On Sunday 26 December 2004 12:01 am, Ron Johnson wrote: > On Sun, 2004-12-26 at 16:46 +1100, Sam Watkins wrote: > > On Sat, Dec 25, 2004 at 08:33:50PM -0500, Curt Howland wrote: > > > I view/listen all kinds of multimedia, but don't expect to get > > > entirely away from the megahertz requirements. While Linux is > > > much more resource friendly than Windows, movies still require at > > > least 800MHz to be viewable while doing anything else at the same > > > time. > > > > It depends what type of movies. Normal not-too-big mpeg movies > > work fine on a 200Mhz pentium mmx. mpeg4 / divx / dvd movies may > > require a faster machine. > > > > > There is no functionality of Windows that is not equaled or > > > bettered in Debian Linux. > > > > The only important thing Windows does better than Debian is > > implementing the win32 platform. Unfortunately there is some good > > software that some people find necessary that runs on Windows and > > won't run under wine. I imagine business people with custom > > applications may find this a compelling reason to stay with > > windows. > > > > The are plenty of things that windows apparently does better than > > Debian. But in my opinion there are vastly, overwhelmingly more > > things that Debian does better than windows (the things that I > > think matter).
Just a nit pick but it is not Windows that does anything better than *nix. In fact as an OS *nix is much better,(security comes to mind, open source/API's available in Linux), this doesn't mean that windows is better, it means a third party software vendor ported their app to Win32 not Linux. Don't confuse the OS with applications that run on the OS. > This, I think we can agree on. -- Greg C. Madden -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
