View Single Post
Old 23rd November 2003, 02:21   #38
zetafunction
Member
 
Join Date: Nov 2003
Posts: 99
Re: Windows rulezzz.. Linux sucks

Quote:
Originally posted by Thomas12yrold
Hi all,

Haha Microsoft Critics .... How very stupid for a bunch of guys to criticize Microsoft...

Why do most people in the world have Windows on their computer? Why are 85% of the applications in the world programmed for Windows (let it be Windows 9x, Me, NT, 2k, XP, 2k3 or even Windows Embedded CE)? All applications are first devoloped for Windows and then ported to Linux..

I do agree that Linux and Unix both have stable kernels ... Windows also has a decent kernel.. DECENT..

Wwwwwait a minute... Havent you guys heard of the Windows Longhorn OS.. I'm sure WinFS, Avalon & Indigo of Longhorn can very easily beat up Linux/Unix... Longhorn is 64bit/32bit compatible .. I'm sure capable of ANYTHING Linux or Unix can do.. and a very very much more.. Though I've not checked out the Longhorn ALPHA or else BETA.. I can make out its goin 2 be a rock solid OS ... (I'm already goin through the Programming of a Longhorn App and XAML with Longhorn code in VB .NET, VC# .NET etc. rocks!!

Linux's so-called "Gnome" is no match for Avalon or even for WinXP's GUI

Haha, Linux's CharUI ... blah ...

Newayz I'm 12 years of age and ... going & growing ... I'm almost an MCSD (a lil more exams to go) and doin my MCSE in a few..

reply via mail (preferred) or else reply to this thread
12 years of age... and growing... shall we say, more ignorant. You need to learn how to back up your claims.

The applications are written for Windows, because more people use Windows. Windows was around first, and has had plenty more time to stretch its legs.

Longhorn is nowhere close to release status. Have you ever read of the enormous performance hit that WinFS causes right now? Yea... thought you might have missed that. That's why people who are using Longhorn have to disable WinFS... and so this "great new feature" is currently not of any use. And there's also this other nifty filesystem out there called ReiserFS...

Rock-solid OS, ha. Mm-hmm. And secure, right? Who are you kidding? Your typical Windows user doesn't want to be bothered with the details of making their box relatively hack-proof. They want something that just... works. And Windows does just that very well-it "just works". Unfortunately, it's also very capable at being full of security holes. I personally haven't gotten a virus or worm on my Windows boxes yet, but I know plenty more who are not so fortunate. I typically get a couple IMs from friends each week who've gotten a virus or trojan or worm. Should it *really* be that easy to get one? I'm not saying that Linux is perfect either, but many distros achieve the goal of "secure by default" much better (Lindows being one exception). And IIS. You seem to have missed all those Unicode exploits a while back. And why check sizes? Let's just hope everything fits in the buffer!

You clearly have a lot to learn still. I will admit that Windows XP has improved a lot and even surprised me sometimes. But it's certainly not "the superior OS" you seem to think it is. It clearly has many issues of its own to overcome. Frankly, I dislike people who are completely one-sided in these sorts of arugments. XP has its set of strong points, and so does Linux. But to claim that one IS the best--that's complete ignorance.
zetafunction is offline   Reply With Quote