.

*blinks* What you think you have infered from world domination 201 is wrong.....

Windows XP 64 was the 1st 64bit x86 OS released by microsoft, not vista. There was earlier 64bit OSes from ms, but they were for Itanium/Alpha, not x86. That is mentioned in world domination 201....

Originally Posted by Zssfssz If there making a 128-Bit OS they have sucured their OS for another 100 years (the first 32bits of the processor took 50 years to exaust the second one (64bit is 32+32) will take 50 years) so it will take 100 years to exaust the second 64bits. Info from inferences from world domination 201.

I think that your speculation on 32bit vs 64bit vs 128bit is out and out wrong. Not just the progression (and 'need'), but the timing.

The 8-bit desktop lasted from 1975-1984, the 16-bit desktop from 1981-1990, and the 32-bit desktop from 1987-2008.

http://catb.org/~esr/writings/world-...ation-201.html

If you did read it, you've complete missed this bit. Its _very_ clear, yet you seem to have decided that there is 50 years worth of x86 32bit......