Linked by David Adams on Tue 22nd Jun 2010 16:14 UTC, submitted by sjvn
Privacy, Security, Encryption A Computerworld editorial takes note of some interesting changes Dell made to the Linux page we linked to last week. They watered down some of their pro-Linux claims, but not as far as you might think.
Thread beginning with comment 431156
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE[3]: Huhh???
by Laurence on Wed 23rd Jun 2010 02:37 UTC in reply to "RE[2]: Huhh???"
Member since:

"What you're thinking about is the long time dead classic Windows line.

How the heck would old "Windows Classic" (I'm assuming you mean like Windows 3, 95, and 97) not be considered an OS?

As far as I know, being multi-user and network aware are not requirements for being an OS.

Maybe you are talking about Windows 1 and 2, which were mostly just shells on top of DOS? (Though I would still call them OSs.)

Oh for crying out load, what is wrong with people this week?

You've taken my comments out of context and I'm not going to get dragged into an off topic debate regarding the now largely irrelevant technical status of a 15 year old piece of software - particularly when this debate has already been done to death a million times on here.

All I intended my post to state was that the opening poster was idiotic to even question whether Win7 is an 'operating system'. It's pretty bloody obvious to anyone with even the slightest of experience in IT that Win7 is a OS.

So the only reason why I even mentioned the classic product line was because I suspected he was confusing NT with the classic line given the past countless debates on 3.x and 9x.

At no point was I stating my person opinion and nor shall I as it's completely irrelevant to the article.

Reply Parent Score: 4