Silver, I'll have to disagree with you there. Sure, more than half of the people who use Windows aren't very experienced computer users, but that doesn't mean they are ALL stupid. I'm an experienced user, and I use Windows 98 SE. People call me stupid, because they say Windows 98 crashes alot, and it's full of bugs, holes, plus has no security whatsoever. I still use it, though. Why? Well, because it's simple to use and very efficient and productive. I know that once you get Linux setup in the way you want it, it'll continue to run that way. I know that Linux is stable, and has good security (well duh, it's based on Unix), but the reason I don't run it is because I don't need to. I don't use it because it's barely compatible, and so many things are made for Windows. You can find almost any program you want for Windows, or in other words, any program that you can imagine. Sure, Windows is very simple to use, and Linux users generally think Winodws users are stupid because it's so "simple". Windows, though, gets things done fast. It's very productive because it's simple on the outside. If you're and advanced user like me, you can go into all these Windows settings and system files and fiddle around with them. You can also fiddle around with the registry (it's quite fun to do that). For me, Windows is sort of a challenge. I always think it's a challenge of making Windows 98 fast, stable, and secure. I'm running an extremely customized and optimized version of Windows 98. The only things that crash on my computer are Winamp, Kazaa. My firewall will sometimes hang on me, but that happens very rarely. I've discovered that these programs crash not because of Windows, but because they have bugs (especially Kazaa). Sure Windows isn't perfect. It sometimes forgets my folder settings, but my installation of Windows is running <b>near</b> perfection. I've installed every patch that Microsoft ever made for Windows 98 SE, along with every single patch for Office 2000. Most of my programs are update and running the latest versions.
For me, Linux is not needed. After some extreme tweaking, my installation of Windows is comparable to a Linux system. Sure, Windows 98 still has a few security problems, but I've tried to minimize them as much as possible. Every few days, I scour my system for anything bad or harmful. I flush all my temp folders, and internet folders periodically. I see if there are any unwanted ActiveX programs on the system. I do online virus scans. I have disabled install-on-demand for IE, among a few other things. There is no executable on my system which will run without my knowledge. My firewall keeps track of EVERYTHING trying to call out through the internet. I even keep track of my Windows core kernel, as it sometimes tries to connect to the internet, or some other program tries to connect to the kernel. I use a rule-based firewall, which stops all the pop-ups on Kazaa. I'm spyware free, and if there happens to be spyware on my system, my firewall will tell me. So basically, I have no need to run Linux, because I'm running a very good install of Windows. Windows is running the way I want it to, not the other way around.
For certain tasks though, Linux is great. There are certain things Linux can do that Windows can't. For example, Linux has 64-bit support, and it's not that expensive (compared to 64 bit Windows). BTW, for all of you out ther who don't know this, LInux is a hacker's favourite OS. If you're a security analyst, or a bug finder, then Linux is probably your OS of choice. I would go into greater detail of the secrets of Linux, but i don't think it's appropriate to talk about. Silver, I think you know what I'm takin' about
.
Ohh, and BTW, DRM isn't going to help Linux (because of the reasons that you've stated).
Eden, Linux is command-line driven. Sure, it has a GUI, but you still need to know how to use the command lines. You need to have some knowledge of the Unix OS in order to run Linux. Also, you need some considerable knowledge if you want to customize and tweak a Linux system. Also, WinXP, I admit, is a quantum leap over Windows 98 in terms of stability/security, but you lose out on alot of things from Windows 98. Plus, XP has it's own host of problems (Eg. SCSI performance problems, DOS is emulated, compatiblity lost on certain funky programs, etc.)
- - -
<font color=green>All good things must come to an end … so they can be replaced by better things!
</font color=green>
Facebook
Twitter
Instagram