Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 16th Jul 2006 21:07 UTC
Windows has more information and screenshots on Windows Fundamentals. "Microsoft Windows Fundamentals for Legacy PCs is a Windows-based operating system designed for enterprise customers with legacy PCs who are not in a position to purchase new hardware. WinFLP provides the same security and manageability as Microsoft Windows XP SP2 while providing a smooth migration path to the latest hardware and operating system."
Thread beginning with comment 143733
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
by cchance on Mon 17th Jul 2006 04:16 UTC
Member since:

LOL I'm so sick of people saying that execs and techs only use windows because they dont like linux... i hate to say this but the fact is hardware failure and the effects of it on an OS are not basis for one OS being better than another, use good hardware and it isn't an issue.

The reason people use windows isnt because they dont understand how to use it... the fact is they don't want to! Linux over complicates things, people say microsoft has holes my god has anyone looked at the patches released for linux? Why is it things must be over complicated in linux, dont say that their are GUI's because even the GUI's appear that they were back from 1995... And don't say "ya well real techs can use the Console", because the response to that is WHY SHOULD I HAVE TO!?!? Because it makes me "3l33t"? I don't want to be 3l33t i just want my server to RUN, and not have to worry about some trivial kernel patch screwing me over.

Reply Score: 1

by Blackhouse on Mon 17th Jul 2006 08:30 in reply to "LOL"
Blackhouse Member since:

Great, server admins that don't want to understand Windows and just want it to 'run'. This is exactly the reason why reason Windows is such a big security liability in a lot of companies. It's not (just) the OS, but it's the incomptetent admins.

Reply Parent Score: 5

RE[2]: LOL
by el3ktro on Mon 17th Jul 2006 09:22 in reply to "RE: LOL"
el3ktro Member since:

I fully agree. If you just want to drive around a car, then you don't have to know it's technical details. A secretary using a computer to write letters etc. just needs to know her office application - for her, it's no difference if it runs on Windows or Linux. In fact I believe that Gnome would be a better alternative in this case than Windows, because it's much easier to handle, has less options, looks nice, has a good usability etc.

But if you don't want to just drive your car, but "administrate" it, then you have to know the technical details. The problem with Windows is, it hides most of the technical details, doing everything automatically. This may work in many cases, but it also doesn't work in many other cases - and then the problems start, because the Windows admins (not all of them, but many) don't know the technical stuff, and don't know what to do except clicking a few checkboxes.

On Linux, you're more forced into learning the technical details, which makes you a better administrator imho, since you know how it works "under the hood". Managing a midsize or large company network isn't easy, you *have* to know the technical details to do it right - and for this, Linux is a better alternative imho, because it doesn't hide technical things. On modern distributions, you can do 99% of your work graphically, but the reason so many Linux admins *still* use the console is not because they want to be 1337, but because it's often more efficient. The few Linux servers I'm managing here in my workplace all have webmin installed, but still I do most tasks trough SSH, because it just works better for me. But you don't have to.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: LOL
by tomcat on Mon 17th Jul 2006 17:15 in reply to "RE: LOL"
tomcat Member since:

I dunno. Win2K3 is pretty darn secure out of the box.

Reply Parent Score: 2

by agentj on Mon 17th Jul 2006 10:13 in reply to "LOL"
agentj Member since:


I'm a tech guy (embedded programmer), but I want to spend time doing my work instead of upgrading to the latest version of kernel/KDE/whatever. I use console-based tools most of the time, when I want to get work done quickly (ssh connection to the linux pc - Midnight Commander and mcedit ROXXX ;) ). Linux PC works also as a server and router. I prefer YaST to get configuration done quickly instead of messing around with files in /etc.
I use Windows for movies, mp3s, playing games and browsing the web and linux+windows for programming. I've tried several linux & *BSD distros running on laptop, but they all sucked with hardware support and USABILITY, which most of the zealots forget.

For old PCs - even Windows 2000 does the job better when it comes to usability compared to the latest linux distros. Everything works out of the box. I used to use Win2k on P150/32MB RAM/ATI Mach 64 1MB and it was quite usable. Now try running KDE or Gnome with comparable USABILITY - it's SLOOOOOOW.

I'm not against linux & linux distros, but some people tend to overestimate their capabilities.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: LOL
by Daniel Grimm on Mon 17th Jul 2006 12:53 in reply to "RE: LOL"
Daniel Grimm Member since:

If you're used to using Linux it's not a problem. Same's with Windows. Thing is, most people are only used to Windows and don't understand why they should learn something new. It's not necessarily harder to use, it's just quite different.

Reply Parent Score: 1