Linked by Thom Holwerda on Tue 28th Feb 2006 18:20 UTC, submitted by JustThinkIt
Windows "There's a lot of confusion about Windows Vista these days. Many online discussion forums have a great number of users who express no desire to upgrade to Vista. Sure, we've all seen the screenshots and maybe a video or two of Vista in action, but for many it only seems like new tricks for an old dog. Yeah, it's got some fancy 3D effects in the interface, but OS X has been doing that for years now, and it's still Windows underneath, right? The sentiment seems to be that Vista is another Windows ME. Perhaps part of the problem is that people just don't know what Vista has in store for them."
Thread beginning with comment 100013
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:

I personally don't care much about the next Windows version, I stopped using Windows a long time ago not only because of technical problems and security concerns, but also because I didn't feel free: free to tinker and configure my working environment the way I like, free to install software without having to worry about oppressive EULAs, free to dispose of my data as I wanted (without being tied to certain applications), and so on.

Sure, the "free as in beer" side of things has had, and still has, its relevance: the simple fact that I can download one ISO image of Linux and install it on as many boxes I like still impress me when I think of it (in the 80's things were different ...).

Even now that Windows has reached decency with the XP version I still feel uneasy when I have to work with it (sometimes I have to). So it doesn't matter how much eye candy, technical prowess and computing qualities Microsoft puts into Vista, that's a no go for me anyway, anytime.


Reply Score: 5

JamesTRexx Member since:

That's about the same reason I started using FreeBSD at home. I wanted to be able to get rid of annoying stuff that comes standard with the Windows install.
The only way XP has been bearable was because of being able to create a custom install cd with nLite.

Reply Parent Score: 3

sappyvcv Member since:

You can use most open source software on windows, in case you didn't realize that ;)

Reply Parent Score: 0

raver31 Member since:

You can use most open source software on windows, in case you didn't realize that ;)

What has that got to do with the original post ?
The guy was saying he wanted FREEDOM, not FREE BEER.
He wanted to be able to do, what he wanted, how he wanted, in whateverway he needed, with the system.

It is the whole thing that needs to be free. Not just the add-ons.

Reply Parent Score: 2

hal2k1 Member since:

"You can use most open source software on windows, in case you didn't realize that ;) "

Thank goodness one can use some FOSS software on Windows. This does at least offer people who are game enough to risk running on the vulnerable Windows platform at least some interoperability with other platforms.

Here are just a few examples: one can use or Abiword on Windows and gain document format interoperability thereby. One can download and use Inkscape for Windows to support viewing and creating SVG format files. Adobe offer for download a generic postscript printer driver for Windows that lets Windows users print to a networked CUPS printer. Ghostscript, Ghostview and GSview offer tools for PDF and postscript support that Windows itself lacks entirely. And so on.

I believe there is a codec for Ogg Vorbis for Windows Media Player available from third parties, even though Media Player itself makes the claim that Ogg Vorbis is not supported and refuses to download a codec for you.

One can even get Windows to be able to read/write Linux partitions:

The common theme here is that Microsoft themselves offer absolutely none of these cross-platform interoperability solutions. There is absolutely no interoperability offered by any of Microsoft's own client-side products.

Can you spell "lock-in"? (Or at least recognise the blatant attempts at lock-in).

Edited 2006-03-01 09:52

Reply Parent Score: 3

chiwaw Member since:

"free to install software without having to worry about oppressive EULAs, free to dispose of my data as I wanted (without being tied to certain applications)"

You do realize that what you said doesn't make any sense, since you can use all open source software within Windows. So what you said sounds like :

"In Windows I have access to softwares from the group A and from the group B. I didn't felt free, hence I switched to Linux where I just have access to softwares from the group B."

Of course there is good reasons to switch to Linux. But not the ones you said.

Edited 2006-03-01 03:36

Reply Parent Score: 2

Rehdon Member since:

Huh? It's your reply that makes no sense to me. First of all, I made some points and you're not replying to all of them: so if you're talking about "reasons I give to switch to Linux" to dismiss them please try to answer to all of them.

Second, and most important, all the applications and utilities I use under Linux are free as in beer and as in speech, while when I used Windows my software consisted of a mixmatch collection of free software, freeware, shareware and proprietary software. Now I can enjoy (and sometimes suffer because of ;) a free environment, from the OS to the last applet in my panel. Can you do the same under Windows? I don't think so.


Reply Parent Score: 1

HappyGod Member since:

What difference does it make whether or not you will use Vista, or whether you like free software or not?

That's totally off topic and irrelevant. The article is exposing the new features of an OS. Whether or not you will use it for reasons other than its technical merit doesn't really matter.

Try to separate objective analysis from your idealistic view of the world. I appreciate these articles because I like tech. I like to read about SkyOS even though I don't (and probably won't) use it.

Windows is a good OS, and it's used by truck loads of people so it's interesting.

Reply Parent Score: 1