Return Styles: Pseud0ch, Terminal, Valhalla, NES, Geocities, Blue Moon. Entire thread

Vista vs. Linux - Which is REALLY better?

Name: Anonymous 2007-09-19 2:48 ID:+QJbpQUL

I'm sick of this "just get more ram!" bullshit. My 286 did almost as much functionality-wise as my current multi-ghz machine. Yeah, really. Sure, there was no multi-tasking, but I did the mostly the same things as I do today.
Hello, fuckers, just because you can eat ram doesn't mean you should. It costs money and also reduces the number of programs you can run.
I can see it now: in another ten years programs will have minimum footprint of 1GB, but they'll just do more of the same.

Name: Anonymous 2008-07-31 20:57

Linux is terrible to use
Windows is expensive to use

both are trash

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-01 0:02

>>281
Unfortunately, Plan 9 doesn't have a lot of software written for it at this point.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-01 1:11

@281

How is Linux terrible to use?  For me, 95% of the time, everything works right out of the box with Linux assuming you pick a good distro and even if it doesn't work with everything, usually all you have to do is download a few source packages and compile it. It has come a long way in terms of compatibility in terms of hardware and software.

Mac is more expensive than Windows and it also has much less hardware compatibility and a smaller selection of software titles.  And if you look at this year's pwn to own competition, you'll see that mac os x got hacked in 2 minutes flat ( http://www.engadget.com/2008/03/27/pwn-2-own-over-macbook-air-gets-seized-in-2-minutes-flat/ ) thus not very secure.  Sure, Windows has more viruses and trojans made for it, but that's why I go with Linux.  It couldn't even be compromised at pwn to own.

...so, in general, this is how I see it:
Linux > Windows > Mac

I'm not including any off beat OSes in this like BSD, OS/2, Solaris,  etc. because most people don't use them as desktop OSes

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-01 1:35

>>283
``Most people'' only use Windows.
Mac OS X is actually relatively alright in spite of the Mac development team. It's Unix after all.

Just a pity about the hardware.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-01 2:10

Opera > Linux

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-05 0:24

>>285
I think I'm being trolled, but I'm not sure.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-05 9:39

Windows 3.1 > *

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-05 12:45

>>286
OMG I just trolled you you must feel pretty stupid now

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-22 1:03

>>288
NO WAI

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-22 2:58

NO U

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-23 0:27

Linux is just an operating system whereas Vista is a lifestyle

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-23 1:22

Linux.  Until Wine can run Vista, and then it's both.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-23 1:23

I'm posting from xpsp3 and lo~ving i~t!

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-23 2:49

They both suck and that is the truth.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-24 1:39

XP is the same as 3.1 but just updated a few of the gfx and effects

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-24 18:08

And Linux is the same as DOS.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-24 22:57

You can't really expect EVERYONE to use linux. Windows is used more frequently because of it's ergonomic traits. You think everyone who uses a computer will automatically know what "find /etc -exec grep '[0-9][0-9]*[.][0-9][0-9]*[.][0-9][0-9]*[.][0-9][0-9]*' {} \;" means? Should they have to? No.

I don't see why people who use linux bash on Windows. Windows can do everything Linux does, plus more. Just like Linux can do many things that Windows can. Yeah, it sucks RAM. Linux can, too.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-25 0:51

>>297
1994 wants its arguments back.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-27 3:07

>>297
That's totally a search string for dates or something.
And you SHOULD know that!

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-27 11:13

>>299
The grep string is a crap rendition of ([0-9]+\.){3}[0-9]+ and might be a complete idiot's idea of something that'll find IPs, but the full command itself is meaningless.
Which doesn't matter anyway, since it's perfectly possible to use Linux without ever touching the command line. My mom does.

Basically, >>297 is an ignorant moron.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-27 12:36

>>265
They did not get to this point because of superior product.  They got to that point because throughout the 90's most people didn't realize the OS was a separate product from the PC itself.  Microsoft purposely tries to blur the lines between the hardware and OS software all the time (why do you think Windows Update always says "updating your computer" instead of what it REALLY should say, "updating your OS.") Most people still don't.

My system is built from the ground up.  100% OEM free (and also 100% Intel free - but it was built before C2Q, etc.) and doesn't afraid of anything.

Name: Anonymous 2008-08-31 1:51

Hi EggZoomin

Name: Anonymous 2008-10-17 1:21

>>302
who or what is an eggzoomin, and how do you use it?

Name: Anonymous 2008-10-19 15:53

you know, this whole question depends on which version of linux? I would go with   Ubuntu > Vista
so yeah, by the way, you can just find out for yourself by comparing Ubuntu to WindowsXP(if you own it) and by the way:

VISTA SUCKS BALLS!

Name: Anonymous 2008-10-20 14:13

BALLS OF UBUNTU

Name: Anonymous 2008-10-21 19:22

wasn't ubuntu made primarily to interest blacks in computing?

Name: Anonymous 2008-10-23 22:46

BALLS SUCK VISTA!!!

Name: Anonymous 2008-10-26 4:53

way to bump a 5 year old thread

Name: Anonymous 2008-10-26 4:54

bumping 5 year old thread GO

Newer Posts
Don't change these.
Name: Email:
Entire Thread Thread List