"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.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2006-10-06
"well, point is, the basic interface is better in many regards. this lies in the small things, like the scrollwheel working properly, drag'n'drop and copy-paste working much more efficient, window management being far superior, things being more consistent, menu's much more usable, things are more configurable, stuff like that. you'd have to use KDE for a few months to be able to grasp these things, if you're used to the windows interface, with all it's limitations you don't even notice anymore, it's pretty hard to even understand these things. "
I'm more a fluxbox kinda guy then KDE. But i havent used KDE in a very long time so perhaps it's time to get it a spin to see.
"let me assure you, you might feel a bit lost in a Linux desktop - but a linux user is much more annoyed by windows. you can do most things in linux you where used to in windows - and a whole lot more. but a linux user is used to a desktop with a working scrollwheel and many other interface stuff which is almost absent in windows. and i'm not even talking now about the tedious way of managing software in windows, having to go to websites and manually having to check individual applications for (security) updates and new versions, having to check for virusses and spyware, stuff like that."
I have used linux quit a lot actually... been managing a few Redhat linux servers in production and i'm not to impressed. Same goes for fedora which btw double the ram windows server 2003 needed to run proberly. So it's not because i don't know my way around a linux box it's more that i actually have used it and don't see it being the silverbullet solution to all problems.
At home i have one computer running a windows. Win2k. I've never been a xp man. Oh and ofcause X isnt for linux only. And the other things you mention as being an advanted of linux isnt linux things only either.
Edited 2007-01-22 13:57
Member since:2005-07-07
sure it's not all 'linux only'. some advantages are X (better windowmanagement), most imho desktop stuff, not commandline (eg not relevant for servers).
i don't know much about gnome, but i do know KDE is, compared to XP, easier to use, and much more efficient once you get to know the 'shortcuts' (non-literal sense). for example - if you have a upload-file box in konqueror, you can just drop an icon in it (even if it's from a zipfile or from another remote location). in windows - you can't, and have to navigate to the file from the file dialog. do that for 20 files, and you'll really prefer the KDE way.
drag'n'drop of tab's, split-screen in konqi, individual window shortcuts, always-on-top button on windec, multiple desktops (and drag'n'drop of windows between them), scrollwheel actually working (scrolling of tasks, tabs, volume, font size, horizontal scrollbars, inactive scrollbars etc) - it's imho stuff like that which shows KDE is much more mature than XP.
if you're not used to a working mousewheel, you don't notice the fact it works. but when you ARE used to increase volume by just hovering over it's icon and scrolling, when you ARE used to be able to scroll between windows, tabs, or in in-active windows - you sorely miss it. same with drag'n'drop, middle-mouse-paste, clipboard history (searchable) etcetera.
everyday tasks become a pain in the ass on windows when you're used to a much more comfortable environment. i've been feeling really stuck with a non-working launch-command menu item (you can't start most stuff by just typing their name, you have to add the location) and all other convenient KDE stuff.
Member since:
2005-07-07
well, point is, the basic interface is better in many regards. this lies in the small things, like the scrollwheel working properly, drag'n'drop and copy-paste working much more efficient, window management being far superior, things being more consistent, menu's much more usable, things are more configurable, stuff like that. you'd have to use KDE for a few months to be able to grasp these things, if you're used to the windows interface, with all it's limitations you don't even notice anymore, it's pretty hard to even understand these things.
let me assure you, you might feel a bit lost in a Linux desktop - but a linux user is much more annoyed by windows. you can do most things in linux you where used to in windows - and a whole lot more. but a linux user is used to a desktop with a working scrollwheel and many other interface stuff which is almost absent in windows. and i'm not even talking now about the tedious way of managing software in windows, having to go to websites and manually having to check individual applications for (security) updates and new versions, having to check for virusses and spyware, stuff like that.