Linked by Thom Holwerda on Mon 13th Jan 2014 10:06 UTC
Windows

Paul Thurrott on the next version of Windows and the future of the platform.

In some ways, the most interesting thing about Threshold is how it recasts Windows 8 as the next Vista. It's an acknowledgment that what came before didn't work, and didn't resonate with customers. And though Microsoft will always be able to claim that Windows 9 wouldn't have been possible without the important foundational work they had done first with Windows 8 - just as was the case with Windows 7 and Windows Vista - there's no way to sugarcoat this. Windows 8 has set back Microsoft, and Windows, by years, and possibly for good.

With even Paul Thurrott claiming Windows is in trouble, it becomes virtually impossible to deny it is so.

Thread beginning with comment 580618
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
RE: Windows Nap Time
by ilovebeer on Tue 14th Jan 2014 00:09 UTC in reply to "Windows Nap Time"
ilovebeer
Member since:
2011-08-08

A person can easily rebuttal with `why would you use Linux unless you're only running a server`?

You already describe Linux challenges are being more grandiose. People tend to want their computer experience to be simple & painless, not frustrating & difficult.

I don't know why you view using Linux as "contributing to technology", or why using Linux is somehow more satisfying in general. If I had to take a tally, I see more complaining from Linux desktop users than their Windows counterparts. That suggests the more satisfying of the two is generally Windows, not Linux.

[/q]So much less frustration because everything is open and can be identified as either a problem or a solution and you can intervene personally to either improve your technology for your users and business. [/q]
Huge mistake on your part thinking that open source software causes less frustration. Linux experiences plenty of breakage & regression on a regular basis. So much in fact that I often see old versions being recommended to users if they're looking for stability & a less problematic system.

Further you point out that the user can be part of the solution to the mess. That's terrific, real simple to do in theory, but the truth is reality tells a much different story. Linux devs are in constant disagreement over coding style, design, implication, etc etc etc. These are the people who are supposed to be at the forefront of Linux advancement and they have difficulty amongst themselves. Do you think Joe Blow from nowhere is going to pop up, submit his patches, and they're just merged by default? Often times I see those guys asked to make tons of changes or take a completely different approach. Or their stuff is rejected flat out. So much for fun in Linux dev.

Oh any btw, are you under the impression tons of Linux users are 1) coders, who 2) have the necessary knowledge & experience to contribute worth-while code? Nope. And Linux is not where everyone is welcome and holding hands. If anything the open source nature of Linux causes just as much, if not more, arguing than if it were closed.

Windows prevents any of that from happening.

Windows doesn't prevent people from writing their own drivers, applications, games, etc. Aside of altering the kernel, what do you think Windows prevents?

Why the hell would you use Windows and compete in the industry with those sorts of restrictions that your competitors using LINUX do not have?

I always get a kick when people try to sell Linux as the os of rainbows & unicorns. This magical os where everything is great and everybody welcomes you with open arms. The truth is Linux has many of the people problems that Windows does. Its' open source nature can be as much of a drawback as it can be freeing. Linux and Windows have far more in common than the fanboys of either are typically willing to admit.

So "why the hell would you use Windows"? Because generally speaking it's solid and fulfills users needs & wants. Maybe you'll respond by saying the exact same thing about Linux. People who aren't shackled by their own bias & ignorance realize both have a lot to offer, and neither hands-down shits all over the other.

For the record, I use both on a daily basis and in a capacity that each is good at. I don't "love" one more than the other. To me they're just tools that I use for different purposes, that's all. I don't get emotionally attached to software, or companies, or distros, or any of that.

Reply Parent Score: 3

RE[2]: Windows Nap Time
by lemur2 on Tue 14th Jan 2014 02:19 in reply to "RE: Windows Nap Time"
lemur2 Member since:
2007-02-17

You already describe Linux challenges are being more grandiose. People tend to want their computer experience to be simple & painless, not frustrating & difficult.

I don't know why you view using Linux as "contributing to technology", or why using Linux is somehow more satisfying in general. If I had to take a tally, I see more complaining from Linux desktop users than their Windows counterparts. That suggests the more satisfying of the two is generally Windows, not Linux.

...

So "why the hell would you use Windows"? Because generally speaking it's solid and fulfills users needs & wants. Maybe you'll respond by saying the exact same thing about Linux. People who aren't shackled by their own bias & ignorance realize both have a lot to offer, and neither hands-down shits all over the other.

For the record, I use both on a daily basis and in a capacity that each is good at. I don't "love" one more than the other. To me they're just tools that I use for different purposes, that's all. I don't get emotionally attached to software, or companies, or distros, or any of that.


I too use and maintain both.

Linux is far less frustrating than Windows, and far easier to use, and easier and much quicker to maintain, install new apps, update, and upgrade.

Edited 2014-01-14 02:20 UTC

Reply Parent Score: 2

RE[3]: Windows Nap Time
by lucas_maximus on Tue 14th Jan 2014 18:48 in reply to "RE[2]: Windows Nap Time"
lucas_maximus Member since:
2009-08-18

Linux is far less frustrating than Windows, and far easier to use, and easier and much quicker to maintain, install new apps, update, and upgrade.


Debatable at best. I use both and think it is the other way around. Your personal experience isn't the same as everyone else.

On the upgrade front, apart from download time (which happens in the background), Windows takes 20 minute to update. The fedup tool on fedora took 35 minutes. Most applications take care of themselves, and I don't even notice Windows update happening these days, unless it is an OS update.

But hey you never listen to anyone but yourself.

Reply Parent Score: 3