Re: Are there advantages of Linux over XP Pro.?
lbrty4us_at_aol.com
Date: 01/25/05
- Next message: Linda B: "Re: Pirated XP, means-test everyone and every product with "income"
- Previous message: Linda B: "Re: Pirated XP, means-test everyone and every product with "income"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Are there advantages of Linux over XP Pro.?"
- Next in thread: B Smith: "Re: Are there advantages of Linux over XP Pro.?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Date: 24 Jan 2005 16:46:21 -0800
Strange post. I'm running 9.1 Personal on a Compaq laptop in tripple
boot with XP & another OS. I have no problem accessing such shares
with r/w - they simply have to be correctly mounted. My KDE gui runs
like a raped ape, very fast, as does most everything else in the
install. It even does better datawise with wlan, though I had to
install an aftermarket driver wrapper. Whatever bitches I have about
about Suse &/or 9.1 are other unrelated things. Ex: I can't play midi
files on my soundcard & have no clue why.
But IMHO&E the real issue implied in the thread is one of utility of an
OS, and contrary to others I assert that while Linux HAS totally
arrived as a desktop OS that will do everything as well or better than
XP for almost nothing, and with far better feel in most distros, it has
NOT arrived as a practical *laptop* OS comparable *utility-wise* to XP.
Regardless of XP's endless annoyances & shortcomings, dumb filesystem,
huge registry to screw with and unbelieveable vulnerability to all
kinds of problems, XP gives typically twice the battery life and 3x the
ease of portable connectivity that all the present distros do on most
all laptops. The former is due to the increasing variations of hdwr vs
present practical development of APCI, and the latter relates to a
bunch of things. Further, refined & trouble-free hotplug & pnp for all
kinds of devices is a big issues with laptops. All these things are
still iffy or only beyond the joking stage with current distros on most
machines.
But I get a laugh out of the notion that one often has to frig around a
great deal with a new Linux install. Because it is usually TRUE - but
WINDOWS has to take the prize for continual & assiduous, unending
frigging around just to be maintained, updated, used, debugged, and/or
fixed (which is often for most who really use it for anything beyond
dubbing around). And all this with none of the hardware issues Linux
distros face to overcome! And at least you can learn about the OS &
still get under the hood - unlike what's happened to XP with all its
arcane & mysterious ways, half of which aren't worth trying to learn
about for most users because by then they will all have changed again.
The only way to know how any OS is going to do on your box, is to try
it. This is also a lot faster than poking around online to see what
others may or may not have posted, and it is a lot more reliable too.
- Next message: Linda B: "Re: Pirated XP, means-test everyone and every product with "income"
- Previous message: Linda B: "Re: Pirated XP, means-test everyone and every product with "income"
- In reply to:(deleted message) Leythos: "Re: Are there advantages of Linux over XP Pro.?"
- Next in thread: B Smith: "Re: Are there advantages of Linux over XP Pro.?"
- Messages sorted by: [ date ] [ thread ]
Relevant Pages
|
