Listas Locatel wrote: > Johannes Wiedersich escribió: >> Roberto C. Sánchez wrote: >> >>> On Fri, Mar 30, 2007 at 10:43:30PM -0400, Jim Hyslop wrote: >>> >>>> If I had immediately followed with some outrageous claim that Windows >>>> is >>>> better and has fewer security holes because <insert some stupid >>>> reason>, >>>> *THEN* you could accuse me of spreading FUD. >>>> >>>> >>> Windows *is* better, since Microsoft reports much fewer bugs than any >>> Linux distribution :-) >>> >> >> Windows *is* better, since it has more users than any other OS, and >> those simply can't be wrong. The same applies to M$ office. >> > > ??? think you that windows is better ?? Even for the users, Ubuntu is > more easy than Windows and for servers Debian is more stable, > flexible....... > > In desktop, windows is the option because many people don't know another > OS..... > > Other question is MS Office. For now is the most complete office suite > and Openoffice must increase performance and options, but its > flexibility and compatibility is the best! >> Practically none of its users ever think of *why* this or that would be >> better or worse than any of the alternatives. >> >> Just my .02Johannes >> > Open Source alternatives are the best options for the users even they > didn't think of it... > > > -- > To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] > with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact > [EMAIL PROTECTED] >
Think that MS made huge improvement with Vista. If, lets say, xp was 100 (some imaginary) points behind linux on desktop, vista narrowed that gap to some 70 points. On shiny new and strong hardware vista is much more responsive than xp (until, of course, it freezes). Maybe that speed gain should deserve even more "points", but terrible new version of windows explorer and some other drawbacks subtracted that to 30. Finding and installing some software and drivers for vista is also much more demanding as installing winmodem or wl under linux. As of office suite, think that all mentioned are hiper-bloated as 95% of users are never using 90% of "features". Why I think that linux is better on desktop than windows? Because it is much easier to learn installing, configuring and using any linux distribution then any (newer) windows version. NTFS permission system is too complicated for any ordinary user who hardly can resolve any little more complicated problem by himself. Constant lagging in windows is huge obstacle that ms have to solve to come even close to linux. I'm little concerned bout linux too, as some distributions and desktop env. are becoming more bloated but than in linux there is always choice: lighter DE and more optimized distributions. -- Mirko Scurk -- To UNSUBSCRIBE, email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with a subject of "unsubscribe". Trouble? Contact [EMAIL PROTECTED]
