Linked by Thom Holwerda on Sun 21st Jan 2007 17:42 UTC, submitted by danwarne
Windows "It's all too easy to get caught up in the million dollar marketing engine as we approach the consumer release of Windows Vista, so lets not forget that it isn't the second coming, and by all counts is an upgrade you can do without. There are many lists out there on why to get Vista, so here's ours on why not to." Update: I have written a rebuttal on my weblog. Update II: Another rebuttal.
Thread beginning with comment 204067
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: wow
by Haicube on Sun 21st Jan 2007 20:27 UTC in reply to "wow"
Haicube
Member since:
2005-08-06

Sorry to say this. I'm hardly a fan of Vista, and completely agree with the 10 reasons stated in the article. Bu I definitely don't agree with you.

This sentence "despite the availability of (better) alternatives..."

Assuming XP is not sold anymore and OSX isn't available for any normal PC, I can't really see this "alternative" that is supposed to be better. Alternatives maybe, but hardly real alternatives for a whole lot of people. Some groups that come to mind are "gamers", "Officeusers" (which actually have tried and partially use OOo (such as myself) and realize it lacks a tremendous amount of features), "Designers" (which need Photoshop/Flash etc etc because photoshop is defacto standard like it or not) and say about anyone in need of specific software not available on other systems (Gee, that's quite a few).

It's getting better, it really is with web based apps and some alternatives getting more software every day.

But at the end of the day, what is "better" is what gets your job done! That means Vista will be THE alternative for say 60%+ of the computer using world. What I'm saying is there is LACK of ANY real alternative for a whole bunch of us

Edited 2007-01-21 20:29

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 3

RE[2]: wow
by superstoned on Sun 21st Jan 2007 21:05 in reply to "RE: wow"
superstoned Member since:
2005-07-07

i beg to differ. i agree many people are locked in to Windows pretty well, microsoft has succeeded there. but for many users, an average Kubuntu desktop can do what they need, and better than Windows XP (or Vista). linux' biggest drawback is that it's different, not that it lacks features.

Sure, the linux desktop isn't beter at everything. but for everything it does worse than Windows, there are three things it does better. and not just the maintenability, stability & security things you often here. The basic desktop stuff is better too. compare the KDE or Gnome menu to windows. if you are looking for an image editing app, where would you look? i'd say "graphics", not "Adobe"...

also plug'n'play is working better on linux in many cases. yesterday i gave a presentation, and my (very old) laptop had never seen an external screen. man, was that boring. i had already opened Kubuntu's screen config tool, and was prepared for some VI fun. but when i plugged the beamer's cable in, the screen just showed my desktop. no configuration at all, just working. well, i've worked at an helpdesk, and we got several ppl each day asking how to get windows to show their presentations...

really, i know it's hard to switch to another operating system, even if it's better than what you have. i have gone through that as well. but don't say just because it's different, it's worse...

sure, the linux desktop can't provide for everyone. but why should it? why not give ppl a choice? let the adobe photoshop lovers use a mac (it's superior in that area anyway). let game lovers use Vista and let everybody who wants to work on a pc use linux...

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 4

RE[3]: wow
by arielb on Sun 21st Jan 2007 21:39 in reply to "RE[2]: wow"
arielb Member since:
2006-11-15

it's very hard to install any apps in linux. It should be as simple as going to a website, download app.exe and it appears on the desktop. Doubleclick and it installs.

But you know this won't happen and to me that is the 'fatal' flaw that prevents widespread linux adoption. There's also very little incentive to develop commercial software because most distros come with lots of free full fledged apps.

Why bother trying to invest in developing an app when the free version is 'good enough' and bundled with the OS and your app is hard to install? And if it's a kde app, people will want it for gnome and vice versa

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 0

RE[3]: wow
by hamster on Sun 21st Jan 2007 21:51 in reply to "RE[2]: wow"
hamster Member since:
2006-10-06

"sure, the linux desktop can't provide for everyone. but why should it? why not give ppl a choice? let the adobe photoshop lovers use a mac (it's superior in that area anyway). let game lovers use Vista and let everybody who wants to work on a pc use linux..."

Funny... i like to think i get work done on my pc's and yet i don't have linux on any of them. And none of them will be running it in the future either.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 0

RE[3]: wow
by Anonymous Penguin on Sun 21st Jan 2007 21:59 in reply to "RE[2]: wow"
Anonymous Penguin Member since:
2005-07-06

"let game lovers use Vista"

While I agree with your post, I have to disagree with that sentence. I have a whole bunch of Chess games and they other don't work in Vista or work poorly.
I suppose the same is true for many other games.
I believe the best OS for gamers will remain XP for quite a while.

Reply Parent Bookmark Score: 3