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

Pages: 1-

Windows > Unix

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 15:18

Why do so-called /prog/rammers hate Windows?

Name: VIPPER 2012-04-03 15:28

>>1

Name: VIPPER 2012-04-03 15:28

>>1
Because this thread belongs on /b/.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 15:52

Easier to work with Unix standard utils than Windows standard utils...

But yes, you are correct to assume that Windows is a superior operating system for most uses.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 15:57

>>4
Except when dealing with real-world heavy-duty work

Windows is a toy

Unix cmd-line is boss

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 16:23

Actual /prog/rammers (not that there are any here) write portable code and are mostly ambivalent towards amateurs who haven't graduated past VB.NET or whatever toy environment they happened to stumble onto while writing their first MessageBox("hello world") application.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 16:55

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 17:02

Also, some brag about the mess of X11, GTK+, Qt, TK... but I still want to see them adding WPF components to a win32+MFC legacy app.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 17:47

I don't hate Windows. I just think Microsoft should have released Powershell 10 years earlier.

Is not perl or bash, but is an improvement.

I do hate MS dev tools.
I have Visual Studio
I hate SQL Management Console
I hate Active Directory Control Panel
I hate VB for Office
I hate Visual Source Safe

I love Qbasic, though. And i prefer C# over Java

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 17:49

I don't see much of that here, because these sorts of threads belong to >>/g/.

Other than that, I used to find Windows XP's retarded interface, which missed the point about most of everything (having a two-screen wizard for unzipping, that's just retarded), along with its garish colors completely obnoxious, and I wouldn't use it willingly. Not to speak about its "ISVs" who made shitty, inconsistent apps which required root privileges to even run, minimized to tray and all sorts of annoyances.

Thankfully, most of that seems to have gone away with Windows 7, which is quite a sensible OS. I'd have no complaints if I had to use it full time.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 18:07

>>6
I program C++ and make heavy use of Windows API, ``faggot''!

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-03 21:02

>>10
Try using it full time and see if you don't change your tune, especially the sensible part.
IHBT

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 1:33

>>7
This. I prefer to live in freedom so I only accept free software. It's more expensive but I'm willing to pay the price to remain in control over my own life and my ability to share.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 2:51

Just pointing out that there is nothing you can do in the unix terminal that you can't do in the command prompt

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 5:05

>>14
can you launch jobs in the background, and bring them to the foreground and suspend and resume them?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 5:43

>>14
The "unix terminal" is too vague. It could be using sh, bash, tcsh and so on. All of which are superior to Command Prompt, though!

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 7:46

>>5
Except when dealing with real-world heavy-duty work
Unix cmd-line is boss
real-world heavy-duty work
cmd-line

real-world heavy-duty work
cmd-line

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 8:17


===================================================================

 A terminate and stay resident program is now loaded in /PROG/ RAM
           Use function key F57 to activate ANSI shitposts

===================================================================

C:\>AND.COM SUPREMACY

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 9:05

>>17
Problem?

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 10:23

I hate windows because it's just a graphical interface for DOS.  Windows has no real multi-user capability, no real networking, and crashes often.  It also has a lot of cruft, especially the ``windows 95'' version.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-04 13:53

I hate it because it is non-free untrustable software filled with voluntary security vulnerabilities mandated by the United States of America.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-05 2:17

>>1
You should try using my doubles instead.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-06 23:49

LINUX IS SHIT

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 0:16

>>17
>real-world heavy-duty work
>not being able to automate your real-world heavy-duty work because you use a GUI.
>click click click click click shit I missed click click click click

Name: >>24 2012-04-07 0:20

>>17
wait I can't tell if you are saying that unix is or isn't suited for real world heavy duty work. sorry if I wrongly mocked you with my green text.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 14:29

>>14

Maybe, maybe not, but Windows command prompt is shit.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 14:37

>>26
Oh really? Google "Windows SUA".

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 16:39

>>26
Oh really? Google "cmd.exe".

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 17:39

>>28
Windows SUA natively integrates with cmd.exe, idiot.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 18:28

>>24
Too stupid to know how to automate GUI apps.
Too stupid to use quotes.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 18:45

If an app can only be scripted by automating GUI interaction (ACOBSBAGI), is shit.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 19:21

>>30
>too stubborn to use an easy and universal interface, easily accessible to scripts.
>doesn't understand that GUI automation scripts will break if the GUI structure is changed.
>hating on my quoting style.
>so butt pained ey must insult my quoting style.
>starting /g/ fight on my /prog/
>not doing it ironically.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 21:32

Check em sinbad

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-07 23:47

>>32
Too stupid to break out of the crippled Unix mindset taught in university CS.
Too stupid to realise that shell scripts also break if CLI programs change their input/output text.
Too stupid to realize that /prog/ is even more idiotic than /g/.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-08 0:08

>>34
>too adorable to learn the capabilities of having an array of unix like tools at your disposal, with invocations that are trivial from any script or tool.
>too wonderful to know how easy it is to keep backwards compatibility with command line options, and how silly it would be for someone to try to retain backwards compatibility with (x,y) coordinates and sizes of buttons and text box layouts in a UI when new features are continuously added in.
>too enterprise to enjoy debugging a GUI script that has started clicking in the wrong regions.
>just energetic enough to actually have a forall x, CLI(x) < GUI(x) debate.
>just sugary enough to not learn how to effectively utilize and develop command line tools.
>just absorbent enough to be permanently scarred from failing to master unix when exposed to it in the context of university CS.
>just aromatic enough to not realize that a CLI interface to any GUI application is trivial, and can be built by oneself with access to the library.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-08 0:26

>>35
Too stupid to figure out how to automate a GUI without hardcoded coordinates.
Too stupid to realize that he doesn't know anything about my work experience with Unix.

Name: Anonymous 2012-04-08 0:52

>>36
>enjoys having to update coordinates and clicking sequences and navigation just to get the application to perform a desired action.
>thinks replacing uses of a constant with a variable initialized once to the constant value is enough to make this approach as easy as using command line arguments.
>thinks ey's work experience with unix and inability to utilize it to its full potential is unix's fault, and not ey's own.

Name: bampu pantsu 2012-05-29 4:10

bampu pantsu

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