The first officially-released build of Windows XP SP3 has surfaced, with 1073 patches/hotfixes and several new features. This build has been made available to testers as a part of the Windows Vista SP1 and Windows Server 2008 beta program and is available in English, German, and Japanese.
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:2005-11-12
that is why people are not switching to Linux even though it is free.
People don't switch to Linux for many reasons. The most obvious one is they can't buy a typical Windows program like Office or TurboTax and install it by clicking next, next okay in a wizard dialog box. There are all kinds of attempts to make this functionality work but it is still not as easy as installing on Windows. You could make the argument that apt-get and yum are superior -- which they are -- for installation and updating but the average Windows user doesn't know how to use these methods. Change is tough and people don't like to do it unless they have a convincing reason. Even saving money falls flat as an argument. What is the cost of Vista $200? For the Windows user to be able to use existing software and not have to learn a new way to use the PC is a *huge* motivator. Also, if you are a diehard gamer XP is just so much more practical. Ever try and run Quake 3 virtualized? I'm not really a big Windows supporter I just am practical about why it continues to be so popular.
Member since:2005-07-01
Member since:2007-10-07
i dont see the point buff.
how you can say that is easy insert an cd chose the installer or do several clic on the next button against only select the package on linux distros today without do next,next next.
I understand that the average user has some fears to try linux, and they already don't know windows, and they dont want to know. but that's not the point here.
Member since:2007-08-22
You do have a point on the installation and availability of software. Yes, Linux does have a lot more software available, but it's not necessarily the same software people want. For instance, my wife wants certain software that isn't available on Linux so I can't fully migrate my home systems over to Linux - I have to have at least one Windows system. Fortunately, Win2k does the job so I don't have to spend the outrageous amounts Microsoft wants for the OS's now-a-days.
As to Quake3 - why are trying to virtualize it?! It's available for Linux natively.
http://www.freebsdsoftware.org/games/linux-quake3.html
So is Quake2 and Quake, and a number of their variants, along with Decent and its variants, and Doom and its variants. Id software is pretty good with Linux. :->
Member since:2005-07-06
Compatibility is *very* important hence gradual changes.
Compatibility has nothing to do with the lack of traction; the lack of traction has to do with the lack of middleware which companies need. The cause is also sitting on the shoulders of companies who refuse to look at the savings over a long term. Quarter by quarter, sure, Windows is cheaper, but when you look at Windows over a period of several years, it isn't a viably cheap solution to business.
You also have businesses who have fetishes over applications; take Sharepoint - the biggest piece of hype ever, doesn't contribute anything substantial to improve productivity and yield only to lock documents into yet another proprietary format. Companies need to stop jumping on the 'latest bandwagon' and critically look at what is being offered. Stopping falling into the hype of Microsoft and other vendors, and ask yourself; what is the purpose of IT and do I really need what they're offering - look beyond the hype and other marketing tricks.
Member since:2005-11-10
Companies need to stop jumping on the 'latest bandwagon' and critically look at what is being offered.
Wow! "Companies need to stop jumping on the latest bandwagon"?
Are you kidding me? Companies are always slow on adopting new applications, operating systems, etc. Because it always involves a lot of work, compatibility issues, and it takes time and money to change anything..
Quarter by quarter, sure, Windows is cheaper, but when you look at Windows over a period of several years, it isn't a viably cheap solution to business.
By "it isn't a viably cheap solution.." you mean - it is not free, right? No, it is not. Why should it be?
Why don't you let those companies make that decision? Sure, they should know what is better for them? Oh wait, they do. And they still prefer Windows.
P.S.
Anyway, what are you talking about now??? I think you are confused.. and just pulling stuff out of your a**, no offense. Can you please stay on topic? You were talking how it would be better to "completely overhaul the operating system rather than incremental breakages". That is just plain wrong and so out of touch with real world.
Member since:
2005-11-10
The solution; completely overhaul the operating system rather than incremental breakages;
We already know that does not work: for example,that is why people are not switching to Linux even though it is free.
Compatibility is *very* important hence gradual changes.