Is the official new name for the Longhorn operating system is Microsoft Windows Vista? Flexbeta seems to think so, and has posted a domain registration from MS that seems to support this idea. Update: Looks like it's official. 
To view parent comment, click here.
To read all comments associated with this story, please click here.
Member since:No, the problem is I find pretty hypocrital to say "Linux is not ready for the desktop" because Mom and Dad don't know how to use it when the fact is Mom and Dad don't know how to keep windows running either, you've said that yourself. Where is the difference then?
BTW, never had a problem with security in Windows myself. But I don't know a single average user who hasn't.
Member since:2005-07-08
Well I never said Linux was not ready for the desktop...I just made a comparaison. But that's what I think if you really want to know...because its not enought polished and not really supported by hardware vendors. While mom doesn't know how to properly use windows and linux (sorry mom), she will probably be able to install a webcam after a while under windows...but she would probably never succeed under linux for many reasons (no drivers, command-line installation, cfg files tweaking, ect.)
and like you said, you never had security problems under windows yourself. i do the same. another proof that windows isnt all to blame. maybe computers should only be used by people like us? ;-) again, thats what i believe as well. sure my mom has good reasons to use office at work but she has no good reason to actually surf the web blindy and install everything that catch her attention like new msn emoticons that are bundled with 10 newly developed spywares.
mom, i still love you know? :
Member since:
Member since:2005-07-16
> if windows isnt ready for the desktop atm, then linux will _never_ be ready for the desktop.
> linux is so many years behind windows and osx when it comes to desktop.
> just stop being ignorant and accept it.
to say that something will _never_ happen, is itself ignorant.
on a side note... i _only_ use linux... gentoo more specifically...
i have a dual lcd setup... running two instances of blackbox... which is a light weight window manager...
when i still used windows, i could not have done this... windows 2000 did not support dual independent displays... all it would do is extend the desktop... which is _not_ what i wanted... (gaming would display to _both_ screens, and thats not what i wanted... which is why independent displays is better)
on linux, everything works great, i enjoy coding/web browsing/gaming/etc... linux is great for the desktop...
yes, i even game on linux...
> hating windows because of microsoft is not nice as well. dont hate it because youre
> a computer-communist. you know, communism always failed...
to call someone a communist just because their views are different is just stupid...
trying to call someone something that people find wrong/evil/whatever, like calling someone a nazi, is stupid because you are trying to associate them with something people dont like, just to make _you_ look right...
i wont use windows, because it does not work for what i want it to do... i can do more with linux... you may not care, but that doesnt mean linux isnt ready for the desktop... because i know _alot_ of people using linux only...
ps. i believe dual independent display support is in windows xp... but i do not know for sure... since i have never used it...
-nny
Member since:2005-07-08
ps. i believe dual independent display support is in windows xp... but i do not know for sure... since i have never used it...
yeah that works on xp, and hmm, im sure theres a workaround to get it working on 2k...anyway, youre using gentoo...u should be uber-good at fixing stuff by hand? :]
Member since:
2005-07-08
if windows isnt ready for the desktop atm, then linux will _never_ be ready for the desktop. linux is so many years behind windows and osx when it comes to desktop. just stop being ignorant and accept it.
and btw, your comment was so unrelated... its like saying "the porshes arent good cars because some people still crash em into the walls!" its just plain stupid to rate something according to its userbase. ive been honestly using windows since v3.11 and i never had a single _major_ problem. believe me or not, i never got a virus (yes i always had an anti-virus but it never detected a single virus that already infected my comp). i think i got 2 files with virus in my whole life but i didnt trust those files anyway and i sure scanned em before doing anything else. i never got spywares/adwares/ect. as well. i still dont understand why people get those... plain ignorance? and about security problems related to windows itself... never had problem there as well. maybe i was just intelligent enought to apply the few patches that were released? just like i did with my linux box? and about boot time increasing after a while...never happened to me...maybe im not dumb enought to install bogus software? some people blame windows but use products tagged "symantec/norton" without complaining? that doesnt make much sense.
windows is one beautiful os. its very reliable when you have minimum knowledges about computers. its nicely designed, easy to rescue, it provides a good sytem-wide api that you can actually use without having to use simplified layers (api wrappers), ect.
no, windows is not perfect. but nothing is perfect. but windows is really good for desktop. blindly denying it is just wrong. and hating windows because of microsoft is not nice as well. dont hate it because youre a computer-communist. you know, communism always failed...