Linked by Eugenia Loli on Thu 16th Mar 2006 01:00 UTC, submitted by Not_My_Real_Name
Windows The director of platform strategy at Microsoft, Bill Hilf has lead the Linux and open source software technology group at Redmond for the past two years and formerly headed the global Linux technical strategy of IBM. He says reliability and predicability are the key factors which give Microsoft's software the edge over Linux and open source alternatives.
Thread beginning with comment 104864
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
is that right?
by eantoranz on Thu 16th Mar 2006 01:40 UTC
eantoranz
Member since:
2005-12-18

Now, with all due respect... that's BS.

Well... I have to agree on something. Windows is much more predictable if he meant something like:

- Within the next 6 months, I'll have to reinstall my Windows on my box from scratch.
- I'll have to use a full blown antivirus + antispyware + antimalware in order to keep it from falling pray to script kiddies (and that of course will mean my super-dupper pseudo-server will behave just like a 486).
- I'll have to pay hard money for my licence.

That's pretty much predictable.

Reply Score: 5

RE: is that right?
by Wrawrat on Thu 16th Mar 2006 02:11 in reply to "is that right?"
Wrawrat Member since:
2005-06-30

Funny, I don't have any of these problems. Of course, it's not like I am going after the trouble... Being paranoid probably help.

I don't necessarily agree with the article, but the most predictible thing in all this is: with a touchy subject like that, there will always have BS from both sides.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE: is that right?
by setuid_w00t on Thu 16th Mar 2006 02:11 in reply to "is that right?"
setuid_w00t Member since:
2005-10-22

You don't have to reinstall windows all the time if you keep on top of viruses and spyware. Virus scanners are resource hogs and scanning for spyware is a nuisance.

I think it's also incorrect to say that you *have* to pay for a license when you consider the number of people who don't. I'm pretty sure that in Microsoft's eyes a non-paying Windows user is still better than a non-paying Linux user.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[2]: is that right?
by situation on Thu 16th Mar 2006 04:55 in reply to "RE: is that right?"
situation Member since:
2006-01-10

Personally, I find that a fresh install of Windows XP is indeed necessary. What I mean (and I believe the parent post meant as well) is that things just start to clog up in the registry after a while. Ever want to test out a buncha apps, so you install and uninstall something like 30-40 of anything (games are normally bad for this).
Ever do a before and after look at the registry? Even after the "uninstaller" ran there are keys left over. After a while (6 months to a year) I find this slows things down enough that it's worth a reinstall.
Total system ownage is not the only reason to need to reinstall, you must consider the slow degrade that I've witnessed in XP (unless you just use a base set of apps and never uninstall anything).
Just to compare, I find Slackware does a great job even with a relatively simple package management tool. I can install a package, remove it, and do an slocate to ensure that everything is truly gone (and it is).
Just my view.

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE: is that right?
by d0nk3y on Thu 16th Mar 2006 02:46 in reply to "is that right?"
d0nk3y Member since:
2005-12-15

*grin*

Yep, you can categorically say that Windows is reliably and predictably going to continue to provide an annoyance for most of us.

And you can trust that it will continue too.

;-)

Edited 2006-03-16 02:46

Reply Parent Score: 2