To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Strange how it was Windows 7 that has made me go the other way. It just kept getting in my way where XP or Server 2003 just didn't. Those builtin group policies that you can't change were the last straw (Well you might but I couldn't be bothered by then to find out how) so I gave it up as a bad job. IMHO, Win 7 is even more 'Broken by Design' than previous versions.
So we've ditch Windows (Apart from one Server 2003 system for support) in my small business. We are a total Linux/Unix/OSX shop now and boy do I feel better for it and not just in the wallet.
Then MS has gone and changd the MSDN licensing as well. I really feel sorry for you MS only guys.
Well, that could be any number of things, but few of them actually have anything to do with the quality of the underlying OS.
It's more about the applications available for the OS (yes, those are different issues. The Cobra was(and is) an awesome car. There's fsck-all for parts available for it relative to modern ones, but it's a great car).
You can buy a 1990s Taurus and find near-free parts all day (buy another one with a different problem, as they all have one thing or another dying by now). Doesn't make it a great car compared to other cars.
I just thought 'OSnews' should be able to distinguish better...
EDIT: Mismatched parenthesis.
Edited 2010-09-24 16:17 UTC
Well if it was all about application compatibility then he probably would have been using XP.
A lot of users here who have plenty of Linux experience would still rather run Windows or OSX on the desktop even if they only used OpenOffice and a browser.
Maybe you should figure out why that is instead of coming up with smug analogies.





Member since:
2005-07-06
For what it's worth, I agree. Windows 7 was the OS that finally made me more or less completely ditch Linux on the desktop.