Dude, you SO do not have a CLUE what you are talking about. I have been a Winblows user for YEARS, never having heard of Linux before. I tried it 3 months ago and I have never looked back. Winblows offers me NOTHING in comparison to Linux. Linux provide productivity automatically, whereas Winblows provides calculator and notepad. Ooo... I can feel the hair standing on my neck. I think it's time you opened your eyes and looked at the facts clearly, rather than choosing Winblows out of blind ignorance. Every application I would ever want to use from Winblows, I can use an equivalent or superior on Linux (my preferred OS being Kubuntu). Winblows steals ideas from other OSs, so therefore MS has a LOT of catching up to do. They need to invent something of their own for once instead of stealing from Mac and Linux. REMEMBER, I have only used Linux for the last 3 months, used Winblows for YEARS prior, and I have been thoroughly satisfied with Linux and what it has to offer. Never had a single issue with my computer, which is an AMD Athlon XP 2500+ with ATI Radeon 9200 and SoundBlaster Live! 5.1, among other things. You don't have to be jealous of Linux any more. Walk toward the light.

No Vista has accomplished something.

Vista's biggest killer is ......wait for it.....

Vista.

Good day.

Joe, great article! I wanted to rise to your defense before the Linux / anti-Microsoft people start their attack.

Why Stuart Scott?

The whole idea is to keep the top guys in management out of the suspicion and you set the new guy up to take the fall.

That's why I think it's like this.

If I was Ballmer I would let the lower guys on the totem pole in the company carry out the plan and then have a way out when the lawyers said the discovery wasn't going to be going Microsoft's way. The top guy would be the CIO in charge of new technology and that's what Scott was. Markevich was the guy in charge of the Microsoft infrastructure and Scott was the guy in charge of new technology in Microsoft for using before it went out to customers.

So everybody below Scott would be using VCSY technology and only Scott and some engineers and laywers would know. That way Ballmer could wait until the point in the case where the lawyers said "we're not going to be able to beat this" and then he could fire Scott for some company "violation" he got conned into and poof the trouble would go away.

What would Scott say? Ballmer could say they found out he was using VCSY technology and they got rid of him the most unembarassing way they could and then he could tell the lawyers to cut a deal.

"Keeping people quiet" never works. You have to "Keep people stupid" and then cut their throats when the investigation gets too close. Poof no problem.
-------------------------------------------------
...fired November 2, 2007 with only explanation: "fired for violating company policies".

Odd.

The one guy most central to any discovery efforts in VCSY v MSFT fired on the same day a ruling was to be given on the discovery phase of VCSY v MSFT.

Very odd.

Microsoft put out a news article about Scott taking on co-CIO role with Ron Markezich December 5, 2006. One day before VCSY returned to OTCBB from SEC delisting. Patrick Tinley, CEO of CDC/Ross was fired the same day.

Scott had left GE and taken the Microsoft position July 2005.

VCSY was cleared by SEC investigation begun December 1, 2004 - one day after VCSY was granted the 6826744 patent.

Very very odd.

Gee, I'm already too late :( Great article anyway Joe.

Here's what I need to do everyday on my PC:

1 - Use web design software, such as Dreamweaver.

2 - Use page layout software, such as InDesign.

3 - Use graphics software, such as Illustrator and Photoshop.

Unfortunately, Adobe has cornered the market on all of these apps...however, most of these tools work really, really well. And if they don't, I can call or e-mail Adobe for assistance.

Can I do the same thing on Linux?

Tell me Joe... in:
"an updated Vista PC with adequate RAM and memory"

what would you call -adequate-? 2GB ... 4GB?

I am running Linux on 256MB RAM! and it WORKS
Vista does not even INSTALL on 256MB.

Go, try Linux... tell me if you come back.

And, sorry... there is no "supported applications"... it is the other way around... applications that -only- work with Windows (and many of them, dont even run in Vista), and that is not a problem of Linux, it is called market power... and as long as people like you continue buying this kind of empty arguments of the -benefits- (or the WOW, duh!) of Windows... we will continue as now... so, you are guilty for that too :)

Greetings from Argentina...

p.s: go and install Linux, not a server installation... a desktop one, as i cant imagine what your face would be if you see a command line (ever in your life... oh, not cmd.exe)...

What I need to do is run Cad like Autodesk, and 3D Studio Max. Are the Linux people here talking about using a PC like an Internet Device. Do you actually do anything with Linux that does not require the internet? Like make movies, do architecture, rat tracing, game development, accounting etc...

Is the term for Desktop now meaning an internet appliance and used for internet stuff. Workstations means running none internet applications like CAD/CAM, Accounting, Marketing Design, Web Design, etc..?

Is there a difference between a Home Desktop and a Work Desktop?

If all I want to do is surf the internet write some java code and download my email then get Linux, Mac, or turn your PS2 into an internet device.

Just tell me what Linux application I can get that the respected companies of that market will accept. Just like when Lawyer would only work with Word Perfect even thought there where other choices. The above post mentions Adobe products what complementary Linux products are out there for Designers? What application for CAD or 3D modeling?

Even if Linux does have pure none interne application will the markets accept content built using those tools.

Like Joe is saying it has to do with the application and not just internet applications.

Then the question is can Vista runs those or are we Talking Windows 2003?

I-Man watch out there is a black helicopter flying around you home. Did you get a degree in conspiracy theory - master FUD - see you still doing your mass spam posting how many board do you post your spam on?

I totally agree on that Windows XP is the Vista-killer. I use both XP (at home) and Vista (at work) and I am fluent on Linux too.

The reason I don't go to Linux is lack of the programs I use daily: Office 2007, dozens of games, tools for my devices (mp4 player, bluetooth earphones, smartphone...)

I also feel comfortable on Windows. Never had a security exploitation, nor virus and I know how to deal with faulty applications and/or drivers. Why should I use Linux?

My best regards.
UM

PD 1: I know there are semi-equivalent software on Linux but... Staroffice is not exactly Office 2007, and the same for other applications.

PD 2: Linux is free I know. My Windows licence is included in the cost of the hardware and as time goes by, the licence's cost vanishes.

PD 3: No, I don´t need open source. I am not interested on modifying the applications.

People do not use Linux or Windows, they use applications that run on those. They couldn't care less what the app is running on. So my-is-bigger-than-yours type posturing is stupid. As someone who uses both Linux and Windows (dual boot XP/Mandriva) I have to say I prefer Linux, mainly because of applications. Abiword for writting, Amarok for music, Opera for web, Evolution for mail, Krusader file manager, Celestia desktop planetarium, they are all better than anything (including commercial apps) Windows has to offer. Windows is there for games and a few programs, like Photoshop.

There is really no need to take cheap shots about hardware on either Vista or Linux. As we all know drivers are responsibility of manufacturers, not Microsofts or whoever is developing Linux distributions. So by blaming hardware problems on either Windows or Linux you are either very ignorant (doubtful) or trying to incite reaction from Linux/Windows users (in this case Linux), which is childish and stupid.

Someone mentioned that Windows is included in the price of hardware. That's not really true. What is true is that OEM's are prevented from selling naked PC's, so you really have no choice but to buy Windows licence with it. As someone who has bought naked PC's for the last 15 years (you can get them in smaller shops), the price difference is significant, I would've had to pay $150 extra for an OEM Windows XP install last year, but I already had a copy for my old machine.

I hope you get the metaphorical coffee cleaned up, it gets sticky if it stays in the imaginable keyboard for too long.

It seems to me that there is an OS for every person out there. Some people require specialized programs to do their jobs, some of these only run on Windows, end of discussion.

But every single time this question comes up, you tech analyst people seem to conveniently forget about the vaaaaaaaaaaaaast amount of computer users who could switch to Linux overnight and would hardly notice the difference. The icons they click to check mail would look different, but that's about it.

I just have to scratch my chin and wonder why, when Linux is offered as an alternative to Windows, the reaction I hear is scornful laughter followed by a mentioning of Adobe's products and occasionally CAD programs. And that's it. No more. Nothing about the incredible stability, the amazing desktop, etc. Because let's face it, not even Windows users are that delusional.

It sounds more and more like Adobe is the only reason you wouldn't even consider another OS. If that's the case, it seems like Windows realistically ought to enjoy a market niche of maybe 10% of users, rather than the world domination it has now.

So Joe, you expect all windows apps to run on Linux, from what you just wrote,quote: "Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications, which are the ones most people use—or want."

And why do you expect that??? Will Windows run all Linux native apps and games??? No, not even one of them. Turnabout is fair play. The fact is Linux has free open source apps and games that can replace most windows apps. If you want to use your Windows program in Linux, you might be able to run some of them with Wine or Crossover, which is more than you can do trying to run a Linux program in Windows. There is one place that Linux does fail to completely run a Windows program, that is a Windows Virus. You need Windows for that.

Now, if you are so locked into M$ Window$, and just have to have the latest version of it to run on your new Ferro Laptop, courtsey of M$, then good luck to you. It appears that Neil is your co-author these days. Your articles have been not worth reading anymore, sorry. Good Luck.

Joe,

You lost all credibility with me at the following line: "Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications, which are the ones most people use—or want."

Um, no.

People want to browse the web, to send and receive emails, to write letters or other documents, to maybe use a spreadsheet once in a while.

Sometimes, they want a little more.

I could bleat on (note how I cast myself in the light you expect) about WINE solving the problems of not running Windows apps, but the simple fact is that people don't want Windows applications.

They just want applications.

Curiously, Vista "breaks" people's computer experience because it changes too much, and Office 2007 is even worse at that.

Furthermore, most people only use Windows because it's what comes with the machine. Low OEM prices are the people's opiate, and Microsoft knows this.

Give people a free "naked" machine, and then let them use Windows XP+Office 2003, or Vista Home Basic+Office 2007, and Ubuntu.

Then tell them the price of each of those "off the shelf", retail.

Guess which one they'll pick if they're paying?

(Curiously, some of those that don't pay may then later find a niggle and pay. If they do, will they be able to move back to Windows easily, or will they find more niggles with Windows because of their experience? Anyway...)

People really don't want Windows applications.

They want applications that do the job, use familiar concepts, and work.

Linux can do that; it's been doing it for a while.

And I've tried moving Windows from one machine to another. Many times. Frankly, I think you were lucky, as it never really worked for me. Bluescreens, failure to recognise hardware, and other nastiness. It works eventually, but it's slow and painful and you're better off just moving your data and re-installing applications if you can.

And that's a fact that's pretty much OS neutral, in my experience...

But to me, that's all irrelevant. People don't want Word. Not as an application. "Word" is simply a synonym for "word processor" - if you gave them Word 2007, they'd be as unhappy as if you'd given them Word 2.0 for Windows. They want a word processor that works as they expect it to, and won't care if it's WordPerfect, Word, OpenOffice.Org's Writer, AbiWord or anything else.

Which means that as long as there's changes for changes' sake in Microsoft's new products, adoption will be slow regardless of whether or not it's ready technically...

"Linux can do that? Linux is notoriously fickle about hardware—and mere mortals shrivel up and die before the great altar to Linus Torvalds when installing hardware drivers. Vista drivers are easy compared to Linux."

I would be laughing about your claims, if it wouldn't be sad that you didn't do any research before writing such a non-sense article.
I changed not only the GPU like you, but the motherboard, the RAM and the CPU some omths ago. Only the harddisk with Ubuntu Linux stayed the same. Guess what?
I didn't even notice something had changed. I did not have to install a single driver. Everything worked out of the box. Can YOU do that? No.

"Simple Vista improvements like driver download support offer huge usability advantages for consumers and can reduce support headaches and support costs for OEMs."

It looks like you trying to be funny but fail miserably.
Fact: Apart from proprietary graphic drivers and some wireless chips, which I have to download first, everything works.
I don't need to install printer drivers. I plug the printer in and print. No driver installation, no configuration, no rebooting needed.
New graphic card driver? I restart my desktop, takes about 3 seconds. Not my whole computer.
In fact, I can't think of a device where I would have to do more than plugging it in.

What about a package manager for Windows? What, nothing?
Proper font rendering? Not this time? ClearType got even worse with WPF? My bad.
Consistent user interface? Compare WMP, IE, Word, Excel, MovieMaker, Notepad.
Does Microsft have to play catchup?
No, that wouldn't be enough. They should stop playing, start working seriously and maybe they produce something in the next decade which will be worth buying.
But at the moment, Windows doesn't even run Amarok.

Bye.

I can't believe how hard the posters on the VCSY Ragingbull message board are trying to cover up the Stuart Scott issue.
Deception cuts deep!

http://ragingbull.quote.com/mboard/boards.cgi?board=BB:VCSY

I think Scott was the safety valve on Ballmers plan to use VCSY technology and have a contingency ready in case the plan didn't work out. They could dump Scott when the VCSY case got too thick and make it look like Scott was the guy that pushed for the infringement. They could tell him they were going to get him out of the company without embarassing Microsoft and without making him have to take the responsibility for infringing so they said he was being fired for a company violation.

All this is speculation but it makes sense because we know Ballmer knows how to pull some crafty stunts.

Look at what chinadotcom did with Pat Tinley. They dumped him. They made him CEO three months before that and when VCSY made it through the SEC investigation the chinadotcom managment had a ready made scapegoat ready to hack.

I work for a Fortune 100 company. They just did a pilot program testing four desktops, RHEL, SuSE Linux, Novell Linux, and MacOS. Novell came out on top but not quite ready to replace XP as the corporate standard. The decision? Stick with XP and reevaluate in two years.

I agree with the statement above. Vista is the Vista killer. I'm betting that in two years, we'll decide to switch to a flavor of Linux rather than to Vista.

Here's the kicker that shows Scott would be the first to try out any VCSY technology Microsoft had. "If Scott's IT initiatives sound a lot like Microsoft's software marketing strategy, they are. He's expected to be the first implementer of any technology coming to market "

It's in here.
http://www.informationweek.com/windows/showArticle.jhtml;jsessionid=Z0Z4QBMNPZCTIQSNDLRCKH0CJUNN2JVN?articleID=201806860

Quotes from Joe Wilcox and my responces:
"" Yeah, I spit out my coffee, too.

It's Linux that has the catching up to do."
----------------------------------------------------
What have you been spiking the coffee or M$ Koolade with, hbetter cut back so you can think a little more clearly. Vista has some major catching up to do, probably the truth is it will never catch up just like ME and MS will just release another OS to sell to the unsuspecting public, like Seven something.
----------------------------------------------------
Quote: "XP is what most people use now, not Linux."
----------------------------------------------------
The one sentance that by itself makes some sort of sense. But what about the future? XP is history soon, if you believe MS. I for one do not believe anything MS has to say. Vista is not a contender, and never will be. Yes it will and has made money, but it is and will hurt MS desktop market share.
--------------------------------------------------
Quote: "The support network for Windows is huge compared with Linux."
--------------------------------------------------
Yes, this is true. Because there is so many things broken or flakey with Windows, especially Vista that their needs to be a huge support network. Linux mostly just works without problems, and help is more for users who don't know how to do something. For them they can go to the user forums of their linux distros and read the FAQ, user manuals, or wiki, or search thru the questions on the forum, or join the forum and ask their questions. And its free.
--------------------------------------------------
Now here is where Joe must had had a twelve pack too much of that spiked coffee, Quote:

"Recently, I swapped the hard drives between two Gateway 295C Tablet PCs. The major component difference was the graphics accelerator. The one model had an ATI Mobility Radeon HD 2300 accelerator and the other integrated Intel graphics. When booting up after the hard drive switch, Vista loaded a generic and inadequate VGA driver, which is sensible. Within minutes, Windows Update had identified the correct video driver and made it available for download.

Linux can do that? Linux is notoriously fickle about hardware—and mere mortals shrivel up and die before the great altar to Linus Torvalds when installing hardware drivers. Vista drivers are easy compared to Linux."
--------------------------------------------------
First off, XP (and probably Vista) if you switch the hard drive with an installed OS on it to another computer, it will probably not work. As the HAL (hardware app layer) is changed. You might get lucky, and be able to re-activate it, if the license supports it. If the hardware is very close, such as switching a hard drive from one thinkpad model to the next nearest one, you might get away with it. Actually, this is a major pain with XP and Vista, and one of the major reasons to jjust dump Windows. Windows 98 second edition and perhaps 2000 were better in this requard of switching out hardware. Although, you had better have your cad files on the hard disk in advance. Now all these problems are so you will pay again for windows, check the eula, most xp and vista licences are only for the orginial motherboard and bios. Flash the bios, and there is a good chance that xp and Vista will have to be reinstalled. Its part of the M$ WGA, to make sure your pay. Change out 4 parts and windows requires an reactivation for example. I do this for a living Joe, I know.

Linux, on the other hand, depends on the distro. SimplyMepis has worked on every hard drive that I have switched to other computers, unless, the hardware is not supported. Most hardware is supported. Mepis supports sata drives, while xp requires a sata driver to be installed from a floppy disk during installation. Not so easy on a new laptop without a floppy drive that comes with Vista DRM.

Vista has less driver support than Linux. How about all them good printers out their without Vista drivers? How about all the old hardware running xp that cannot upgrade to Vista. Odds are it will work real well on Linux.

Wake up Joe and smell the real coffee. Sure M$ is bankrolling your site now, but what happens when all this pro MS drivel drives off all but Neil?

Perhaps, MS will conclude that they should spend money on some other site that has real readership.

Steve, you wrote

"New graphic card driver? I restart my desktop, takes about 3 seconds. Not my whole computer.
In fact, I can't think of a device where I would have to do more than plugging it in."

Come on Steve, do you not even bother to check what your writing is even plausible or do you just assume people are gullible?

For instance, no matter what OS you were running you would still have to restart the whole computer, unless of course you are able (and willing) to change the graphics card with the system still powered on.

I would like to see you just restart your desktop after swapping a graphics card Steve, when you have done this you can post a link to youtube and we can all watch in amazement.

one correction to my post. Try switching that xp or Vista hard drive to another computer that is not the same motherboard. IE a different computer. Odds are you cannot, but Linux probably will.

Microsoft is being maneuvered into position to be sectioned out and segmented like a cow destined to be stew.

General Atlantic has been moving behind the scenes for years to accomplish what's coming and the nitwits forgot what a powerhouse the foreign IT community can become once they're cut loose from the American IT monopolies.

How long have VCSY Shareholders known?
Since the beginning. lol

By: Portuno_Diamo
29 Mar 2004, 12:24 AM EST
Msg. 128884 of 202544
(This msg. is a reply to 128880 by popjason.)

pops ' The reason none of these coincidental dots have no direct connection may be due to two things:

(1)VCSY is off on a path that is surprisingly like C. Feeney's technological vision but not linked to his work.
or
(2) VCSY is off on a path that is part of C. Feeney's technological vision.

We know previous General Atlantic Partner alumni seem to be found in developments that mirror the work Feeney's company is pursuing. The recent post concerning Symphony Technology and Industri-Matematik illustrates just how convenient such a low flying network can be.

We also know Feeney employed Wade and others to create an electronic international financial transaction network decades ago. We know his vision is in that vein with multiple business opportunities radiating around that ultimate vehicle.

We know that VCSY was created to produce a global international telephonic distributed database with embedded smartcard technology as far back as 1999.

We know the company seems to have made partnerships to carry out such a plan since 2000 with little publicity beyond partnering announcements.

There are multiple undeniably tantalizing parallels between the work VCSY has been and is currently doing and the work being supported and managed by General Atlantic Partners - Feeney's company and largest technology VC fund in the world.

The first question we must answer is: if item 1 is true then VCSY is trying to emulate the old man without any hope of having any help or any intersecting activity with him.

And the question we are faced with in item 2 is if 2 is true, why are their NO direct connections between what VCSY is doing and what Feeney et al are doing?

Therefore:

(1) It could be that Wade and Valdetaro and Davison and Macauley and the rest are deluded technocrats hoping against hope that they can gin up something to catch Feeney's eye so he will employ their developments in his enterprise.

(2) It could be that VCSY is in fact a holding company and think tank specifically put together to foster new technology to bring about Feeney's ultimate vision - that being personal mobile computers capable of acting as electroinc transaction agents for individuals anywhere in the world. If this is true, VCSY should be engaged in a number of areas having to do with this sort of vision yet never have a directly traceable connect between Feeney's work and VCSY's until the entire system is ready to come into its own.

It behooves us to investigate some of what Feeney has done to see if there are any lineups that emulate conections (since a person like Feeney studiously avoids publicity and therefore hides connections within his own work at any level).

The prime impetus in Feeney's work may be found in First Data's efforts to make credit cards obsolete and supplant them with individual electronic bank vaults in the form of smartcards and ultimately personal chips.

I realize how this sounds to you. I know it seems to be the height of pompous detachment from reality to suggest something as inconsequential as VCSY seems to be would be in some way a cog in the machine of one of the great technology venture capitalists of our time.

But you should detach yourself from cynicism for a moment to answer a few questions:

1) Why was VCSY chosen as the integration agent to put together the distributed smartcard system for Transtar?

Transtar being the pet project of the "father of the magnetic stripe card" J. Svigals who happens to also hold the patent for the latest generation smartcard devices. Svigals could have chosen many many different integrators to achive his vision - yet he chose VCSY.

2) Why was VCSY chosen to integrate Now Solutions as a spin-off from Ross Systems?

There certainly must have been something beyond simply finding someone with 6 million dollars to buy part of Now from Arglen and engage in a partnership with the previous owner of Now Solutions - Ross Systems. Either VCSY had technology to integrate with Ross Systems iRenaissance HR or Arglen/Ross engaged VCSY with the express intent of crippling the company by entangling their livelyhood in Now Solutions then attempting to take Now Solutions from them. (Arglen has settled in this matter and we await Ross' settlement. So what was the original story here? and if players like Arglen and Ross were involved...who asked for the involvement and for what reason?).

3) Now look at the following news announcement from 2001:

Government Computer News
July 16, 2001; Vol. 20 No. 19
Trade commission manages travel online
BY DIPKA BHAMBHANI | GCN STAFF
'The International Trade Commission has moved a step closer to paperless travel management with a system that went online in April.'
'"Under SmartPay, [ITC] had a travel agent," said Tony Marshall, vice president of Zegato, "but they had no travel automation. They had to pick up a phone and call the travel agent.?"'
'...Now ITC travelers make their own reservations using Zegato software and the SmartPay cards.'

Naturally the "smartpay cards" are 2001 smartcard technology.

Now - Pointing to further work by Zegato:

http://www.vcsy.com/press/042210012003.htm
Globalfare.com and Its Partner, Picasso Travel, Agree to Provide Leisure Travel Fulfillment to the Government Client Base of Zegato Solutions
TUESDAY, APRIL 22, 2003 10:01 AM
"LOS ANGELES, April 22 /PRNewswire-FirstCall/ -- Globalfare.com, Inc. (Globalfare), a wholly-owned subsidiary of Vertical Computer Systems, Inc., today announced it has entered into a services agreement with Zegato Solutions, Inc. to provide leisure travel fulfillment for the governmental client base of Zegato Solutions, Inc. Globalfare has also entered into an arrangement with Picasso Travel, Inc. whereby Picasso Travel will provide air, hotel and other travel options through Globalfare to Zegato Solutions, Inc."

As of today we do not know the progress of this partnership. Because there have been no further PRs, it is easy to assume nothing is happening. But in an arena governed by a pattern of secrecy (and especially if the paternal seed for such patterns finds secrecy a vital working formula) one would do best to assume that, unless the company has announced a failure or dismissal of this partnership, the partnership must still be in force and advancing.

Don't think so? Then you have that right, but other aspects of the company's business indicate this is precisely how they work. They speak only when a deal is formulated or changed. Other than that they do not speak. They are actually not required to say anything more than to point out material developments in business and to post quarterly and annual filings of financial state. So they do just that and, under times of duress, perhaps not even that by choosing to go pink.

Now - notice the list of involvements Vertical professes to engage:

Form 10KSB for VERTICAL COMPUTER SYSTEMS INC

7-Aug-2003

Annual Report

MARKET PRODUCT OWNERSHIP VERTICAL COMPUTER %
------ ------- --------- -------------------
Human Resources and Payroll emPath 6.2 Now Solutions 60.00%
Government Sector- Emergency Response ResponseFlash Vertical Computer 89.00%
Publishing Content NewsFlash Vertical Computer 100.00%
Higher Education UniversityFlash Vertical Computer 100.00%
Franchises/Independent Agent AffiliateFlash Vertical Computer 100.00%
Database connect XML Emily Agent Vertical Computer 100.00%
Emily XML Scripting Language Emily Vertical Computer 100.00%
Travel Globalfare Vertical Computer 100.00% *
Public Sector e-Procurement Service PublicBuy.net InetPurchasing 2.5% *
Smart Cards TranStar Smartcard TranStar 0.0%

* Vertical Computer is also entitled to receive royalties on sales of certain iNet Purchasing products and smart cards by TranStar.

There are a couple things one must ask when considering the Zegato partnership... why did Zegato choose Globalfare? We don't know the state of the Globalfare/Zegato partnership announced April 22, 2003 - but I do seem to remember an announcement regarding the Transtar/VCSY partnership around that time - in that the VCSY/Transtar partnership was dissolved and VCSY retained a 3% ownership with royalties of Transtar business.

Then VCSY entered into a program to fit into Zegato's system shortly thereafter.

I do not see VCSY chasing any other form of business other than the HR/travel/accomodations/purchasing stages of business leveraged with distributed data transactions involving content publication and communication via portable smart devices on an international basis.

What do you see when you look at the core of Feeney's GAPartners efforts? ERP software and services with HR/travel/accomodations/purchasing at the core along with emphasis on global data transactioning via smart devices.

My question to anyone is: What sort of connecting information are you wanting to see from companies that do most of what they do in the dark - precisely so you and competitors do not see?

Some will argue that all companies are trying to work with smartcards and electronic HR/travel/accomodations/purchasing and electronic transactions... partially true: SOME companies are working in those areas but many companies are not able. Only a few offer some of the capabilities necessary, Only a handful offer all the capabilities.

VCSY has demonstrated an ability to enter into partnerships involving key areas critical to development of just the sort of businesses Feeney is most interested:

HR management (Now Solutions)
Travel management (GlobalFare/Zegato)
Purchasing (iNetPurchasing)
Content and information distribution (GIS/Responseflash)
Smartcard data distribution (Emily/Apollo/Transtar)

The cry from those who wish to point out VCSY's failings is that nothing has become of these efforts.

I would like for someone to demonstrate to me that these efforts have failed.

No-one here can demonstrate that failure because the company has not offered a further explanation. You can believe what you want, but failure of any of these efforts would be a material development in the company's activity and would require a form of announcement from management.

Ongoing development toward maturity does not require further explanation.

In addition, if you examine the historical flow of technology and visit the dates for a number of General Atlantic developments and parallel technology efforts started by VCSY, you will see a number of highly improbable coincidences.

I view these coincidences in a total view to see whowhat and where is involved. This is what lead me to believe the Arglen connection was a bad deal due to European telecom interests and bad blood between Miller and Feeney. I appear to be right in that at least Arglen and Thurn und Taxis have had bad blood toward VCSY from the get-go.

I also wonder just what all these floating connections will reveal. But I do know these coincidences are more than just mirages. They are concrete dates and times and more than curious content that signal partners dancing without touching in a crowded room.

Linux is a decade behind Windows for the average user.Like it or not that's the way it is. The only thing that I find the Linux user base and supporters to excel in comparison to Microsoft the last couple of years is arrogance, their false claims and spreading FUD about Windows.

I Like MS Supporters. Decade in Linux development terms can be 3 months.

Next three months combined profile system. Ie group policies. Most of the container tech so you don't have to pick Linux Distro's any more. Just install as many as you need.

Scary enough a working WinFS system. So its a little hard to say 10 years behind. 12 months maybe.

The pointing to MS Office is a common one. OpenOffice.org is not in a class to completely compete with it. KOffice something windows users have not seen is very close. Note krita in KOffice is also completion to Photoshop. Don't worry KOffice will be released on windows so you MS loves can stay at home.

OpenLina project running Linux applications on Windows Mac and Linux. So yes Linux applications everywhere.

LSB 3.2 most Linux developers are waiting for. End of having to build stuff for Linux Distributions.

Status Quo is about to get a huge mother of a shake. Since users will be able to reduce there MS need without swapping to Linux straight up.

Now that is not the real issue. Linux desktops are forcing new hardware out that is not able to run Vista. Anyone want to place bets on XP being fully extended to 2009 at least.

Sorry MS you screwed up with Vista computer sizes are not going to just keep on expanding to run your OS. Power usage has become critical. Vista running using under 5 watts I don't see happening any time soon.

Heh...It looks like Joe Wilcox needs to go a long way before he catches up with SJVN, or even Linux, for that matter.

Microsoft's flagship operating system isn't fir for installation, much ready for prime time, Joe.

Keep preaching to the choir, buddy; because you certainly aren't cutting it with the pedestrian crowd that could teach you a lot about Linux--the casual user.

Maybe you might try installing an Operating System sometime--windoze or Linux--because I don't think you can hack it in the real world where some of us don't get pre-loads.

The mistake in this article is that it doesn't consider WHY people want M$ Office. It's *NOT* because M$ Office is better integrated, has better featuires, or has better performance. It's mainly because people don't know they have a choice. Users find it on their office desktops or bundled in their PCs. And often they are told not to fiddle with what management has decided to put on their computers. And, of course, there's the FUD from Redmond.

In terms of usability, Linux has all the applications desktop users need. OpenOffice does most of what M$ Office does and a few more things that M$ Office can't. Other common applications are also avauilable such as a web browser (Firefox), e-mail client (Thunderbird, Evolution), messaging client (GAIM), graphical file manager (Thunar, Nautilus, Konqueror), graphics and drawing tools (GIMP, OpenOffice Draw), and so on, are available and are of very high quality.

Vista, however, has to catch up on security, where it is nowhere near Linux. Stability is another place where Vista is far behind. Then there's hardware support. Linux had made great strides here and installing drivers isn't a problem (if you have to do it at all). Then Linux is also ahead in IPv6 support.

Vista is far ahead in the FUD department, however, and it seems that's where Micro$oft has decided to focus a lot of its energies. Instead of innovation, Micro$oft threatens litigation.

As usual.

This article is such a troll. It's like something out of usenet. And this guy gets paid for this?!

Quote: "Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications"

Why should it? It's not Windows, thank God! It's got equivalent applications which work just as well as the Windows ones. If you are desperate to run a Windows-only app then you've got WINE, Crossover or VMWare to help.

Quote: "Linux is like the foreign auto with missing parts, but nothing more important than a couple wheels, brakes or steering column."

How do work that one out? When you get windows you only get a seat and steering wheel. If you want to do any work (drive) you need to buy Office, Graphics program, IDE, etc (i.e. the rest of the car). In any Linux distribution you get the keys to the whole car (and a full tank) which will work flawlessly.

Quote: "In my testing, an updated Vista PC with adequate RAM and memory [sic] performs extremely well�and delivers a much better experience than Windows XP."

What's the difference between RAM and memory? Or is it just that Vista needs so much of the stuff that you need name it twice >)

You failed to mention Windows' favourite application 'Activation'! Any kind of hardware change results in having to phone MS to allow /you/ to use /your/ computer. That's one feature which I'm glad Linux doesn't include.

And to the people who reckon you can't do any 'real' work on Linux. Just think about it next time you watch a Disney animation. They are all developed and rendered using Linux software. And these things bring in hundreds of millions of dollars. Yeah, no good for real work... :-p

Oh and google, and several governments, and ...

Linux runs on all of my PC's including my laptop 512MB RAM & 32MB graphics card. Try getting Vista to work on that !
Most people do want Microsoft Office including my current employer until he saw me running an Excel macro on Open Office then he said "I didn't know Linux could do that".
Vista will not recognise my 4GB of RAM. It reports it as 3.25GB. I have tried messing around with DEP & PAE to no avail.
Linux reported 3.25GB too, so I clicked on the openSUSE system update, and now I have 4GB RAM.
CAN VISTA DO THAT. NO!!!

SVJN is much too nice to you. If he would have critized your dumb "Android is an insult to any user"-article, hew would have had much more material to write about than you have right now. He maybe paints the image a bit too shiny, but you are more apart from reality than he is.

Let's be sensible!

For anyone who has minimal requirements and doesn't need MS compatibility, Linux is fine. Dell's adoption of Ubuntu Linux may make Linux a viable proposition in time.

I have dumped Linux and gone back to good old Windows XP Pro. Why? SuSE Linux's developers issued a kernel update that made my system unstable. I looked at Ubuntu but version 7.10 was a mess for the first couple of weeks. (Apple's Mac OS is based on Unix and looks good in its 10.5 iteration but Apple's hardware has quality-control problems and the support is abysmal.)

I actually went out and bought a copy of XP when it was first released. Over the years, I have found XP to be pretty reliable and got used to its eccentricities. In the words of Apple's advert, 'it just works'. Linuxs works but you're more at the mercy of people who get bees in their bonnets. Linux proponents need to remember that most people get a PC to do work, to play, or follow their hobbies - they don't get a PC to spend their time tinkering with the OS.

You tried Linux lately? Kubuntu 7.10 detected my graphics drivers without any problems whatsoever. Can get more out of Linux/Compiz eye candy than from Vista, on far cheaper hardware.

(Also, I forget the URL, but you can get Vista eye candy on XP with some themes, without forking out for the extra hardware that Vista requires you have).

Analogies? Vista is like a mega truck taking up all the lanes, running over and hooting at whomever, breaking down whenever; Linux may still require some tweaking to the body work, but runs more reliably...!

I think the point people often miss, which is the case here, is that Linux was never meant to be an emulator!

They focus on trying to make Linux emulate Windows and run its applications and, not surprisingly, often hit a dead end. But if that's what you want, just install Wine, or download VMware server for Linux, create a Windows guest and run your Office apps on it.

As folks have pointed out here, Linux comes with many alternative applications that can do most of what their Windows counterparts do. And just like it was with Windows, hardware support is now orders of magnitude better.

The real challenge is to break that infamous Windows-is-the-de-facto-standard culture.

Perhaps we'll be able to break that culture if people start opening their mind and experimenting new things...

**yawn**
You linux fanboys are as predictable and blindly biased as the numerous self-professed conservative republicans in this country. I have run Vista since beta 1 and watched as it's stability and performance improved. I have run Ubuntu, Suse, Red Hat, and Fedora. These are more in line with Windows 95 in terms of development maturity, operability, and functionality. Compete with Vista? Get real people. I truly envoy your states of delirium. Eternal sunshine... All of Vista's "problems" have been related to the hardware community catching up than the OS itself. Like Joe said you idiots can have linux. Me and the rest of the modern world will be running Vista! peace.

All those stupid FUD. I haven't invested much time in maintaining Linux since I switched from Gentoo back to Suse. There is nothing to do, It just works.

Oooooooh. I bow in front of you and your "modern" wisdom 3DES. And you're absolutely right; if Vista is nothing but a half-baked product, blame those who make the hardware, it's all their fault! Pretty ironic that you get to call others blindly biased idiots; just as ironic as evan talking about arrogance.

I think like Tornado. Windows is Windows and Linux is Linux. Those who expect to get a Windows clone with Linux are fools; that's not what it's meant to be.

And Joe, sorry, but your latest articles have been really poor. Please try putting less emphasis on quantity and more on quality.

Really a nonsensene article. Sorry to read such low-level journalism here.

Arrogance doesn't have a place in technical commentaries.

Joe! You're such a hack, man. I seriously don't grok how you get paid for pieces of sycophant food like this.

"Let's be sensible! For anyone who has minimal requirements and doesn't need MS compatibility, Linux is fine." --Arthur Norton

Oh! Let's *do* be sensible, indeed!

Here's the short-list of my minimal requirements:
Online access to installation media.
A non-disk-image, one-disc installation that takes less than 30 minutes from first boot to full usability...only rebooting once.
A system environment that never crashes. Period.
The ability to boot to multiple kernel images!
Solid hardware support without having to kiss some vendor's butt, hunt for driver CDs or disks, or download drivers and sneakernet them to a machine.
I need a widely-accepted and open scripting language with lightning-fast shell execution, as well as a shell environment that does a lot more than just showcasing "dir/a".
I need the ability to specify which environment I will boot into (GUI or CLI), and if said environment is to be single-user or multiuser mode.
I need several compiler and development environments.
I need immediate, broad-range archival compression algorithm support.
I must have sound and video editors, hex editors, DVI editors and viewers, SVG editors, ps/pdf creation programs, "over the wire" backup utilities, disk imaging, partitioning and partition recovery utilities...at the time of installation.
I refuse to do without network mapping and diagnostic utilities and security software.
My choice of GUI environments, from ridiculously 3-D and heavy, to lean and mean.
I need wordprocessing, spreadsheeting, graphics processing, database functions and lucid contact management "out of the box" with microsoft document compatibility from mso95 to present mso releases, because some people are still stuck in the legacy software paradigm. [*]
It's obvious that I need native ISO Open Standard Document compatibility, because I exchange information with people all over the globe.
Various CAD/CAM programs must be immediately installable, if not already installed.
Several browsers should be at my fingertips (all impervious to MSWindows compromises) realplayer, flash and java preinstalled and configured.
I should have at least 3 or 4 IM/IRC clients, that speak all protocols, available to my collaborative needs.
I should have my choice of several email clients. All impervious to MSWindows compromises.
(S)ftp clients, ssh access to my web server, a firewall that actually does something.
ImageMap editors, Link Status Verifiers and stylesheet editors and deguggers are required from the get-go.
Lucid CD and DVD burning/mastering software installed with the OS.
Various servers and server components must be immediately available to me. I should have the option to have Apache installed for me at the time I install the OS.
Full access to all system logs, configuration files and system settings. In human readable formats.
Package/update management processes which practice full disclosure and control over the end result.
The ability to login to and fully control any machine in my infrastructure, from the machine I am sitting at now, including stopping and starting any service, installing and removing software, and fully updating the Operating System via ssh.
The ability to install virtually any program to serve my needs with a few key-strokes or mouse-clicks; and no discs, or product keys.

Now...go get your XP or Vista retail CD/DVD...the one you bought off the shelf at CompUSA or BestBuy.

Sit down at a machine that is CAT5/5e/6/7, GboE, or fiber-connected to an Internet gateway, with a pair of virgin, 750GB, SATA hard drives.

Start installing.

By the time that you're done, if you claim that MSWindows can do more than even a tenth of my list, above, you're blowing smoke from your nether regions. You've also blown at least a couple hours of your time.

I know. I've done it.

You misstated the situation, Andy. Maybe MSWindows is fine for your modest needs, but I actually do something with a computer, you know. Linux is just about the only the OS that has the chops for my needs.

"SuSE Linux's developers issued a kernel update that made my system unstable."

That was obtuse. It's pretty obvious why you're happier with MSWindows.

Always keep GRUB/LILO entries for your newest kernel as well as the three preceding kernel iterations.
"That way, if a new kernel results in anomalous behavior, you can boot back into your earlier kernel image...which DOES WORK."
{smile}

[*] We've been using both StarOffice and OpenOffice for literally years, and submitting documents to those who claim that we are REQUIRED to use MSOffice for the sake of compatibility. We have yet to have it noticed, much less have a document or presentation rejected because of it.

So, if anyone is resting on document compatibility as an objection...that was moot years ago.

Somebody way up near the top said that the need for Windows can be reduced to people who need Adobe apps plus some CAD/engineering software.

1 - No, that reply is flabby logic. The need for THOSE TWO PEOPLE is Adobe + CAD/engineer.

2 - To say that people use apps, not operating systems, is missing the point. People use what they're comfortable with. That's Windows.

I have trained entry-level workers for the past nine years on a Windows app, week-in, week-out. In 1998-2000, it was pure hell when I encountered an older employee or anybody else who hadn't used a GUI-based operating system before. The whole mouse concept was foreign to them. We'd sit them down in front of Solitare for 15-20 minutes and they'd be fine. Believe it or not, even Mac users had problems with Windows.

As time progresses, though, I have encountered less and less people who have problems with Windows. Why? Because they use Windows at home, or at another job. Now everybody we train -- even those we are converting off DOS systems -- know how to use a mouse, use Windows, etc., because they do it at home, at other jobs, etc.

The Mac users -- those that are in a Mac bubble at home or school or other jobs -- still have a few problems with Windows.

I have tried to make the argument for my partner to use a Mac at home. After all, most of the work computing is just surfing and playing a few web-based games, like on Yahoo. He doesn't see truly what is "easier" about the Mac, and this guy is an excellent programmer! It just looks different, and he won't use it.

He and I will gladly continue to use Vista and XP, warts and all. It's what we like, it's what we know.

Look -- Linux may be more stable than Windows, and you may be able to find a desktop environment in Linux that is as flashy as Mac or Windows, and you may have equiv. apps out there for Linux... but who really cares?

People want what they're familiar with. Windows, due to Microsoft's monopoly, is what everybody is familiar with. You don't have to like that fact, but it's still a fact. All the whining in the world isn't going to change it.

Here's another point -- software developers make money selling Windows apps. I can tell you right now that if my company's app was Mac or Linux-based, I wouldn't make 1/10th the money I'm making now. We couldn't get businesses to convert their desktop O/S to Linux. We surely couldn't expect them to buy expensive Macs, either!

Perhaps if a company could take the Apple approach and sell good hardware WITH Linux on it, get it into a mass market retail store and get more people to WANT to buy it, then Linux for the desktop will have a viable future.

Until then...

Centerfield13 Linux already is working on that. Top of line motherboard with Linux embed in. Yep a not removable OS.

CAD is a program thing. There are commercial equals.

So you want windows fine. I will give you windows. 1 windows XP/Vista box to 10 seats. Local Linux firefox and other applications.

This system gives you all the functions of windows with less power use and less cost.

Its not a either OR game. You can have both Linux and Windows. Gives you the best cost per seat. Best power usage and complete function of Linux and windows.

I agree making Linux software at moment is not highly profitable. Problem is lack of a common ABI that covers everything needed. But with openlina it will be since that will give you 100 percent market coverage. They very thing .net promised and has not provided. Reason Linux binaries running perfectly well on Windows, Mac OS and Linux even blending in with native applications.

There is a market big one. Clock is ticking.

Joe
I am glad that you have finally realised the SJVN is an idiot!
That has been known for quite a long time, so please do not ever quote him again !
As for the comments ...well ... Joe I feel that the "Linux community" has swapped over from "Linux Watch" and are commenting here instead, all these commenters are so biased it's just not funny anymore.
And it seems that the more "moderate" commenters have left this site and that you are now left with likes of Chips, Marco and (heaven help you) I-Man, and other side of the arguement... there is none, they are no longer here !!
In my view you now have only anti microsoft commenters left here, the others have given up !!!

I am not exactly Anti Microsoft. I am not seeing that Microsoft has a answer.

Last time between 1998 and 2000 When everything was in the same kind of boat MS did not have a answer either. Instead bleed market until killer feature ADS was released.

Only one major difference then Linux had no device market share to use. Its now has 40 percent device market share to use. Japan desktop sales are slowing and being replaced by the device market. If this is a on going trend and expands. MS is in trouble. Note MS has less than 5 percent in the device market. A large section of that is there own X boxs.

Dismissing Linux as a possible Vista killer is jumping to far. There is a risk that Vista is going to kill the home desktop market completely. Top end business is going to come under attack threw intergation.

Now final and scary problem new hardware is being built for the desktop that can never run Vista. This is different to any other time in MS history. Normally the new hardware is normally big enough to run the New OS. Not having hardware produced too weak. So the natural old hardware will die and we have to move to Vista may not happen.

Basically things have gone wrong for Microsoft we want to know the damage. Not be told to put our head in the sand. That MS is a big company so it will win. Sorry MS is a small company. Value far less than hardware makers. Most of the major NAS and Device makers using Linux are many times bigger than Microsoft and they will have no question about taking MS market share its profitable.

Oh dear! Linux fanboys are almost as passionate as Mac fanboys but passion is no substitute for logic.

The plain fact is that most of us just want to perform tasks with our PCs and XP allows us to do just that. Over the years, XP has matured and gives such good service that many people prefer it to Vista, which - in its turn - may also mature (though the DRM stuff is a turn-off). Though Apple is selling more kit these days, it has its own problems (viz. the new iMac 'freezing' and the bugs in Leopard) - once you've looked at Time Machine and Cover Flow, you've seen the real improvements and they're usually not enough to make you 'convert'. The Linux world is in a state of flux. I left SuSE 10.1 because an updated kernel used a compiler version that hadn't been made available to me; as a result, my graphics went haywire. User reports of installing Ubuntu and Kubuntu 7.10 vary from ecstatic to suicidal. The other 'distros' are a mixed bag.

I'm OS-agnostic. I just want to get work done and it's easier in XP than in Linux - in my experience. I used VMware under Linux but the openSUSE developers decided to change the way that USB was supported and 'killed' VMware (it seems to be fixed now). Lately, UIDs have begun to be used instead of directory references, which is great because each drive is now identified uniquely but bad for the user because the UIDs are strings of (apparently) random digits! As usual, it's horses for courses: if Linux suits you, fine; if Mac OS is for you, fine; I just prefer XP. If I have to move from XP, it will be to something that offers me as much and more - it has to be better from my point of view not that of a developer or salesman.

WONDERFUL reality check joe. Thank you. And in customary form, the linux-tards get emotional. Somebody (joe) called their God a fat man with skimpy underware, and now its religous.

Thanks again joe. Fairly written piece.

This post simply shows the arrogance and/or lack of knowledge the writer has about any operating system that was not released by Microsoft.

It also shows a fairly large lack of knowledge concerning applications- other than those that run on Microsoft operating systems.

Presenting a one-sided viewpoint may make a writer look good to the corporate bean-counters- and the Boss- but it will not help your credibility in the market.

The above article does speak of some matters of contention in desktop operating system choice, but the conclusions it states are either false or misleading.
They are not correct.

Is Vista perfect? No, far from it.
The Windows-centric market has proven that with the extension to XP's service life and the problems Microsoft has had getting Vista adopted by users, both private and corporate.
Is it all bad?
Again, for some, and for some uses, no.
But XP is largely better according to THE OPERATING SYSTEM MARKET.

Is linux perfect? No.

I use linux, and even I can not deny that.
But the operating system itself is more solid and secure.

The main issue linux has is NOT even application compatibility although that does exist: not a failure of linux, but of the people who develop the software, for not porting applications to the operating system.

The main issue linux has is NOT hardware compatibility although there are, again, some problems there. This is somewhat less of an issue:
hardware that complies with published standards generally just WORKS in linux. Hardware that does not follow standards, but requires special drivers (and drivers that are usually "Not Certified" by windows as well) is more of a problem, but in many cases, even these devices have drivers.

The main issue linux has is NOT software support.
Support is freely available through online forums and communities, and this support tends to be better than the free support provided by Windows-centric communities or Microsoft.
For those who really WANT to pay for support, and not have to learn anything about the system they use, there are a lot of paid support options for linux as well.

Desktop linux has two main problems at this point:
1: Differing software package management systems mean that installing software is not always just a "point and click" process. It can be, but is not always, and those who are NOT familiar with linux may not find the easy ways to do things.

2: Misleading information posted by in blogs, articles and press releases.
Like this one.

Windows Vista will eventually achieve a level of success, merely due to the marketing machine of Microsoft, aided by the lower costs of the hardware itself.
Imagine if that 2GB of memory that Vista really needs cost $800 USD instead of $150...
Same thing with cpu speeds and video cards (specifically for gaming.)

Now imagine that I can run the same or similar software, with fancier 3D graphical desktop features in a system with 512mb of ram, half the cpu speed and a video card that costs $50 USD-

Oh wait- that's right, I can.... Using linux.

Upon re-reading my comment I realized that I missed a couple of pertinent pieces of information-

A very large number of Windows applications can be run successfully in linux using compatibility layer software (such as CrossOver Office or wine.)

For many applications there are applications in linux which have perfect or near perfect compatibility with Windows software titles- thanks to the programmers who have written software to work with common formats.
Word and Excel are two of these that work perfectly for me.

Joe, I think you missed the point. Steven's automaker comparison goes even deeper. A comparison that I believe even Steven missed in his own argument.

American automakers didn't loose market because the Japanese build cheaper better cars. They lost market because they couldn't or didn't build cheaper better cars. In other words they lost market because they couldn't keep up.

The current state of things quickly becomes irrelevant when you look at it from the perspective of evolution and improvement. Window's development process is broken, period.

Linux's small steps with minor version releases and this feeling of perpetual "beta" state has made more progress in less time than both Windows and OS X put together.

I started using Linux for business functions back in 2000. It was then only limited to server applications and working as network storage or routing devices. By 2001 with the advent of licensing 6.0 and all the rent-a-soft ideas coming from Redmond we evaluated the possibility of moving part of our systems to Linux. By the end of 2002 and early 2003 the ideas was a no go. Major linux distros had trouble auto mounting CD ROMs and more so USB drives. Linux was the laughing stock of the Windows community in terms of desktop usage.

About two years later I published a little picture at Extremetech showing my Linux desktop burning a CD, streaming audio from the web, viewing a DVD and chatting with my webcam on. A year later by early 2005 the Linux desktop already had transparency. Of course David Coursey was all over Vista(Longhorn back then). Talking how great it was going to be when it came out "this" year.

The word "this" must have been some secret codename that meant 2007. Because they kept saying "this" year, "this" year and it actually never came out the year those articles got published. Not even Mary Jo Foley got it right.

Of course all the Windows fan boys were all off when they said it would be a cold day in hell the day some major PC seller started shipping Linux. Well today we do have them. With a sense of poetic justice I may add. At about the same time Vista launched.

One must note that even Vista's flagship feature "Aero" can only be run on a few machines with high end graphics cards. A whole lot more systems can run Beryl (now Compiz Fusion) without a hickup. For a review of that go to youtube and look up Beryl. You'll quickly realize it outshines anything Aero has to offer.

More so Vista trashed the one golden feature Windows had. Application and driver support. All the things that were wrong with Linux suddenly became apparent in Vista. It was as if during the first months of this year Vista was a big step back from XP.

Meanwhile Linux kept evolving. It might not be up to speed with Windows. Let me correct that. Application developers may not be up to speed with Linux and thus haven't released many of their apps for it. That of course doesn't mean Linux is deficient. More so the fact that a lot of applications exist for Windows doesn't mean it isn't deficient. Window's development process is slow and sluggish. It isn't up to speed with the competition. It isn't even up to speed with what it used to be.

All the blind Microsoft supporters here are only driving more nails in the coffin. Do realize that change is needed and quickly if Windows is to keep pace. Particularly in a competitive web and networked market we see emerging today.

Do remember that in the beginning the Japanese sold small little cars that only poor high school and college kids drove. Everyone made fun of them, the cars and the brand names. Today the same brands carry some of the most high end cars in the market.

Do you all remember how Balmer and Gates used to laugh at Linux? Well Balmer stopped laughing a while back. That is good. He is still in the patents litigation floor. I'd wish he'd just go up a few more floors to the "lets get a good, reliable and maintainable product out the door" floor. He knows what can happen if he doesn't. He's from Detroit.

"Oh dear! Linux fanboys are almost as passionate as Mac fanboys but passion is no substitute for logic."

This, of course, is why the 'Linux fanboyce' use and understand self-respect, logic, critical thinking, Operating Systems, power switches, et al...and, of course, Linux.

"I left SuSE 10.1 because an updated kernel used a compiler version that hadn't been made available to me; as a result, my graphics went haywire."

Issues with nVidia or ATi, huh? I'm betting on ATi, myself. You have that certain 'quality' about you...but, anyways...thanks for the repetition, as well as confirming that you weren't competent to use even SuSE.
Sheesh! Even Fedora offers you the option of booting to your earlier kernel...this is older than RH6.0. Where have you been...beta testing Longhorn and astroturfing web logs?

"User reports of installing Ubuntu and Kubuntu 7.10 vary from ecstatic to suicidal."

Thanx for the laugh. Nobody serious about Linux speaks Shuttleworth's name even in a joking conversation.

"I'm OS-agnostic."

{gasp!} You don't say? You, obviously, aren't a student of Greek, either; but I have to say that you are spot-on with that admission. Thanks for sharing.

"I just want to get work done and it's easier in XP than in Linux - in my experience."

You need more experience, and you need to actually use a computer for work, instead of just email and surfing for porn .WMVs.

Yes but look closer vicky. This year Linux guys are taking ATI and Nvidia into there own hands.
Nvidia have provide better drivers for years to Linux. But by linux standards they are still crappy. So Teams are now reversing Nvidias cards. AMD is handing over the specs. So one day no drivers to install at all since you will have you Nvidia and ATI card drivers out box.
Biggest bug bear for Linux in business is having to use MS Exchange servers.
"User reports of installing Ubuntu and Kubuntu 7.10 vary from ecstatic to suicidal." Sorry to say that is about the same rating XP gets. Vista is more like a high for a few days then a month or two of I will get passed the problems then 100 percent turning suicidal due to warped problems.
Ubuntu is not that bad. Vista the Lemon takes beating I would say a 2003 maybe a 2004 linux might do it. But we are 2007.
Click install like windows is in the works for Linux.
There is logic vicky. More Linux laptops on way. More Linux Desktops on way. Bottom edge of market is going to come under 200 dollars for a desktop case and under 400 dollars for a laptop. How are we going to stay selling product effective and stay full windows in a market like that. Vista alone is worth more than the laptop. Even worse this new bottom level hardware cannot run vista.
Ie High end sports car for limited numbers ie Vista, XP. Linux low end. This is a problem. Linux Low end does not mean giving up Windows software in business either. The said bit is out box the Linux Low end will be getting more software for nothing. Nothing been said by the Microsoft supporters have explained how they win. Does not help that the home computer market is slowly dieing. People have more important things to do with there time.
I have to be able to make a profit selling it and not get under cut all the way. Currently Linux items are really threating to kill lots of my markets.

"'Linux' doesn't run any of my Windows applications,...

No, not those special Windows *Wares and Virus apps the last time I checked.

What a rude rant from "vicky from brook"! I wonder why some people seem incapable of discussing technological issues calmly and sensibly.

I have used computers since the 1970s (IBM and Burroughs mainframes, DEC VAXes, CP/M machines, IBM PCs, etc). In my time, I have solved a fair number of computer-related problems and enjoyed it. Now, however, I just want a system that works. Yes, I could spend time undoing the botched update that SUSE sent out but, quite frankly, I can't be bothered. Before 'openSUSE' came on the scene, I never had a problem with updates or incompatibility from one release to the next and I have neither the time nor the patience to debug the latest SUSE experiment. If the Linux proponents want Windows users to try their OS, let alone to switch, they will have to be more considerate and disciplined.

I believe in freedom and I do not castigate other people for the choices that they make. I also believe that competition is healthy and that a successful Linux and Mac OS would be good for the user.

Microsoft's business practices are, to put it charitably, questionable. Sooner or later, if competition is to get a chance, the OS and applications sides will have to be separated fully; the failure to do that after the DOJ and States proved their cases is a disgrace.

Nonetheless, people who buy PCs just want to do whatever they got the machines for. If that's only e-mail or word-processing, so what? There is room for everyone, from dedicated hacker (not cracker) to casual user. OS wars are as pointless as architecture wars and other such nonsense. The PC is, for many of us, just a commodity now. If it's a hobby for some, good luck to them.

BTW: nasty remarks about porn merely show the hollowness of your arguments.

vista works with swapping hard drives ?

At least until XP, windows barfs if you did that. It wouldn't even boot or even if it did, you couldn't do anything because even the mouse/KB wouldn't work for me. This was with nvidia card on both machines.

Linux, OTOH, when I took the HD to another m/c with ( different) nvidia card and whole set of different h/w, worked fine, incl h/w accelerated 3D and all the common h/w ! XP could NEVER do that.

Try it ! Move it to a different PC where it was not installed.

People never remember their history. The same complaints were made when XP came out. But Microsoft kept improving it and now it is the preferred OS, same thing will happen with Vista.

And no, the Device driver installation for Linux doesn't work like XP or Vista, I've done it and I know, Linux is a Geek OS, a majority of people are not Geeks (I on the other hand like playing under the hood).

Linux crusaders tend to denegrate anybody who says Linux is not ready for the desktop. They also tell people who are trying to learn how to use Linux that they are idiots, they should already know that. Not something that draws people to Linux.

And programming for Windows XP gives me Millions more desktops to target than Linux. I make much more money programming Windows desktop software. It's a fact. The Linux people write Micro$oft with the dollar sign as if it is something that is denegrating, but I have a family to feed and Money is the way to feed them, I can't afford to be a crusader. Maybe in politics but not with my lively hood (at least not for the war between Linux and windows, it doesn't mean world destruction even if the Linux crusaders think it does).

jrh
I totally agree with everything that you have said.
I wish you could have a talk to Chips and Marco, boy would you put them in their place ...finally !!

Quote:

And programming for Windows XP gives me Millions more desktops to target than Linux. I make much more money programming Windows desktop software. It's a fact. The Linux people write Micro$oft with the dollar sign as if it is something that is denegrating, but I have a family to feed and Money is the way to feed them,

End of Quote

A good reason for you to program for Microsoft, also a good reason for me to use Linux.

It's the hardware requirements that make Vista insane. I'm getting fairly good performance running Ubuntu as a home desktop on a Pentium III with 256 mb RAM that I bought for 60 dollars. No 3D games, no goofy 3D desktop, but all the useual home and office amenities, including You tube, music and video, DVDs. On a sixty dollar computer. With a brand new OS that I downloaded for free.

I wasn't a computer geek when I started to use Linux, but I did have to become one. It's not the OS itself that makes Linux difficult for ordinary users; it's the lack of support. If people had to download and install Vista themselves, they would fare no better. Preinstalled and preconfigured Linux (now offered by Dell and WALLMART) should change the picture dramAtically. I hear that the 200 dollar Linux Desktop that Walmart is selling is doing well. The picture is changing... but having found it challenging (albeit rewarding) myself, I know that the usability issue is real.

But for most people, the issue of applications is a mirage. I really don't think most people need these expensive Windows applications, certainly not nonprofessionals. A commercial artist might prefer photoshop, I've never used it so I don't know its any better than the gimp, but I can't imagine why a student or home user would need Microsoft Office. My last experience with Word was Word 2000, which had more bells and whistles than a Coney Island Fun House, and was about as conducive to actual writing.

I question the idea that Windows applications are inherently superior. Maybe some of the really expensive ones have an advantage, (or maybe not) but try to imagine life without adware, spyware, or crapware. I know it sounds like a hardship, but you do get used to it!

"I buy the analogy of Japanese transportation in the 1880s. So ... Linux still has 110 years of development work and channel partner building before Windows is ever threatened." - I bet IBM thought similar years ago about the desktop computer shortly before their typewriter sales travelled in the direction of /dev/null

Please remove your head from your ass and smell the competition...

WOW! WORST ANALOGY EVER!

Are you saying that the PC took IBM by surprise? Who do you think invented the PC?

Nevertheless, I think I'm on your side of the debate. "Compared to Windows, 110 years of development" from the Linux community takes about ten years.

I've been using Linux for just over five years, and I'm still amazed at the development I've seen in the time that it took for Microsoft to squeeze out Vista.

And, though the issue of usability is real, let's remember that it's ephemeral. Linux is harder when you don't know how to use it, easier when you do know how to use it.

These days, the command line is only necessary for configuration tasks (and not in all distros) and that means that when Linux starts to come preinstalled, it's not really going to be an issue... BUT the thing about the command line is that when you don't know how to use it, it's a pain, but when you do know how to use it, it's like butter. The command line cuts through the most boring tasks, particularly when you add scripting... and the integration of the command line into the desktop gui means that it's always a choice. Therefore it's always a servant, never a master. It only helps, it cannot hurt.

Yeah yeah I know most people think the command line is poison, but for once, lets talk about reality instead of perception. The reality is that Linux is a more advanced operating system because it gives me two tools and allows me to choose which one I prefer on a moment by moment, taks by taks basis, while Windows generally hands me one tool. It took me a couple of years of using Linux to start using the command line, and now I promise you that it's going to save me countless thousands of hours over the rest of my computing lifetime, and until Windows matches it, I'm not going back.

Arthur Norton wrote:

Yes, I could spend time undoing the botched update that SUSE sent out but, quite frankly, I can't be bothered. Before 'openSUSE' came on the scene, I never had a problem with updates or incompatibility from one release to the next and I have neither the time nor the patience to debug the latest SUSE experiment.

(Sigh) You're talking about openSUSE 10.1, aren't you?

I was a SUSE user doing that period and, that was indeed a disaster. Some skilled users were able to get it running okay, but I went back to 10.0 while they worked it out.

OpenSUSE released a remastered version of 10.1 that worked fine, but it only came out a few weeks before 10.2.

It's fair for you to bring up the 10.1 debacle, it's not fair to use it to represent all of SUSE's history, or all of Linux. SUSE 10.0 worked great. The remastered 10.1 workwed great. OpenSUSE 10.2 worked great. I've switched to Debian, but I hear good things about 10.3.

Damn I'm late. When did Microsoft-watch.com become a comedy portal??

The bit about Linux not running any software you'd want, specially Office was hilarious! Props to Joe Wilcox. You should start touring, email me when you're doing stand-up in the South Florida area.

blackbelt_jones, my posting included the following:
'Before 'openSUSE' came on the scene, I never had a problem with updates or incompatibility from one release to the next'.

In fact, I was using the remastered version of SuSE 10.1 (which wouldn't load the SuSE-provided version of the nVIDIA driver, so I had to use the nVIDIA-provided one, which needs redoing after each kernel update) and couldn't switch to 10.2 because it changed the way that USB worked and that 'broke' VMware (it's apparently fixed now). My problem arose when SuSE released a kernel update that used gcc 4.1.2, whereas only 4.1.0 had been released to 10.1 users. Despite a bug report being logged ('you can compile the kernel yourself with 4.1.0' was the response) SuSE did nothing while I continued using 10.1. My graphics became progressively more unstable; so, I cut my losses and moved back to Windows XP. People who have come from a Windows environment expect things to work: they don't expect to be told to compile the kernel or to have their system stability compromised by a kernel update - Linux folks are only too ready to jump on Microsoft when it errs but seem unable to admit any fault in their own OS or distro.

Despite my experience, I hope that Linux 'makes the grade' because there's nothing like competition for concentrating the minds of suppliers and Microsoft has had nothing like competition for far too long.

Most of the arguments used are nonsense:
"1 - Use web design software, such as Dreamweaver.
2 - Use page layout software, such as InDesign.
3 - Use graphics software, such as Illustrator and Photoshop."
Dreamweaver works with WINE. But why use wine when there are great linux native apps around?
Dreamweaver: Quanta Plus
InDesign: I don't know this software, maybe scrita
Toshop: the Gimp

"There simply aren't enough applications along the server stack to the desktop. The one most businesses want is Microsoft Office."
Open Office? Star Office? Koffice?

Have you ever used linux?

"Linux can do that? Linux is notoriously fickle about hardware—and mere mortals shrivel up and die before the great altar to Linus Torvalds when installing hardware drivers. Vista drivers are easy compared to Linux."
This is a problem of hardware manufacture. Some just don't take time to build a decent linux driver(or just don't build it).
But most of the big brands(creative, nvidia, intel) have correct and easy to install linux driver.

Quote:
People never remember their history. The same complaints were made when XP came out. But Microsoft kept improving it and now it is the preferred OS, same thing will happen with Vista.

Stop it! Stop it! I can't stand all this gushing praise! We get it; you like Vista!

The enthusiasm of Vista users is getting just a little tiresome. They're always going on and on about how it's "not that bad". Or how it "actually works okay.", or how "it'll be fixed when they come out with service pack one." Damn, it's only an OS, it's not a magic formula! How "not that bad" could it possibly be?

; )

Incidentally, I don't remember my history. Did people actually refuse to buy XP when it first came out?

Well it's been awhile since we had an MS vs Nix war. Most people are biased towards the OS of their preference as it can be seen as an insult to put down someone's tools (it's not how big it is it's how you use it).
I use XP on my laptop and my main work desktop. I would go to Vista but I can't afford the extra memory. I run Ubuntu on my development PC at home which is running at 1.3 MhZ with 128MB ram. It's a slow PC but run Ubuntu fine. It came with all the developer applications I needed .... for free, and also recognised all of my hardware. It's been running smoothly for over a year now and I'd install it on my other PCs but I have a few games that don't work on it (only a few). I say for anyone that hasn't tried Linux - then try it - honestly it's worth it.

SJ

To Arthur Norton:

I've been using Linux for five years, and I, too, am used to things working. But there are always exceptions, and I'm sorry if you turned out to be one of those.

I ordinarily wouldn't advise anyone to update their kernel without a good reason, but if you really couldn't use SUSE 10.2, maybe that counts as a good reason. Your problem (to the extent that I understand it) seems atypical to me, but that doesn't mean it doesn't matter. No excuses offered, just my apologies as part owner of Linux. Hope you'll try us again someday.

Joe,
just thought you might like to see what some in the Linux community thought of this article, and your lack of knowledge in general on Linux.

http://www.mepislovers.org/forums/showthread.php?t=11222

There are a lot of Linux users who post on your site here in the comments, Joe. We expect better from you. Do your homework, learn something about how to use linux first. Maybe you will see why SJVN likes linux. This article is not up to your standards.

First, to give you some perspective of my MS knowledge - I have worked at the major MS confs in Europe and the US manning the 'Ask the Experts' booth of the MS pavilion. I have trained MS Gold Partners on new product releases. I have presented at MS HQ to customers. I am MS certified of various flavors including 95/98/NT4srv&ws/2000srv&pro/srv2003 and am also qualified to teach the above for MS.
I never liked Linux much. I know Windows really really well, and I just wasn't productive in Linux.
Then I needed to set up a couple of boxes for friends and family. They do a bit of surfing, and they need an Office stack. I had one luck at how badly infected their current XP machine was, and realized that Windows XP was not the answer. Vista was not either, for price and performance issues, and also the fact of how badly it fared on my own machine. (Hint for MS - don't tell licensed users that their license is invalid. It annoys us.)
To cut to the chase - I downloaded Ubuntu 7.04 which installed without a hitch, and found all of the hardware in all of the various boxes straight away. Quick install, and no bleepin' activation. Office suit available from the start. *Super* easy to get new apps from the Internet.
I call BS on the assertment that Linux has driver problems. My experience with Ubuntu is that it just works, no need to futz around with DLing drivers, it auto-updates, it does most of what I want right away.
In my work as a consultant I see that we are now reverting a lot of customers from Vista to XP. Is Vista good? I don't know, but right now I have very little (zero) incentive to find out.

Uhm, I meant to say that I had one 'look' at how badly infected their machine was.

Wow kill the messenger
http://marketshare.hitslink.com/report.aspx?qprid=5
if you care to notice vista's market share has gone up from .11 to 7.89 in one year. The "other" os section which covers linux and gone DOWN from 4.09 to 3.31.
http://www.linux-watch.com/news/NS6656004430.html On the server front Window Server is turning Linux into a dinosaur, window server 08, which is essentially vista, is likely to continue that tread. I wish the author had quoted some numbers.

What concerns me the most about this article is how it was completely opinionated to what the author wanted in an operating system. Therefore you didn't give readers any general userful knowledge, they just told us what they look for in an OS.

I like the quote "Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications" DUH! Does Windows run Linux applications? What's even funnier is that the author specifes MS Office as being the one he cares most about. There are many Linux alternatives that support MS Office file format. Aside from that Linux does run MS Office seamlessly under Wine!!!

One thing that bothers me about the perception of Linux is how people keep saying it's free, which is a complete misunderstanding of it. Technically you already own it (including developer rights). In many cases software that is free is not completely given away, for instance the right to copy and give it too friends (or to keep the version you are using). I feel this article is trying to compare two different cars, when really it comparing a car with a bicycle. The bicycle is faster and cheaper in congested cities but the car is better for interstate transporation (with the required licensing).

Comparing

attributeWindowsLinux

OS Lifetime

Till MS stops supporting it. They just had to extend XP. If they hadn't of done that reinstallation
of the software after 2009 would only last 15 days. You can through out your purchased CD at that time. Talk about time with the family... try throwing away a computer and building a new one at MS's
discretion.


Reinstall as needed. I've been using Gentoo/Portage and doing somewhat of a continuous upgrade and always have the newest version of the software I use. I've had the computer for 6 years and have been continuosly upgrading it (2 kernel changes).

Software Availibility

Buy whatever you need. Some GPL/free software.


Already own common applications... web, email, office suite, dev tools, windows virtualization,
raid support, server software, OS command line, lower tech games... others

Driver Support

normal things, including leading edge hardware drivers that
rarily work when supporting new hardware features


all normal things

Compatibility with other OSs

Intentionally attempts to be incompatible


Catches up with compatiblity with other OSs after EU, Sun... whoever sues the right people for
antitrust practices.

Price

$150 OEM and $1000 dollars of hardware to run it.


already own the OS, already own the Pentium II that can run it fine.

Installation Ease

good enough


depends on distribution, choose your ease.

I feel Windows is great for High-Tech gamers, new multimedia ideas (like DRM), leading edge hardware use. As the product being purchased funds an organized means of supporting the newest gadgets. Linux to me appears to be the choice for people that want to do what a computer does. My grandma should not be forced by MS to buy a new computer every 5 years when MS tells her to do so.

No journalism here. Just an opinionated rant. Of course, Many gnu/linux supporters are guilty of the same offense.

*This article is a joke, I just spit my coffe of the screen.What do window have ? one dimension desktop versus linux multiple 3D cube desktop system?.

dont write this kind of article again if you had never use linux.*

Go and get a linux live CD yourself and use it for at least a month for daily use before posting and joke and non true comment or artikel online. If linux is a commercial company, you would have been sued gulity for spreading false news to attack the company. The post your comments with true fact. You havent start to compare really compare linux from the real application that is already in linux with application in window (which they always copy linux application). The stucture of the file system of the linux and operating system.The hybrid(actualy monolithic, name is change to hybrid for sake of marketing)kernel of windows operating system and their design in comparing to linux kernel which is updated from time to time.

1.Never did you mention about Windows performance in memory management system comparing to linux operating system.

2.Actual number of top ten server occupied by linux and other operating system compare with windows

3.scalability of linux operating system and windows.

4.The way you key in you points in this article shows that you do not have actual or true knowledge in applications,design,security and performance of linux operating system.You might want to read and check out the 5 truth and myth of linux.

5.You may not know how the operating system itself
is design, which makes you not in the position to even post this article or comment.

6."The one most businesses want is Microsoft Office." Infact, linux has open office which microsoft tends to copy feature from them. Microsoft office 2007 is inteded to get rid of open office in linux.

7. Hello, which planet have you been living on all these year?

I agree on the Linux part.

BUt i disagree with the XP part.

XP is a _lot_ better than Vista.

Its still win-win for Microsoft, but if you claim Vista is better than XP than I must say... i think you are a troll.

Joe:

Despite whatever you might say, Steven J. Vaughan-Nichols has more credibility than you'll ever have, because he uses BOTH OSes ALL DAY LONG, ALL the time. When you do that, please post back on the subject.

Ubuntu 7.10 runs on more hardware than Vista (as tested by me installing both Vista Ultimate that comes with MSDN and Ubuntu on a dozen machines I have laying around). Vista only seems to run on machines listed as "Ready for Vista" which means a very narrow hardware profile and a limited set of drivers.

We dumped an HP Vista machine because it wouldn't work with a 3rd party mouse, Logitech web cam, or our printer. We got a Mac (this is the kids' machine) and haven't looked back.

Ubuntu running Wine (a simple install) runs Office and IE flawlessly.

Ubuntu has much better "eye candy" than Vista and supports multiple desktops much better as well.

Comparing Ubuntu with Vista using your criteria (hardware compatibility and software compatibility), Ubuntu wins hands down.

Comparing Ubuntu with XP, XP is better from a software compatibility and peripheral compatibility perspective, but runs on pretty much the same hardware.

A big bunch of rambling drivel. Is your objective to prove some point or just see how many superlatives you can put in an article?

...ask a 100 Linux flipper heads which distro is the best and get 101 answers.

I'm not hearing much defence of Vista in the comments. XP yes, Vista no, which has been my point the whole time.

Given the choice between XP and Linux, I will have XP on my main machine. I have too many programs I need that run on it. I do run Linux becuase I can see it is past time to learn how to do it.

But if Microsoft shuts down XP, and forces Vista down my throat, forget it. I am NOT paying an extra $1,200 a machine just to run the pretty interface. There is nothing Vista has worth the "Upgrade". Linux fits the bill quite nicely in that case, and the major software vendors are going to have to live with it.

PS - I DO NOT run Microsoft Office. I own my data and work, not Microsoft, and I have no intention of letting them keep it hostage. I have been quietly moving to Open applications on the Windows platform, Apache, Open Office, MySQL, etc where they are appicable. Are you listening Mr Balmer? You are about to put a very large hole in your foot.

IMHO, the time to knock off the Evil M$ Empire may finally be at hand. Vista and DRM issues may be the proverbial backbreaking straw for many users and the companies they work for. With the exception of SJVN and a handful of others, the mainstream PC press is bought (via subsidies, sometimes direct, usually indirect) by the folks in Redmond and their allies.

OSS people OTOH lack the financial resources to play that game, but here's how they can win, and this is something a previous poster hinted at: convert the business establishments that keep paying ransom via licensing to Redmond by using Linux as a (benign) virus!

Install the most Windows-like distro, maybe Xandros OCE, maybe Freespire, maybe an Ubuntu flavor. Set up the desktop to look as close to Windoze as possible, then do all your work (or at least as much as possible) on the Linux desktop. If you use OpenOffice, be sure to default file save formats to the M$ flavors. See how long you can pull this off before the friendly neighborhood net admin figures out what you're doing.

In our company, this is doable for all the non-CAD people. Our admin is pretty sharp, so he usually stops by within a day or two to ask what's up and admonishes people to not break anything, i.e. maybe start up a DHCP service and create havoc with network IP addresses. He would love to stop budgeting huge $ for annual licensing, though.

Sure, in lots of places there will be hardware driver issues, and there will be glitches when documents won't render 100% when an unsuspecting Windoze user opens them, but if we can get 99% there, sooner or later the corporate bean counters will wake up and start e-mailing the admins: "We can save how much by switching to Linux?!?!"

...GUYS GUYS GUYS (and Gals)!

This is a business, not a religious war! Come on grow up. Granted some of Joe's comments are open for debate, the fact remains which OS is on 90% of the WORLD's desktop?

If it wasn't for Microsoft, we'd still be in the stone age for computer development (why need 2 GB of RAM when 256 will do it?), and we'd have a lot of used computer software stores and eBay wouldn't exist.

For a business to survive, it needs a BUSINESS PLAN and an IDENTITY.

So what is Linux's identity? Um, wait Linux is worse than a schizo, it has over 100 identities...

Linux is not a serious business contender. While Novell is trying to make great strides with Suse, it is still not ready for the big league.

Linux was, and always will be, a kiddie propeller head OS.

What about Access database on Linux? Outlook manager? Linux and Exchange server.

Heck look at the keyboard. QWERTY is a bad keyboard, why isn't there a big uproar over that? IT was made to SLOW you down. Where's the flipper head protest on using Dvorak if they are so religiously festooned on having the best?

While I appreciate competition, Linux has a long way to catch up to Windows.

Like Apple, Linux users are a cult.

(And yes, I have all three - MS/Apple/KBuntu here at home). A side note for what it is worth - Apple and Kubuntu makes me feel like I'm back in 70's Communist Eastern Europe.)

...here's a question for the propeller heads.

I hire you to install, say Kbuntu. How or what guarantee do I have you haven't added a back door code to my system, you know open source etc?

Use the Bit count? I purchased (yes that swear word for Linux users) Suse 9.1 from Novell. I went to Novell's website and looked at the bit count. Then I looked at my Suse DVD. Not the same.

So even there I can't be sure I got the real thing.

"Linux doesn't run any of my Windows applications, which are the ones most people use�or want. ... The one most businesses want is Microsoft Office."

This is such specious nonsense I have no idea where to start. People want/use Windoze apps because that is what is SOLD and what the computers they BUY have on them and because Microsoft has the marketing muscle that Linux-based entities do not. Provide an _easy_ alternative and BAM! the monopoly is dead.

I can tell you this: if Quickbooks came out on linux there would be a mass exodus; that's the sole desktop business program that runs on Windoze that's necessary that doesn't have a completely acceptable alternative on Linux.

Tomax7 - you say "What about Access database on Linux? Outlook manager? Linux and Exchange server." Holy crap! There's MySQL and all kinds of other DBs! Who needs access? There's LDAP and soon will be a clone of Exchange Server (for those wed to this dreck) Why does Micro$oft have to define the desktop compute environment? It's done so by default; there are plenty of BETTER ways to do things.

But again, he with the best marketing wins; this happened a couple decades ago with the VHS vs. Beta and Windoze vs. MacOS. History merely repeats itself.

Now, kids, go back and read Neal Stephenson's "In the beginning was the command line" and get a sense of how we got here.

I think Joe is just a big blogger troll trying to start a fight !

Well he is right about Office, though. I quit using Linux a couple of years ago because I needed all the features of MS Office and Open Office wasn't getting it. But now I just run the virtual windows from Linux when I really need those features of Office.

Linux is WAY ahead of Vista in so many ways!

YIKES!!

I am a tried and true Windows fan but VISTA is barely a BETA version. I have had nothing but trouble with Vista. (My reliability rating is 3.2 with a new HP laptop)

The only reason businesses does not migrate to Linux is not the office suite or applications; it is the fear for unknown. Open office is a great replacement for MS Office, Eclipse works on Linux, networking ......

In my mind the question is when will VISTA become a stable operating system?

If it wasn't for Microsoft, we'd still be in the stone age for computer development (why need 2 GB of RAM when 256 will do it?), and we'd have a lot of used computer software stores and eBay wouldn't exist. quote

Actually, if it were not for MS, we possibly would probably be years ahead of where we are now. There ware several operating systems out there in the early years much more advanced. Bill's Grandaddy gave him a Mil, and he leveraged, stole, and bought out those better systems. So the last part of your comment is at best, MS FUD. We will never know.

I happen to be typing this on XP, which works well, I made my living off Computers for several years, and probably have about 10 XP licenses at the computer club I run. I can still make more on a windows install than a Linux install, but there is no question in my mind which is the more advanced between mistahVISTA and most modern Linux. And it ain't mistahVISTA

Could you please answer these two questions(publicly):

1. Do you have any computer related qualification that is not a Microsoft certification?
2. How much did Microsoft put in your pocket to get you to write this article?

Cheers

I've used Windows since early 1980's. I am now a Linux user. There is nothing that I did on Windows that I can't do on Linux: word processing, multimedia, and so forth. I think that measuring Linux against Vista is a waste of time. There is a lot of resistance among Windows users to Vista. I prefer Linux to Windows every time. The journalists who keep writing these articles just miss the point. In my view there are multiple communities of users. While I'm tempted to characterize the different communities, I'll avoid that and just say the endless drumbeat of Windows support in journals is indicative of the threat that Linux represents. However, Linux is just one part of the threat. I think Google is another, possibly even more important part. Will anyone be running application locally in ten years? I don't know, but I do know that the Nokia tablets, and similar Internet devices, along with Linux and Google and others are changing the landscape in exciting ways and Windows just seems like yesterday's technology both for Microsoft's business practices and for the lack of innovation in their systems.

Whenever I see an article like this one I have a question that I want to ask it's author: What's your point? Microsoft as we know it is already dead, they just don't know it yet. It got it's death sentence when Google announced it was joining the Ajax based, web application business.

Microsoft makes most of it's profits from the idea of distributed processing and desktop applications. The future is going to be thin clients and web based application servers. Love it or hate it, MS OS's will be overkill as thin clients. The Microsoft life support system is the ridiculously small to-home bandwidth in this country. When our bandwidth levels catch up to most of Europe and Japan the applications for thin client based workstations will mushroom. In this paradigm proprietary and open source applications will be competing on a level playing field. It won't matter whether the client is open source or proprietary. The server won't matter either, because the applications they run will be developed on cross platform languages like Java and Ajax. Like I said, Microsoft is already dead, they just don't know it yet. They will be as pointless as this article is.

Oh, for what it's worth: I used MS products for decades, from DOS through XP. I can tell you for a fact that there is nothing missing from the GNU/Linux distributions of today. Every application I need has an as good or better choice available to use. The only application that is seriously lacking, IMHO, is Scribus as a substitute for MS Publisher. MS Publisher is a great application, and although Scribus is good and getting better it is a long way from the power of publisher.

Gates is a thief. He stole it from Xerox and Gary Arlen Kildall (circa CMP 86). He can't steal or threaten the developers of Linux. I only have Windows XP installed on my computers as that's all I use at work....ooops we do have HP Nonstop technology and Cisco routers, Omg we do have Linuse in our JBM protocol converters. What am I trying to say...if you live in Iowa check out the 3 bills you can get from the lawsuit Billy lost. It's available to any Microsoft user. https://iowamicrosoftcase.com/secure/FileClaimOnline.aspx not sure if that is the best place to file, since everyone wants our money one should investigate a little further..... See ya..Pablo

So none of your software will run on Linux. Of course it won't! But, Linux comes equipped (no extra charges) with a better office suite (3 of them, even) and to get a Windows system with OS and add on software that will equal what Linux has for free would cost you over $10,000. And there are new and updated packages coming out all the time - for free. And if that's now enough, you can yourself, or have someone else, re-write it do EXACTLY what you need. Can you do that with a Windows package?

And what about the open source software that MS used and bungled when they started Windows.

Vista is overpriced bloat-ware with little added value to XP or any other operating system.

For the Linux nay-sayers...since they obviously aren't paying attention...

For ray-tracing animation perhaps you should check out NVidia's Gelato and the tools that it integrates with on Linux or perhaps Blender if you are less-inclined to the high-end tools. by the way note the licensing for most of these tools.

As far as support goes for these and most other open-source programs while you may not always be able to call someone you can browse and interact with other informed users on the supplied forums. More often than not the answer you are seeking is already there. More often then not the forum users are also more well informed than the Level 1 and Level 2 tech support staff that handle commericial software support.

For the artsy-fartsy crowd, yes, there are currently no Adobe killers, and yes, I've been a loyal Adobe fan for 11+ years, and yes some of the Adobe tools suite is one of the reasons I haven't converted ALL of the machines in my house to Linux. However all recent Adobe builds support the newest OS-X (which is really based on which OS?!?) therefore logic dictates it will only be a matter of time until they have some Linux tools available on some level...even if it includes a custom Adobe Linux distro for compatibilty sake. Beyond Acrobat Reader, Flash plug-ins, etc.

As far as getting work done, most of the commerical webfarms I've seen are virtualizing (downsizing hardware) with either VMware on Linux or this little thing called Xen which is progressing quite nicely, perhaps it's worth your time to read on Sun's recent advancements.

OpenOffice - 'Nuff said.

I could go on but you people who keep drinking the Microsoft kool-aid really aren't worth my time....remain in your ignorant state of bliss.

It sounds like someone needs a history lesson and/or education:
Fact: until windows 95, the mac was ahead. Windows wasn't even in the same ballpark. It was only by conicidence that when creative soundblasters or gravis ultrasounds became incredibly affordable by the mid 90's combined with windows 95 did MS finally pull ahead of the mac.
Fact: *nix had true pre-emptive multitasking before winbloat (hell the AMIGA in the mid 80's had it before there was a linux kernel even). MS had to rewrite their messy OS from the ground up as NT which evolved into 2000, xp and so on to add advanced concepts lacking in windows from the posix world.
Fact: MS copies other peoples IP. Anyone consumer can easily compare the features offered in even mac's past offerings including osx and compare to xp and vista and see this (unless you are incredibly blind or completely stupid that is).
Fact: MS copied java and it's jvm when they lost and were not allowed to control it like they wanted. They will claim that java was just a copy of C++, but not so..there were distinct differences, and furthermore C++ existed some 10+ years before java came along. MS with .net and C# (a blatant copy of java)--wow a whopping 2-3 years after java came out and they found out they couldn't control it. Yet another example of them copying IP and doing nothing original on their own.
Fact: MS has the following product development paradigm; Put out something incredibly crappy, and over so many years including non-ms ip influence, it finally evolves into something a little less than incredibly crappy (but just patched--under the covers it's still the same bloated crap).
Fact: *nix isn't going anywhere, so concerning MS server software; it's at the bottom of the totem pole when it comes to big business. No big corporation will ever be running their entire business solely on wincrap anytime soon. Maybe SMB and small mom and pop shops--but not big business or government.
Fact: government and most people around the globe prefer open document format--yet another thing MS is trying to control now.
Fact: the only reason MS has the support from hardware mfg's with driver support and applications and support is due to their monopoly on the desktop market--something they didn't obtain 100% fairly and did it on the backs of other companies they either swallowed up or non-ms IP that was incorporated into their latest products.
Fact: MS's idea of "licenses for linux" is the biggest joke of all. It's more likely MS themselves is in violation of IP infringement. There are indeed some people that actually think MS invented "SEQUEL SERVER" and that it's the "holy grail" in RDBMS--another joke. IBM invented SQL (which hasn't been pronounced SEQUEL by old-schoolers for some time now..simply "ESSQL"). Same goes for XML and a slew of other technologies MS has either tried to or wants to control or link to it's messy OS
Fact: in a patent war, MS would lose so badly, it would be rather entertaining. The only thing MS has ever done that's semi-original is direct x and visual basic--both of which in fact didn't originate from inside MS at all). It took outside IP to tell them what they needed or develop it for them. This continues to this day (except for their messy os of course, which is why it's so messy).
Fact: MS is blocking DX10 from xp not because it can't do it (they had numerous updates to DX since the original on windows 95)--only because they know they can tap into the power user/game market and force them to buy vista for the next generation games.
Fact: you don't need DX10 (or DX anything) to fully utilize features in today's gpu. DX is just an API.. many demo writers have been known to hit the hardware themselves, and there is always openGL.
Fact: DX* doesn't make the hardware work better..the hardware and mfg's dictates what it can do, it's only a layer on top of it to ease windows programming. Sure nvidia or ati might be more willing to support DX and features tapped through DX, but that's only because MS has a monopoly
Fact: MACS are still preferred by joe user because they just work and are easy to use. And since OSX have a bsd unix foundation..
Fact: *nix can indeed catch up to MS on the desktop provided enough time and corporate involvement. A lot of big companies as well as government are fully behind *nix still. MS just has a monopoly..nothing more.

You could go on and on and methodically post example after example of why MS is ahead and is currently easier to use, but he bottom line nut shell explanation is simply MONOPOLY. You don't see the EU suing canonical/ubuntu do you? They sued MS. hah! MS tries to control everything that isn't their own IP while claiming "patent infrigement"..pathetic and their lawyers are obviously clueless as well. The only reason they tried to go after these BS linux licenses is due to the fact they are in fact scared of linux's potential and trying to control it to retain their monopoly..period, end of the discussion on that one. thank god there's freebsd and solaris too. And, I would not be so suprised for MS to finally break down at some point and create their own distro of finally fully adopt posix.

*Tell me, why on gods green earth would someone want to pay more $ on vista when they can do the same graphics eye candy with the current XP--or do it on *nix with beryl and have it look just as good or better?

VISTA: it's all about eye candy and bloated with DRM stuff. Power users that want the most out of their high power hardware investment should avoid the bloated vista at all costs.

I just put Slackware Linux 12 on an old 500mHz machine with 256 MB RAM because Windows XP was running so slowly on it. Vista? Wouldn't even bother to try it, especially since I would need to buy it first. Linux runs great on the machine and I was presently surprised, as a new KDE user, to find just about everything I need already included: browser, office software, messaging, graphical ftp client, etc. plus a somewhat intangible fun factor.

Linux feels like a sports car. It's not missing windshields and doors, as mentioned in the article, but it does have a five-speed. And it sure is worth learning to drive.

I always find it amusing to read comments about which operating system is "better" or can "kill" another. What ever happened to suitability to task? Saying Linux/Vista is better than Vista/Linux is like saying a Ferrari is better than a pickup truck - not if you have to go to Home Depot and pick up a load of drywall, it isn't!

As I see it, there are three major markets for OSes: server, office productivity, and power user. The power user generally depends on a few specialized applications, so they have no choice but to pick the OS that supports them - in this case, Windows or Mac. I have this situation when I try to use PhotoShop, for example.

The server market isn't as clear, since Linux and Windows Server are both fine OSes. I run my business on providing Linux virtual machines, so I know you can get a lot done on Linux, and at low cost with easy administration. (Try running a full web store on 256Mb of memory under Windows Server!) I haven't had that kind of experience on Windows, but I respect that others have. And, the development tools on Windows are great, especially for the less geeky of developers. So I'd call it a tie here. The market seems to bear that out.

Finally we come to the office productivity desktop. I've switched to Linux because I can get everything I need done with one easy install of an OS (PCLinuxOS) and there are less bugs and crashes than in Vista+Office 2007. I even use it on the road and for my web development. Vista is constantly complaining about this and that and requires a lot of handholding, which is why I dumped it. So in my personal case, Linux wins over Vista.

So which is better? It depends! But an increasing number of us are starting to make our choices not on what's better, but who we'd rather be dealing with: giving, loving, passionate Linux developers and users, or a faceless tyranny that charges a lot for the privilege of giving you all the responsibility over your operating system but none of the control.

-Eric
http://www.enkiconsulting.net

I've been a Windows user for a very long time and currently still use Windows XP. I'm going to buy a new desktop system very soon and I'm installing Linux on it. Why? Because I've already traded MS Office for OpenOffice.org - I'm sick and tired of MS Office security problems combined with high cost. Outlook and Internet Explorer got the axe in favour of Thunderbird and Firefox for similar reasons, although I also discovered to my great delight that I like them a whole lot better too. I've long since ditched Adobe Reader in favour of Foxit Reader because I could no longer tolerate pathetically slow Adobe bloatware. Throw in the high costs of running Adobe software and I tossed it all out - been using GIMP and Inkscape for a long time already. Microsoft scripting? Tossed it in favour of Perl. I don't use Windows Media Player, Windows Firewall, WinZip, nor a host of other Windows-only applications. The list goes on. And then one day Vista came out, loaded to the gills with anti-consumer "features" and I knew that XP was the last version of Windows I would ever use. 'Round about then it also occurred to me that there weren't many applications left on my XP desktop that aren't available on Linux. So that leaves Windows' easy-to-use-easy-to-administer polish, right? Nope, I've about had it with Windows problems that I can't fix because of undocumented, hidden, proprietary, and/or generally poorly designed configurability. I've administered FreeBSD servers for eons and so I *know* how good it can be. And then a friend let me play with his Beryl-equipped Ubuntu desktop and that stuck a fork in any attraction to Vista's UI bells 'n whistles. Yes, I'm still using Windows XP, but believe me when I say that it's a great relief to know it's coming to an end soon. Sure, I know I'll have a different set of problems with Linux, but I'm more than ready for the change and I'm not afraid of it. And the many people who rely on me so heavily for Windows support? Most will eventually be moving to Linux too. Why? Because as of Vista, I don't do Windows.

My 80 year old mother was having too much trouble with windows. I gave her an Asus eee notebook attached to her keyboard and display. She now browses the web in firefox, uses thunderbird for email and writes her occasional letter in open office. As far as she's concerned its an easier to use windows that boots faster.

I am converting our entire office to linux desktops, all people do is use spreadsheets and documents, for which they will use open office, send and receive mail (Thunderbird) and run our web deployed apps in Firefox. Maybe not the best gaming platform in the world, thats why game consoles were invented.

@ evan:
"linux is a decade behind windows for the average user"

Technically true still, but not an entire decade. Furthermore so what? Windows was a decade behind the mac until win 95. This isn't the 90's anymore and canonical's distro has clearly shown that anything ms can do can be done cheaper better and faster.
As far as linux spreading fud..excuse me? Pull your head out dude. MS is the only one guilty of spread FUD. That's not my opinion, it's simply a fact and common knowledge.

Open source is the future, period, and everyone should have a right to free software. The free software foundation and GNU are still dead right with that paradigm.

As far as defending vista or vista vs xp.. windows users (and especially the power users that want the most out of their hardware investment) should stick with XP and/or use it in combination *nix. Vista is bloated down with drm and license crap and it's pretty ironic that the power users will have that power cut dramatically to accomodate the overhead of vista. Power users invariably include gamers these days as well.

gnu/linux: it's free and you OWN it.
MS bloatware: it's not free, and you don't own it at all. That's right. You won a license to USE it only.

You want pay for M$ programs?, do it! Do you want to use free software??, do it!!

The point is: ten years before nothing talk about this.. windows will die??... now 2007 this discussion are at the press, school rooms, univeristis, tech forums, IT bussiness, everywhere!!!

Not all consumers need Office, Acad or Macromedia software.

with linux I don't need pay for any software, I don't need any antivirus or antispyware!!!!!

If you want throw away your money good for you!!

greetings from Uruguay

Fact, Fact, Fact.

Those are nice facts, but you missed one important one...

FACT: Microsoft Windows is on 85-90% of computer around the World.

Must be a reason. Sure marketing, but there must be something more - simplicity maybe?

Fact still remains, we got Windows.

Like Beta VHS, why did VHS win? If you said Beta lost because it was proprietary - then what is Windows?

Linux has no identity, suffers from fragmentation and instead of working with Windows, Linux users try to bash MS at every turn.

That alone tells me of the quality of Linux users.

first of all, the facts quoated above are all valid points.

>FACT: Microsoft Windows is on 85-90% of computer around the World.

as already stated--because ms has a monopoly on the desktop market only, not because it's better per se. simplicity? i have to laugh. if you want simplicity get a mac. why do you think people prefer apple's products..they're quite simple to use, macs included.

>Fact still remains, we got Windows.

yes it's not going anywhere anytime soon. so what? we got windows and it's on more desktops. that doesn't mean it's better. it's more prevalent, people are more familiar with it and as a result of the prevalance there are more apps and developers. that's the ONLY reason MS is ahead is because of it's desktop monopoly, not because it's better than anything else out there or anything else isn't up to par. the facts quoted are dead on correct.

>Linux has no identity, suffers from fragmentation and instead of working with Windows

there are indeed multiple distributions, but that's because it's open source. that's the advantage and why it's grown so quickly. how long has windows been in a useable form comparable to a mac of the 80's? a little over 10 years, thats how long. how long has linux had an xfree86 desktop via kde/gnome? about the same amount of time. look at where it's at now. on par easily in features with windows. it's just that ms was out there already while linux is newer. ms is not ahead because it's better, it's not better, period. it just has a bigger user base. this was already mentioned in the above facts as well. you have said nothing to refute it.
as to your vhs/beta analogy--beta probably DID lose because it was specialized more. vhs was probably cheaper and easier to produce. the analogy isn't 1:1 because both formats were proprietary, each having it's share of market and partners behind it. vhs ended up being cheaper and possibly this helped persuade rental shops to push vhs more..thinking more people would have the cheaper vhs vcr. all about marketing--which is exactly what ms is all about. marketing and fud. really ms is like the vhs, and beta like the mac of the 80's.

Joe,

I think you got it all wrong. What makes you think Linux wants to replace Windows? Is it the hype created by users who think corporations will drop their Windows investment for something free all of the sudden? Linux is a choice and it's not for everybody.

Granted, I love the fact that I can install any distro along with open office on my friend's PCs without feeling guilty.. It does make me feel a bit "socialist" though, feelings!

How do you spell "Troll Bait"? That should have been the heading for this piece of "journalism"

Given the quality of Vista, Linux does not have to be a "Vista killer." Nor does MacOS. Vista is doing a great job of convincing IT executives that it's not ready for prime time.

Not only is the Linux desktop better but the Ubuntu desktop puts it to shame.
Just off the top of my head...
Let's see it is infinitely more configurable
It is infinitely more customizable
You can write your own code to make it your own
You don't need a mini-mainframe to run it
Oh and did I mention Linux is FREE

I sure wish LINUX would eclipse Windows. I have been trying for years to make a go of the Xandros version of LINUX shelling out a lot of money for their regular upgrades.

And now I am beginning to get Vista on newer PCs I am buying, and not Xandros or any other version of LINUX.

There are two reasons. My most important applications are not available in LINUX format. The main exceptions are Thunderbird, Firefox, and Acrobat. Attempts at virtualizing with Win4Lin have failed miserably so far. Reason: Installation of the virtualization software fails because inconsistencies in the installation instructions and the OS. Also, the PC slows down a lot without any explanation. Basic features, like the kicker, crash or hang, etc. There are different distribution packages that will not necessarily install automatically on the wrong version of LINUX.

The other reason is that the Xandros OS is not anywhere near as stable as windows, Yes, that is true. I hate to admit it. Not enough with all the instabilities, there is apparently a huge amount of coding time yet to be done to provide the error trapping along with clear and understandable, truly context sensitive error messages. In other words, all too often LINUX hangs and doesn�t tell me anything and in the rare occasions when it does report something, the message is inscrutable and, at times in incorrect English.

I do read many comments about missing applications software. But I never see anything about the extremely serious incompleteness of the error trapping and context sensitive messaging code. Nor do I read about the frequent hangs, freezes, and slowdowns. Having written this, I must compliment the good guys at Xandros, who always try to help weed through the arcane, undocumented labyrinth of "features" that have caused problems with the OS.

Again, I fervently wish LINUX would win. I will also continue to try to use Xandros. But Xandros is not anywhere near complete. They have made great strides. Still, without an incredibly HUGE amount of additional coding, LINUX simply can't compete with XP or Vista or the MAC OS.

BTW I used to be taken aback by the semi literate language in the comments inside the windows code. If you go into LINUX you find comments written in less than fluent English by coders who are obviously very much imbued with, what they think, is fluent English.

Plenty of comments to comment on here.

Mel says: If it wasn't for Microsoft, we'd still be in the stone age for computer development ...

I was using a 32bit 2MB WIMP GUI Ethernet workstation for office work in 1983. It cost $9K and is still as fast as most of my friends PCs that have cost them multiples of that in upgrades since Microsoft took us on the great leap backwards.
If MS hadn't hijacked all the development money for their 16/32 bit clunkers, we would have had 256bit by now.

You may ask why we would need 256bit. The answer is in the microcode word length that enables high level functionality for interactive natural language, 3D vision and hand written document recognition. Even Intel had to include 128bit registers for simple MMX extensions.

Eric Brooks says: I've used Windows since early 1980's.

MS only started in the early 80s and they certainly did not have Windows then. The only windowing interfaces available at the time were XEROX WIMP clones running on UNIX or a proprietary OS. Most of these machines were multiprocessor, cost between $9K and $50K and had sub half second interactive response times.

tomax7 says: FACT: Microsoft Windows is on 85-90% of computer around the World.

Steve Balmer was recently quoted as saying MS didn't have a monopoly as Windows was only on 97.5% of the world's desktops, not 100%.

With 97.5% and the best desktop system in world why would they even bother with all their anti Linux FUD.

There is so much in that article for me to go after.
But being that most of my work involves repairing windows computers for businesses after they get screwed up, I really loved your device driver comment. If I had coffee at the time of reading it, I'd probably be in the same position as you with your screen.

In the windows world....say one updates their motherboard. I'm not talking graphics card anymore, this is big boy time now, we are doing the whole motherboard, video card and all. It's all different now. What happens when you stick your old windows drive on this new system? With any luck in the known world, you'll have to call up Microsoft and sit there talking to the computer, or the Indian woman and have to type in the codes and read the codes, not generally fun. Worst case scenario is the blue screen error message and your hours of attempts in vain to search the internet for support on how to make it better.

Alright, so now Linux, best case is it just works, this usually happens now, especially now that Ubuntu (and i'm sure others) boots into a low graphics mode, you choose your new Graphics card, everything else generally works, if not, it'll be taken care of when you run the Restricted Drivers app, absolutely worst case: I installed xubuntu on my cdrom-less toughbook's hard drive using an Intel Core 2 Duo system with nvidia graphics, popped it back in the toughbook and had to go to a command line and change the graphics driver to the right one...a quick search on the internet told me how to do this (since it's been awhile since last time) After that, everything worked fine.

Oh yeah, if you just can't do without windows software, I hear crossover office is awesome for this...although I've got a windows (.exe and all) softphone running on my linux box at home to connect to the phone server at work and it works better then when I tried to install it on windows...

I tried Vista a few times (had the unfortunate experience of having to install and set it up for clients) and after you get over the fact that they used OS X and Linux as their design base, you are overcome with the fact that....wow...this actually sucks more then what I expected. Oh sure it's got some cute features that might be cool...but beyond that, I'll stick with my spyware free, virus free, just works, does what I need and then some, and then a little more Linux system...kthx and all that.

I am a third generation MCSE and a Systems Engineer by trade. I have been building PC compatible computers since 1988 and now I build and support computer networks. The individual who wrote this article is what I would refer to as a 'technical f-cktard'.

Windows Vista blows goats. It is the worst OS offering out of Microsoft since Me, maybe ever, and I've been using and evaluating new versions of Windows since v2.0 and Win286/386 came out. Hardware support is abyssmal. The interface is confusing and completely dumbed-down counterintuitive. Removal of OpenGL support destroyed backwards compatibility of thousands of games. The new UAC "feature" is insanely annoying and makes the running of thousands of programs on Vista all but impossible for less experienced users. The redesigned Windows Explorer itself, the heart of the interactive user-facing interface, is absolute junk - finding anything has become cumbersome for experienced Windows users. DRM and bloatware not to mention visual eye candy that's really not all that stunning to begin with (even on cutting-edge hardware) chew up clock cycles and reduce the machine to a virtual self-masturbatory device.

I could go on and on about the new Vista paradigm and the concept of whomever dreamt it up and then brought it to fruition and how much crack they had to have been smoking, but I won't. There is precious little positive improvement to speak of when comparing XP with Vista, and SO much good that they destroyed in the process.

I used Feisty Fawn for a while a few months ago, and there was much to praise there. But, alas, I am a Microsoftie to the core, disallusioned since I waited six years for them to release this steaming pile of crap they call Vista. I need to keep up with M$, I have been institutionalized and my employer has no plans to move to anything other than M$ products. And I haven't nearly been as angry about the changes M$ has implemented in Server 2008 (e.g. Longhorn) as I have in the desktop OS debacle they call Vista. But this is one of the most ignorant 'articles' I have ever read from this publication.

...developers, developers, developers, developers.
...developers, developers, developers, developers.
...developers, developers, developers, developers.
...developers, developers, developers, developers.
...developers, developers, developers, developers.
...developers, developers, developers, developers.

...sorry couldn't resist.

Hey silly question. Itook a couple of VB6 classes, so i'm no developer, but Vista has been Microsoft's longest running development OS - 6 years almost.

What have they been doing down in Redmond?

"why do you think people prefer apple's products..they're quite simple to use, macs included."

...spoken like a true cultist.

What 'people' are we talking about?

The 5% of the market types?

You shot yourself in the foot my friend.

...speaking of macs, just did the latest update on the wife's imac tiger.

110MB update -that's a big update!

Now it won't boot up, just twirls in the grey apple screen. don't i have to hold the apple key down to get into repair mode? don't work.

just bought loepard and heard it has a lot of sec problems.

So doesn't matter what o/s one has, they all got probs.

I have to say that I have just spent the better part of a week rebuilding a Windows XP machine from scratch with a new motherboard with all the apps and hardware peripherals I had on the old one. I rebuilt from scratch because my five year old install of XP was "rotten" and the thought of trying a "Repair install" on a new motherboard gave me the screaming heebeegeebees. Repair installs are the kind of torture I wouldn't wish on my worst enemies, even Bill Gates. But you know what with Linux you can just unplug the hard drive, move it to the new mobo and off it goes - you might have to reconfigure the graphics using the command line, but with the latest Ubuntu even that is achievable from the GUI. And don't kid yourself that Windows doesn't require command line use - there are literally thousands of fixes that require the user to open up a command prompt or edit the registry in some obscure way.

Anyway, I digress - what I wanted to point out is that even after a week of on and off work on my machine it still doesn't recognize my SATA drives properly, gosh it was real nice that I had to install a floppy drive to even attempt to make it work (but it didn't). I'm told that Vista fixes those problems, but gosh you know SATA drives have only been around for two or three years now - just why is it that Microsoft can't fix basic problems like this with the installer? I sure hope XP SP3 gets it right... or I may have to make Linux my permanent resident OS on my home machine (like it is on my laptop and at work).

...while you have a good point Moschops, but how many people need to go around changing mobo's?

Yes i know about upgrading to vista is a prime example.

At the same time how do you protect your investment from piracy?

I adore watching paper MCSE's and other former or present helpdesk types and future JC Penney employees try to even talk intelligently about UNIX. I'd say keep eating the Microsoft dog food and enjoy. It is good for you.

Remember when win95 came out? There were lines around the block for people to buy the first official copy. Then came win98 and the lines got a bit shorter. Win2000 even shorter. XP a few eager people. Vista, no one came and rightly so. Microsoft has no claim to fame, unless you count all of their illegal and near criminal business activities and their third world software. You would have thought that by now they would actually know what they are doing... Selling third rate software that requires first rate hardware to run it. Sorry, no Vista for me, I'll leave that to those kool-aid drinkers out there who love to be losers and throw good money after third rate software.

Windows is still the best choice for the vast majority of users. I build my own PCs, but I don't write scripts, I don't write software, I don't work in a server room. I've tried installing Linux on a variety of PCs at home, I'll tell you, each time was a trying experience that left me unsatisfied with the results and unable to make it work properly. In contrast, I purchased Windows XP for the last PC I built, before SP2 came out. It installed without a hitch, loaded all the drivers I needed, and has never crashed once. SP2 installed cleanly also. I have been running XP on my PC at work for 3 years without a single crash. Once in awhile an application crashes, but XP has been as solid as a rock. I use a wide variety of software in my job, everything from high-end publishing software to Solidworks, and there's little or nothing available for Linux to match my applications. I will be building a new PC next year for home, and it will run Vista Professional with the Aero interface. I expect it will run most if not all of my current software and will be as stable as XP. Linux is fine for hobbyists and for servers, but totally unsuited for the average user.

Linux may be no Vista Killer but Vista is the best thing to happen to the MacIntosh in a long time. Half of our developer group is clamoring for MAC's for their next scheduled upgrade instead of PC's running vista. Up to this point we have been a solid Microsoft shop but Vista is a non-starter for us. The MAC OS is now fully unix certified so we get GUI ease of use as well as a battle hardened kernel. Since our office tools are avaialble on the MAC (Office, Dreamweaver CS3, Entourage (for Outlook) it's a no brainer. Plus, instead of having to buy expensive add ons for backup and SSH/SCP tools, and disk encryption, they come built right into the OS. The Mac adds you see on TV tell our story.

Joe:

Thank you for a great article. Our company is making the switch to open-source. I have been one of the few IT people saying it is a bad idea. It is nice to see someone else with the same reasoning.

A few months ago I read an article where the leaders of Linux complained because most developers wanted to build the kernel, few developers wanted to build applications, and no one wanted to test. Scary!

Our company has saved thousands of dollars by using freeware, but wasted even more money on salaries for IT personnel to “dink-around” with plug-ins. Freeware isn’t free. It cost more in the long-term. A simple cost-analysis will validate the cost differences.

Our new open-source development team has spent the last 6 months saying things like: I can’t get the plug-in to work on my computer; there is no information on the internet to support this library; I’m not going to develop anything until we have a stable and productive environment; like everyone else I am “fudging” my numbers to make it look like I am productive; we are still evaluating different freeware programs; etc…

Linux and open-source may work for some people, but not in our business environment. Take a minute to evaluate total cost and support options.

Mike

WOW.....the Pro M$ people are at it again. I recently bought 4 laptops preloaded with vista. I have since formatted and installed SUSE on all of em. Sorry Bill, i'm not impressed.

Both articles have their merits but unfortunately there is no reliable supporting data for either argument only opinion -- as I see it. What it really comes down to is the abiliity of a software package (operating system) to support the business, or user, needs. Why do people use MS Office -- probably because it is the software the folks started out using. Why do people use Windows -- it comes on the PC. If you take away pirated versions of Microsoft software, what do the numbers look like. I would bet the numbers would look quite different. (No reliable statistics available. The expectation is a presumption on my part.)

I have Vista on my wife's laptop and I have Ubuntu 7.10 on mine for different reasons. My wife likes the idea of using Windows because everyone uses it. I use Linux and open source because I am tired of paying Microsoft for stuff I don't even use such most of the functionality in Office. The OS's both function good enough. The Vista interface is less than intuitive. Figuring things on Linux is challenging if not overwhelming at times. As soon as you get some supporting documentation rather than opinion, you and sjvn get back with us.

Have a good Thanksgiving

Mike

Please people. My users have enough problems with Windows XP. If I tried to put a Linux PC in front of them they would mutiny and hang me from the rafters. All of you pro linux winners have to get out of your little closet and actually see what your users are doing with their computers.

As Joe said Linux is nowhere near Windows in usability and as far as I am concerned, on a business PC, nothing is more important. If your users can't use it, you are out of business.

I do not run any copies of Linux on any of my home PCs. I have one machine with Vista and two with XP.

I have nothing against Linux and have played with several live CDs. A fine OS, not without its own nuances and issues, but in my experiences no worse than anything I have encountered in XP. I am just not ready to switch yet.

But Vista? I am unimpressed, VERY unimpressed. It takes a lot of memory and drive space so I can do what I always did before. One reason it consumes more resources is that I have to run Virtual PC with a copy of XP in it to run all the apps I use - some of them are M$ apps. (How come no one ever factors in the cost of a second M$ OS in the price of Vista? It is practically required.)

Vista is forever telling me �Windows Defender� is turned off. Well the service is running, it is using resources, and it has prevented things from happening because it suspects the activities, all while I am harassed about it being turned off. I have tried turning it On and restarting services etc. - no change.

I cannot count the number of times the sound card driver update has �successfully� downloaded and installed only to see a window afterwards telling me that it has failed, with no explanation why.

M$ Dynamics AKA Great Plains(GP) is a classic example of some of the trouble you can run into. We have the latest version where I work, which has at least some Vista compatibility, but that is not the version we are using. We are down-level one version until all the �plug-ins� developed by a third party are ready for the latest version. Thats ok, it has been mentioned that you can use GP on Vista... No harm no foul, I gave it a shot.

It installed just fine. But we are using a version on the server that has two Service Packs in it. I would not be allowed to connect to the sever until my version is identical to the one on the server. One slight problem � M$'s Service Packs for GP violate the new security in Vista and cannot be installed. The problem is DEP which can be turned of by editing the boot.ini... except that the boot.ini is no longer a text file and must now be edited using a tool that makes Edlin feel quite 21st century. (For the young Windows users Google Edlin and return when the pain from the embolism subsides.) For those who find themselves in a similar situation there is a NON-M$ solution which you will need to locate online, download and install, there may be several by now, but I use EasyBCD.

I did the smart thing and setup a dual-boot so I can reboot without DEP when I need to.

I have crashed Vista twice in the five months I have been using it. It is not impossible to crash, but it sure is tougher than previous versions of Windows. But it has not been a user friendly experience. I had to turn off UAC, as a network Admin it was likely adding actual hours to my day with all of its requests for permission.

When I first received the machine it would connect to my wireless home network, which did not broadcast its SSID. Overtime the machine refused to connect to the network more and more if the SSID was not broadcast. Now it won't at all. According to tech Support the only solution to the problem is to format the drive, run the restore disk(s) and see if the problem persists. WHAT!?!?!?!?!? And reinstall every single app, again, from scratch, edit the boot.ini again? They are positively MAD! So I always broadcast my SSID instead which upsets me.

Unlike the Linux live CDs I have tried I had to install an Office suite rather than use one of the several that came preinstalled. I get some of the best technical support out there by doing the same thing I would do if I ran Linux � post questions in forums. There are plenty of very knowledgeable, helpful people out there for everything, even M$ apps and OSes.

I run OpenOffice on the Vista machine and no one at work knows or cares.

I have two machines which need only the simplest of Excel installs and even less intricate functions. Did I purchase two copies of M$ Office Basic for these machines? No. Calc will do just fine. The guys using the machines think they are using Excel because it looks just like Excel to them, for what they do.

Three of the servers run Windows, two run Linux. No one knows, no one cares. They just want their apps to work and their files to be there.

I am not a Zealot for any camp. I just want the best tool for the job. I will use Linux where it is better suited, I will use Windows where, in my estimation, it is required. If we had Desk Toppers here I would probably be pushing for Macs for them.

Where I draw the line is Vista. I have the only machine running Vista in the building and it is going to stay that way for a LONG time. I do not need the headaches of having to explain to the CEO why all of the new PCs require the extra expense of a second Windows OS. And at our company they would. We have some apps that are not going away any time soon. Legacy apps that do not run on Vista, and one that will not run in a VM on Windows due to the lack of USB support � a requirement for the app.

The bottom line folks, is to use the best OS for the job � in your EDUCATED opinion � and not just the one you are rooting for, or like the best.

People keep debating, mostly along the lines of Open Source/Closed Source. The issue at hand is actually Open Mind/Closed Mind.

drew

Sorry for the issues with dashes and quotes in my previous post folks.

drew

I will say that I run both XP and Vista, both at home and at work. I like both. They work as they are supposed too. I will also say I am an IT pro.

Linux, otoh, from MY experience SUCKS. When monitors don't display correctly, can't chnage resolution, NIC's are no where to be found and what's sound??? Ya, linux is real useful.

And wow, OpenOffice installed. BFD. What a pile of crap that is. Is Calc capable of being a COM server or user? Haven't seen it yet. And I do write to Excel in a number of apps.

Speaking of apps, Windows may not include a whole lot (notepad/wordpad/paint/email/etc), linux doesn't offer a whole lot more eiter.

Then there is all the hardware that requires windows. Including my high speed scanners/printers/jukeboxes/etc.

And why do I want to type arachic and mysterious commands to edit ini files. What a lot of fun THAT is. Windows makes it so much easier to make modifications. And hardware generally works oothb in windows, with little, if any, trouble.

Linux, mya be fun to play with a live cd from time to time, but that's about as far as I want to go with. As far as ever becoming the number one desktop, that's just a lousy bit of wishful thinking.

I was in the junkyard recently trying to get a part for my vehicle. At one point I needed to remove a screw from a tight spot.

I have a tool that is perfect for the job. It has the tip I needed at a 90 degree angle to the handle... it was at home.

If I had brought it with me the entire job would have taken at least twenty minutes less and I would have not cut my hand.

Sometimes it really sucks when you do not have the right tool for the job.

PaleGhost stated, "Is Calc capable of being a COM server or user?"

My reply, simply put, is I didn't need any of that this time.

I needed almost nothing at all. Some formating, a few formulas, and the ability to print. Should I really have to buy (Office 2k3) Word, Excel and Outlook just to do that? No. I have never paid $100.00 for a screwdriver and I didn't think the company I work for should either.

Typing semi-colons instead of colons is not going to kill me.

Part of doing my job right is deciding when to throw money at the problem, and when there is a cheaper solution that does not sacrifice any of the required functions and increases the learning curve only slightly. Calc fit the bill nicely. It won't always and when it doesn't or can't I will not hesitate to use Excel, or whatever else might be the most appropriate.

The problem still remains: People keep debating, mostly along the lines of Open Source/Closed Source. The issue at hand is actually Open Mind/Closed Mind.

I apologize in advance for any further problems with Quotes, if any.
drew

Mr. Wilcox-

It would help me to understand your comments if you could tell me which distributions of Linux you have used. None of those I have used fit your description.

Support is through the world-wide community of user groups and from the programmmers themselves. I can't imagine what problem you had that couldn't be solved with the help of these extensive resources. Could you tell me, please, what it was?

OpenOffice.Org substitutes perfectly for Microsoft Office and is free. It has a database, word processor, presentation program, draw program, and math equation editor. For Corel-level image processing there is the (free) GIMP program.

The Thunderbird e-mail program has proven to me that it offers more features than Outlook. Again, its free.

FireFox browser is a hands-down winner over Explorer. The add-ins avaiable are truly wonderful. Again, all free.

I am not a Windows- or Microsoft-basher. However, it sounds as if you might me a Linux basher....

Please prove me wrong by answering my questions stated above.

Sincerely,

Michael Ostrowsky, R.Ph.

MS should stick with their xbox360, halo and media center these days where things are less likely to go wrong.
Ooops..too late. They shipped defective xbox 360's anyway :p

As for people not wanting to use linux because it's more difficult or foreign than XP--that will change with time. In fact it already has. Ubuntu is just one of the first to make it more user friendly than ever, and Dell offers this as an option. There is no reason why this can't continue. MS didn't get user friendly and where it's at overnight, they've been working at it since before windows 95. With win95 the finally got something akin to the mac of the 80's and early 90's, but it took them nearly 10 years to achieve it. Look where Linux has come since about the same amount of time. You have a UI now that's at least as good if not better than anything MS has. People just aren't as aware of it yet. But with ubuntu and Dell and more companies behind it, more developers will come on board and there is no reason at all why it can't catch up to MS in the desktop market. But as this happens more and more, MS shows their true colors and uses fud and under the table tactics to try to retain their monopoly. MS is all about marketing these days and trying to retain their monopoly, because if they play fair they know they will eventually lose out to the other companies out there./

How much did Microsucks pay you to write this bunch of lies, idiot?

"Linux can do that? Linux is notoriously fickle about hardware—and mere mortals shrivel up and die before the great altar to Linus Torvalds when installing hardware drivers. Vista drivers are easy compared to Linux"

Please try linux before you write any article. I bought a "naked pc" (If that is what you call) and installed XP, vista and ubuntu in it. Ill make a slight comparision.

XP installed in 45 mins. Lifetime is 1 hour without a firewall and antivirus. Nothing works.

"Vista drivers are easy compared to Linux"

With a default XP install, I get the following features.

1. Sound doesnot work. I have to install the "Reltek driver"
2. Display is not smooth. I have too install "chipset installation utility"
3. I cant play any video. I have to install media acceleration driver.
4. LAN doesn't work. Have to install LAN driver.
All these on a intel chipset.
5. I have to install drivers for my "winmodem" which is supposed to be a "windows modem"
6. IE6 which a beautiful crap.

And I have to install all these every 6 months.

With a linux install I get,

1. People complain about mp3s not working in linux but in windows, it is even greater as no sound works.
2. Display is smooth with good graphics.
Please see http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=E4Fbk52Mk1w
3. I can play media even when the graphics are running.
4. LAN, bluetooth works.
5. It installs drivers for my winmodem ( Windows modem and not a linmodem )
6. There is no better browser than firefox.
7. You dont have any viruses.
8. It can run for years together,etc,etc....

And the biggest advantage of windows is " windows costs and linux is free" :)

I have to spend " 399 for office, 399 for windows, 50 for a antivirus software, 100 for nero, ? for photoshop, ? for this, ? for that"

But with linux, I have better software for free.

As for vista, it is an acronym for "Virus Infections Spyware Trojan Adware".

Mr. Wilcox-

On November 19th I asked you two questions:

1) Upon which distribution of Linux were your comments based?

2) What support issue had you experienced with Linux which was not solvable with the world-wide Linux support system?

If Linux were truly as bad as you opine, tell me please, why do millions upon millions of intelligent people use it daily and enjoy it so much? Perhaps because they ARE intelligent?

If you, in fact, have had no in-depth personal experience with Linux, you cease to be a journalist and leave in question why your editor prints your diatribes in the first place.

Could you please have the courtesy to respond and prove me wrong? Otherwise I must believe what your detractors are accusing you of in some of the other more heated comments preceding and following mine on the 19th of this month.
Thank you.

Michael Ostrowsky, R.Ph.

Mike Ostrowsky wrote: "Upon which distribution of Linux were your comments based?"

Hi, Mike,

Sorry, I didn't see your earlier comment. I've used Red Hat, SuSe, Ubuntu and Xandros.

And my comments are based on what would affect the typical consumer, not the technical user that knows his or her way around the command line. When drivers are supported, three of the distributions deliver really well. However, if a driver isn't available with the distribution, discovery and installation is, in my experience purposefully wearing a consumer's hat, much more difficult than Windows.

Mac OS X and Windows already set a high standard for driver installation. Linux isn't there yet, on the desktop, for the average consumer.

Most of the commenters defending Linux are not typical, everyday users. For me, Linux is fine. But I'm not the typical user, and I presume that neither are you.

Joe

...JOE!

I think one of the first commenter's summed it up the best.

Linux isn't a Vista killer, it is doing a fine job on its own.

Son of ME II

Hi there, Joe-

Thanks for your response. I am now encouraged that you just may be a reasonable fellow. Your presumption that I am not a typical user may not, however, be accurate. To me, a kernel is what's left in the bottom of your popcorn cup and C+ is the grade I got in algebra once upon a time.

You might avoid some of the more heated responses you received here if you would make the perspective from which you are writing clear at the outset of your article. Better late than never, I say.

Your experiences with Linux and drivers may have to do with a common misconception that many Windows users bring with them, that is, don't attach any hardware until your software is fully installed. At least with Ubuntu 7.1 (my distro of choice), you should install the OS with all possible hardware in place so it is recognized at the outset.

My second question still stands though, about support. Any comments?

Thank you for the dialogue. I appreciate that you probably have better things to do than defend yourself against sometimes hostile readers.

Mike

Basically use what you like.
To me the best thing Linux can be used for is Surfing the Internet running in your CD/DVD drive "Live" No install, No virus's on your Hard Drive, go anywhere on the net you want. Visit those virus, spyware, malware infested sites that no Windows PC would ever dare to visit. Then when you've had enough, reboot back into what ever Operating System you like.

OK a tip for Windows Users, do a websearch for TEENpup Linux which has support for Flash, Java and more all ready to go in a live CD. Runs on Old and New PC's easy to use.

Joe Wil Coxsuck his Microsoft Bosses. His smiley face says it all.

Joe,

I have been using Windows since it was first introduced. I think it was 3.1 but it was a long time ago and I am over 45 so it's a blur.

I am NT(XP) Certified, am A+ certified and was a Dell factory repair person for a number of years. I am a bonafide Windows professional capable of correctin most Windows woes.

I have also been attempting to use Linux since I first discovered an early Red Hat kernel in 1994.

I have attempted many times to make the jump to linux, but always ran into a hardware or software hurdle that was deal stopper. No more.

I am now running Linux Mint on my main machine and do all my daily work with it; word processing, spreadsheets, web design, audio editing, label printing, photo management, photo editing etc. Linux has arrived and I don't have to worry about viruses, security updates, licenses etc.

I also have a Vista box, Mac OS X (G4) and another machine running Ubuntu 7.10 but I come back to this pretty Linux Mint distribution.

For the last few years, I would find myself almost being able to make the transition to Linux, but then a web or audio project would pull me back to Windows.

I now live in Linux.

For those who claim that the MUST HAVE WINDOWS to do their daily work; GROW UP! Try to be young enough to learn something new. No you can't have Dreamweaver or GoLive or InDesign, but those are massive pieces of bloatware anyway that actually prevent you from learning Web Design Code. I have them all and I LOVE not using them.

In Linux I have Blue Fish, NVu, Kompozer and other cool HTML and web editing tools. I also have GIMP which is comparable to PhotoShop, Scribus which is a great layout program and Audacity for editing audio.

If people are ready for a change, Linux is ready for them. And the price is right. How much are you willing to pay for the headache called Vista?

Val Davis
vald@valdavis.com

I use Linux and Windows and basically I can do most of what I need to do in Linux as I do in Windows. Some anonymous guys mentioned about programs not available in Linux that are not professional grade. Boloney. CAD/CAM? Qcad. Photo Editing? Gimp. Word Processing, OpenOffice, Koffice, Abiword, pick and choose. Linux is more than capable to be a desktop operating system for a while now, and I do not think that anybody here should dispute that.

Vista? I was reading Maximum PC the other day and there was a section about how to tweak Vista to be bearable. This is not a Linux Fanboy publication, but what's mostly a PC gaming magazine. This should give you an idea on the amount of bad press out there about Vista. It's not the Linux fanboys doing it, it seems that Vista trashing is a neat thing to do nowadays. You just have to read this article. "Vista will run with adequate RAM and CPU". Ok, so basically, if I do not want to upgrade my computer, I can only run XP and being that XP runs well in a modern computer, and that home users are not going to upgrade their computers, it's going to be a tough battle to Microsoft to sell Vista, other than the hard core PC user.

But.. he's right... Linux will not kill Vista. Vista will fade away the same way as Windows ME did.

That's it.

BTW, this was typed on an old laptop running Windows NT 4.0.

PD 2: Linux is free I know. My Windows licence is included in the cost of the hardware and as time goes by, the licence's cost vanishes.
???????

PD 3: No, I don´t need open source. I am not interested on modifying the applications.

I don't modify them either, but I would like to know whether they work as advertised. Can't have accurate peer review without source code!

http://forum.thedjproject.com/forum/viewtopic.php?p=93

rosie@triad29.com

rosieponder@verizon.net

Not only do they try to rip you off, they send your email out and you get a ton of junk mail.

TEENpup 2008 released 3rd of March 2008
Perfect Live Install version of Linux for older PC's comes with flash, java etc built in ready to go! Hurry! download from www.puppylinux.ca/teenpup

okay you have some valid points but do you think windows is so much better,vista is nice yes but it is a fat bloated system. why do you need a fat bloated system and spend hundreds if not thousands to run it
the best part is that windows 7 is around the corner that should tell you something about vista
would you like to go back the Microsoft monopoly again

Good info and well presented, for more quality free info on pc security related issues have a look here.

satellite TV cable deal. get free 4 room installation...

Hello I have fond a lot of useful and interesting files on http://newfileengine.com.Visit and enjoy it!