Dual Booters out there -- What do you still run on Windows
GeneralThis forum is for non-technical general discussion which can include both Linux and non-Linux topics. Have fun!
Notices
Welcome to LinuxQuestions.org, a friendly and active Linux Community.
You are currently viewing LQ as a guest. By joining our community you will have the ability to post topics, receive our newsletter, use the advanced search, subscribe to threads and access many other special features. Registration is quick, simple and absolutely free. Join our community today!
Note that registered members see fewer ads, and ContentLink is completely disabled once you log in.
If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact us. If you need to reset your password, click here.
Having a problem logging in? Please visit this page to clear all LQ-related cookies.
Get a virtual cloud desktop with the Linux distro that you want in less than five minutes with Shells! With over 10 pre-installed distros to choose from, the worry-free installation life is here! Whether you are a digital nomad or just looking for flexibility, Shells can put your Linux machine on the device that you want to use.
Exclusive for LQ members, get up to 45% off per month. Click here for more info.
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" and KDE4Town.
Posts: 9,039
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by multios
I don't know the first thing about virtual systems. Figured that if it takes room to run, why not just install it. But, I don't know if that is really how it is
Between VirtualBox and VMware, VIrtualBox is by far easier to install, setup, and run (IMHO).
anybody care to play mickeysoft roulette???????
dos 4
dos 5.1
dos 6.0
dos 6.1
windoze 3.0
WFW 3.10
microsoft BOB
NT 3.5
win 2000 (original release)
win ME
Vista
above are listed most of microsoft's "dogs" BOB wasn't really an OS, but a front end for win95 that was designed by a kindergarten teacher (or so it seemed). one problem with BOB was once you loaded BOB there was no way back into the win95 gui
anybody care to play mickeysoft roulette???????
dos 4
dos 5.1
dos 6.0
dos 6.1
windoze 3.0
WFW 3.10
microsoft BOB
NT 3.5
win 2000 (original release)
win ME
Vista
above are listed most of microsoft's "dogs" BOB wasn't really an OS, but a front end for win95 that was designed by a kindergarten teacher (or so it seemed). one problem with BOB was once you loaded BOB there was no way back into the win95 gui
"best" has a different definition for every user. Most users like windows as thats what they used at first, and most people dont like to try new things are afraid of it. There are many users who started with linux and find windows pretty much confusing.
OK. Let's try and look at this as objectively as possible. Which means we need an objective definition of 'best'. For this context, desktop operating systems, I propose that best mean the OS most able to work with all hardware, to be able to perform any function or duty the user would require, is stable and secure, etc
At the moment, this is simply Windows. I don't like the monoculture anymore than you do, but it is what it is. Linux might be the best OS for individual people, but it is not the best all round.
Personally, I believe it is because there is not enough money going in, and no clear focus. Yes, choice is good, but there must also be some sort of focus. At the moment, Canoncical is the only company doing this, and they have yet to turn a profit.
Quote:
OpenOffice is used in many corporate offices, and they are doing their work with it and still have no problem with it.
Yes, they are used. We saw a quick adoption of this, but I honestly wonder how long it will stick. OpenOffice has terrible compatibility, with internal versions, and does a lot of stuff poorly. I have found it to be decent for 'casual' office users, who don't do much more than references, tables and headings. When things get more complex, it becomes useless.
Quote:
Sound was never a mess for me, since the good old days.
Sound actually seemed better in the good old days. These days, there is OSS v3 and 4, ALSA and Pulseaudio. Pulseaudio still some problems in some implementations. Just because you can manage to get decent sound on your desktop, does not mean it is not a mess.
Quote:
Originally Posted by foodown
Interesting . . . sound is a mess? I have not experienced significant sound problems in Linux since Slackware 3.2. Maybe it's just that I always run Creative sound cards.
Sound being a mess is not affected by individual users getting it to work fine. There is no clear architecture or compatibility or..anything. It is getting there...
Quote:
You are right about OpenOffice . . . but, Word, Excel, and Power Point run pretty flawlessly under WINE. The rest of Office is pretty much useless no matter what platform you run it on.
I think people who need to use Visio or Outlook may disagree. I also think it is not the best solution to run Office under WINE.
Quote:
I appreciate your point of view, but I'd wager that my Slackware desktop is more functional and better looking than any Windows desktop.
For you, sure. For most people, that simply isn't the case. Windows can simply do so much more. The reasons for this may suck, but it is the reality.
]quote]Even if you cannot accept this, I'd still contend that Mac OS X is a better desktop than Windows XP, Vista, or 7 . . . Heck, Mac OS 8 was a better desktop than XP, Vista, or 7. Therefore, Windows is not the best desktop OS.[/QUOTE]
Well, it is. It certainly is not as subjective as you consider it to be. What did Mac OS 8 have over modern versions of windows?
Quote:
Originally Posted by ~sHyLoCk~
Unfortunately kino is nowhere as good as the video editing apps available in windows. Quite sad actually, one of the reasons I have to keep logging into XP. Tried win7 but that takes more space so came back to XP.
There is not a single decent OSS video editing tool available.
Distribution: Slackware64-current with "True Multilib" and KDE4Town.
Posts: 9,039
Rep:
Quote:
Originally Posted by Josh000
OK. Let's try and look at this as objectively as possible. Which means we need an objective definition of 'best'. For this context, desktop operating systems, I propose that best mean the OS most able to work with all hardware, to be able to perform any function or duty the user would require, is stable and secure, etc....
That most certainly would NOT be windows vista, especially in regard to hardware and, to a lesser extend, security.
I'm in Game emulation. Do development in Slack, play my games under wine, etc. Windows? Virtual PC setup for making sure servers compile on Windows as well as on Linux, oh and Yahoo Messenger for SMS messaging with the girlie.
That most certainly would NOT be windows vista, especially in regard to hardware and, to a lesser extend, security.
Yes, it would be.
Vista was mostly undeserving of the rep that Vista got, and at this point in time, it is a perfectly fine operating system. Most of the problems were due to terrible drivers, which while Microsoft should have cooridinated things better, is not entirely Microsofts fault.
LinuxQuestions.org is looking for people interested in writing
Editorials, Articles, Reviews, and more. If you'd like to contribute
content, let us know.