On Mon, Sep 28, 2009 at 8:08 AM, Alan Lord (News) <alansli...@gmail.com> wrote: > On 28/09/09 07:56, Sean Miller wrote: >> Hmmm.... with all due respect he mentions Linux so much I doubt any >> impartial reader will take much notice of his comments. > > He is comparing the two. What's wrong with that? There are clearly some > problems with Win 7. Unstable updates, iffy text editor... > > Also, for most users (as it seems so few bought Vista), Windows 7 has no > easy upgrade path. If you are currently using XP, you have to format > your HDD and start again. That really sucks for "normal" users.
I didn't say that his arguments were not valid, simply that the whole way he writes gives the impression he is "out to get Windows" which (for me at least, and I am a Ubuntu user remember - so "already converted") makes the whole piece less persuasive. I suspect that he has not realised he's done it, but I would like to read an objective review of Windows 7... the little "bullsh!t filter" in my brain starts sending out alarm bells only a couple of paragraphs into that piece... he paints a very different picture of Windows 7 than my experience running it in a VM has given me. And he keeps saying "which, of course, is done far better in KDE..." or whatever. If the article was called "KDE vs. Windows 7, the Verdict" and had a table with comparisons then it would be rather good... ie. Eye Candy - KDE 90%, Windows 7 80% Security - KDE 90%, Windows 7 40% Compatibility with iTunes - KDE 25%, Windows 7 90% etc. Sean -- ubuntu-uk@lists.ubuntu.com https://lists.ubuntu.com/mailman/listinfo/ubuntu-uk https://wiki.ubuntu.com/UKTeam/
