Re: Udungtu 8.10 ***WOW***
- From: Charlie Tame <charlie@xxxxxxxxx>
- Date: Mon, 01 Dec 2008 22:10:53 -0600
Mike Hall - MVP wrote:
"Charlie Tame" <charlie@xxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:eexJiewUJHA.1164@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxMike Hall - MVP wrote:"Alias" <aka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:ggu83k$l09$1@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxMike Hall - MVP wrote:"Alias" <aka@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxx> wrote in message news:ggtun4$qkc$3@xxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxxSthief Ballmer wrote:Em Sábado, 29 de Novembro de 2008 04:54, Richard Urban escreveu:
What is in the distribution IS the operating system.
you better reinstall your definition of "operative system".
You'd think an MVP would know the difference between an operating system and a program.
just like you should know the difference between a Vista and Ubuntu group?
Ah, but I do know the difference. We know you're afraid of Ubuntu because it may very well cost you your run adaware for money business.
By the time that any Linux distro has the same customer base as Windows, it will be plagued by infections, and you still will not know anything or have any respect or regard for what people want out of their computers..
Yes, Linux will become more of a target, however my experience with Vista is that many problems have been fixed BUT IE has become the problem. You cannot uninstall and reinstall it, and when malware breaks it you cannot always fix it. And malware for IE is not really malware, many of the breakages I see are due to some "Toolbar" or BHO that gets installed whether you ask for it or not.
Do you really think that virus writers and hackers will sit idly by as underdeveloped countries and government departments get Linux distros foisted onto them?
Foisted? Microsoft surely are the experts at foisting. Example, small business server. You can't use many of the facilities "Offered" without also purchasing "Office". You also need to buy "Sharepoint". I am not suggesting that this is "Dishonest", GM want you to buy GM parts not have things compatible with Ford, but isn't everything these days "Foisted"?
You push Ubuntu because you can't afford a Windows PC really, and jealousy drives you to want to bring everybody down to your level.
I have a number of Vista capable machines with removable drives and regularly swap the OS on each of them. I prefer Ubuntu for some things, Windows for others. Cost has nothing to do with it. The positive thing as far as Vista is concerned is that it's networking and reliability have improved to the extent where it could be used for work, previously it was little more than a "Toy". The problem with using it for work now is the insecurity and unreliability of IE, and when that goes wrong (not "If" but "when") much other MS business stuff cannot be used either.
Linux has given the world three things.. a good server OS for, a platform for hackers to ply their trade, and newsgroup trolls..
Ah, you mean because a Linux utility on CD can almost instantly render all Windows "Security" worthless?
My website contains free info re spyware and how to get rid of it, as do the websites of most other MVP's. When we do go out to customers, it is to help them and not leave them with a system that does not do all that they want it to do..
Most of which gets on there DESPITE UAC, which is NOT security but rather Useless and Cumbersome. Again, this is not Microsoft's fault, mostly it is a user problem, but it is touted as "Security" when it is not.
Microsoft need the next system to be more repairable, more modular, get rid of IE and WMP as system components and make them reinstallable. Get Explorer to actually work?.
Let's have a proper update system, not some half baked thing that relies on IE.
I have on occasion showed Linux distros to customers but so far have had no takers even for those who essentially only surf and do e-mail. I don't see Windows as the answer to all, but I am acutely aware of the fact that I have to go with the wishes of the people I serve.
No argument there WRT customers' needs, but I will disagree a little about no takers. People usually don't volunteer for change too readily, but when the changes involved are as big from one OS to another as they are between XP and Vista then something else becomes more attractive than it otherwise might be.
Some of the attitudes are based around free stuff not being that good. People would rather trust and spend $90 on Norton or McAfee than use free AVG and Avast even though AVG and Avast are well enough proven. I often hear that "well, I had a free av program running that let a bunch of crap through. Should I get Norton?"
Of course, the truth of the matter is that free stuff is not as good, but free stuff is not deficient in the basic functions, lacking only more advanced or 'luxury' features which the majority do not use anyway. All in the mind, eh..
Well you say "Not as good" but if "Better" = included stuff you will never use then I'd argue that "Not as good" is not the right phrase to use :) I use a pickup because occasionally I have to carry an 8 X 4 sheet. If not for those occasions a small car would be "Just as good". :)
.. Except for those who do want some of the advanced 'luxury' features not offered by the free stuff. Their wants and/or needs should be respected and recognized, and this is where I take up against Alias for his blind assumption that Ubuntu is good enough for the needs of ALL computer users.
No, of course it isn't right for everybody. I use both but for games Linux does not yet come close. However that is as much to do with the game writers simply not writing for it as anything else. For business the professionally written "Open Office" suite works well. I have Vista and XP at work, and Ubuntu, and what stops me doing things with any of them is the corporate firewall / proxy thing. In that environment they are all pretty much equal except that XP and Vista are STILL vulnerable to ActiveX and other viral problems whereas Ubuntu is far less so.
I have never said that Ubuntu or any other Linux distro is crap and has no place anywhere, but I would not tout Ubuntu as a panacea to a disgruntled Windows user because it simply isn't..
In my workplace it is at least as useful as any Windows, this is something Microsoft need to realize and I think they probably do. Alls singing all dancing Vista cannot do more than the others because it is necessary to run it "In a box". Why then spend money to upgrade?
The maxim "you can lead a horse to water but you can't make it drink' is oh so true..
Re IE, I understand that use of Firefox now outstrips users of IE, so surfing should ne safer, yes? So why isn't it? Maybe because any open connection to places unknown will be dangerous?
The more a browser can do the greater the risk, however when bits of that browser are involved with the OS itself then faults in it (Whether inherent or created by some add on)risk the OS as well. Hmm, for example if the "Display Screen" code is in the OS and the browser uses it (Simplistic case) than that small bit of code will be debugged and stable. If on the other hand the OS relies on some routine in the browser for all it's screen display and the browser gets corrupted (and in the case of IE cannot be removed and re-installed) down goes the whole system.
I don't think that it matters much that WU relies on IE or that browsing defaults to IE. If I want to surf, I pick whichever browser I want to use at the time, as can anybody else..
Example of the above a Vista machine I was testing at work, everything is fine except IE locks up. FF works, mail works, it all works until you try to use IE. When that locks the only way out is hard power down or reset button. According to the publicity one failed task should not bring down the whole thing... but the IE is not a "Task" as far as MS are concerned, it is written in as an integral part. Maybe this was once a profitable ploy, or one that compelled it's use for many people, but now has become a perfect example of why modular is better.
UAC is only a part of Vista security, was badly implemented, BUT there is a utility out there which can make UAC more user friendly called TweakUAC. It is a pity that it couldn't have been like that at the start, but at least a fix became available, as do fixes for many other things in time..
And "Time" has been the problem. The next version needs to undergo some major changes, but MS have painted themselves into a corner. Actually the markets' demands for compatibility have been a major factor in this.
- Prev by Date: Re: Added memory = lower Windows Experience score?
- Next by Date: RE: 100 reasons - Why to use Windows Vista
- Previous by thread: Re: Udungtu 8.10 ***WOW***
- Next by thread: Re: Udungtu 8.10 ***WOW***