Windows vs Linux [It's own thread]

[phlogistician]

The thing is everything is "borrowed" from somewhere. Even...Linux. Am i breaking news to people here? Am I wrong?

You are spot on, Linux is just another Unix derivative. There were ports of Unix for PC architecture long before Linux, FreeBSD, Solaris, and going waaaay back, Xenix (if you are old enough to remember, Microsoft licensed it from AT&T (who developed one major strain of Unix) and it was available on amongst others, the Tandy TRS-80. Damn, I wanted one of those soo much when I was a kid, but they were well out of my price bracket!)

The only thing different about Linux, was that it was given away freely.

Of course, in business, you end up spending out for software support anyway, so nothing is 'free' in reality.

 

[phlogistician]

I am now. Are you saying they aren't?

Dude, chill out, this is just pathetic. Make a point, eh? You are stabbing wildly now.

I was not trying to be specific, it was a throwaway line or two.

Throwaway, like completely telling a lie about the source of Microsoft revenue? You were just making shit up.

NT is the technology they've been using for OS design since the 90's.

So? NT was developed by a guy who wrote DEC VMS, and took many elements from MS's previous 'Lan Manager' product, which run under OS/2. Everything has a history, and borrows from older products, you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater. I really don't get what point, if any, you are trying to make, apart from salving your ego.

I don't actually give a shit what you end up believing, just don't go flashing your big ego around proclaiming how wrong something is, because you've also assumed something else.

My ego? That's a laugh. You plainly made up some bullshit about MS revenue 'cos you think you know so much, but were vastly wrong, I called you on your utter bullshit, and I have an ego? Please, take your correction like a man.

I know what I said up there, and in the large it isn't far off the actuality; Microsoft are stuck with NT and what they've pushed or shoehorned it into over the last 12-15 years.

Stuck? The kernel inside Vista and Server 2008 is referred to as the NT v6.0 kernel, but it has significant portions rewritten. Some code is common to previous versions, but then you don't throw the baby out with the bathwater! Keeping some things, and changing others is called 'product development'.

I don't think you understand the long term plans for developing MS OS's, some things envisioned over 15 years ago are yet to be incorporated as features, MS have such a long term vision for their products.

Now, like I said, don't bother replying, unless you want to have a stab at sustantiating the bullshit claim that MS only survives from gaming revenue. Go on, I could do with a laugh!

 

[Avatar]

Personally I couldn't care less what OS I'm running, as long as it lets me do my thing and doesn't bother me with anything else.
I've got 2 Linux (Fedora, Mandriva) pc's for home use and 1 Windows XP pc for video editing.

 

[Vkothii]

I'm now going to drop the biggest pile of crap I can dream up on the fly, let's see:

Microsob's corner of the PC market, and the commercial one in terms of "installed on platforms" is just a percentage of the linux installed base.

Linux already outpercentages Microsifts's percentage of active CPUs running OS images.

Nya nya.

P.S. I absolutely guarantee, folks, that this post will be the reason for the next few demonstrating how to jump to all kinds of market myth-based conclusions, vis-a-vis the computer industry, what it is and what it does these days.
Probably what a PC is too, for all I know, but I can't wait to see...

 

[phlogistician]

Source?

Actual numbers?

Baseless assertions don't restore your credibility.

Linux is popular, we use it extensively. I couldn't tell you exact numbers without checking. You should also check before you make such bold claims.

 

[Vkothii]

Just the one sucker then?

Doesn't look worth the effort - I'll just leave this particular bug under its rock, and let them scurry around believing their little world is the real one.

But I say again: Linux (and a few other Unix derivatives) have the largest installed base, in terms of OS images on processors, by a large margin. Something Microsub's makers like to ignore as often as they can.

I imagine anyone who is a real computer scientist would agree: Linux is the king in the systems world.

 

[phlogistician]

Just the one sucker then?

It's too tempting to retort, ... I'll leave this one be.

Doesn't look worth the effort - I'll just leave this particular bug under its rock, and let them scurry around believing their little world is the real one.

If you had figures, you'd back up your statement. But I guess you are not backing up your claims, because you know damn well it's an Apples for Oranges comparison; most desktops ship with an MS OS and that counts as a sale. Linux may get installed at some later date, but as you can download a distro for free, and apply it to a any number of computers, there's no clear way of measuring that.

But I say again: Linux (and a few other Unix derivatives) have the largest installed base, in terms of OS images on processors, by a large margin.

Linux, AND Unix derivatives, .... again, an Apples to Oranges comparison. By including 'Unix Derivatives' you include Mac OS X! What point are you trying to make here?

Something Microsub's makers like to ignore as often as they can.

Are you really that naive to think MS ignore their competition?

I imagine anyone who is a real computer scientist would agree: Linux is the king in the systems world.

Ah, you're a 'computer scientist' are you? Well maybe it's time to leave your Ivory Tower and go into the real world!

I've yet to see a single business that uses Linux exclusively on it's desktops, whereas I worked for dozens of places where MS is king. I have tried replacing MS OS's and MS Office products with Linux and StarOffice at the behest of a manager, for cost saving reasons. It was a total disaster. He just didn't get how much investment his staff had in using MS products, and what a dent is productivity it would have, until it happened. We soon rolled that one back with a big 'we told you so'.

Anyway, with a large portion of business machines running MS products, and the vast majority of home PC's coming pre-installed with MS OS's, and only nerds, geeks and hackers post installing Linux, I'd love to know where you get your notions from. ( I was at PC World only last week, the only member of staff not rushed off their feet in the PC dept, was the Apple guy. I had to wait for an assistant, as they were shifting that many MS OS PC's, the Apple guy looked bored.)

In the Server market, yes, we have lots of Linux, but then we have lots of Everything, notably MS W2K, and 2K3, AIX, Solaris, and RH Linux, with a smattering of HP. If you lump all the Unix varieties together, yes they outweigh MS Server OS's, but that's rather an unfair comparison.

Anyway, taking this off on some tangent doesn't change the fact that you were talking out of your arse wrt Microsoft's revenue from gaming.

You just keep making unsubstantiated claims after each other. Time to leave your Ivory Tower, and realise that 'professing' is different to 'knowing'.

 

[Vkothii]

Let me see, what DID I say, then?

The only thing keeping Microsoft afloat is the games market

Yes, but their share of it is not great, compared to the overall games market, nonetheless MS has a significant turnover (they're a bloody big corporation after all)

, the Xbox and their "old tech" XP distro.

XP is the current default office/home OS, and it's based on NT (btw, I don't mean the original version of NT, for the hopelessly pedantic out there). The other server versions and commercial platforms are also based on revisions of NT.

NT (not XP specifically, that's the "flagship" product), the games market, and sweet FA else, is all they have now after the explosion of NT versions that were on the market.

Vista isn't actually a released product, it doesn't count. I'd say they dumped that one on the public a bit too early.

Miss "I'm a computer expert" is now welcome to crap all over whatever she sees fit, and make an even bigger fool of herself.

 

[Vkothii]

You just keep making unsubstantiated claims after each other.

No, you're the one doing that for me.
If you actually understood computers, you would know what I'm referring to. The fact you restrict everything you have to say about 'computers', to servers, desktops, laptops, the usual suspects, tells me I'm talking to someone who doesn't (understand computers).

Not that an expert like you would ever think that, you're a died-in-the-hole PC person, I see.
Macs are a rather small slice of the Unix base. The "few" other Unix derivatives I mentioned don't come anywhere near total Linux installs.

But you don't know what I'm talking about do you. That's why you feel like flinging shit around, I'd say. Must be frustration or something.

 

[phlogistician]

Let me see, what DID I say, then?

Originally Posted by me
"The only thing keeping Microsoft afloat is the games market"

Yes, but their share of it is not great, compared to the overall games market, nonetheless MS has a significant turnover (they're a bloody big corporation after all)

None of that takes away the fact that you were wrong. MS don't make much money at all from the games market. It is an insignificant portion of their revenue, it is not keeping the company afloat by any means.

XP is the current default office/home OS,

Not true. Vista is the default install for new home machines. Some manufacturers have relented and bowed to public pressure to still offer XP, but the default is Vista. Whether corporations have started deploying yet is another matter.

and it's based on NT (btw, I don't mean the original version of NT, for the hopelessly pedantic out there). The other server versions and commercial platforms are also based on revisions of NT.

Your prose was confused. In business, the designation NT may have a legacy inference, but we certainly are more specific when we talk about products and support.

NT (not XP specifically, that's the "flagship" product), the games market, and sweet FA else, is all they have now after the explosion of NT versions that were on the market.

All they have? You have completely ignored the huge market for applications, and just focussed on desktop OS's.

Vista isn't actually a released product, it doesn't count. I'd say they dumped that one on the public a bit too early.

Vista is a released product! You can walk into a store and buy a copy! It is second only to XP in terms of desktop representation! (blowing your claim that Linux is the most prevalent OS somewhat, and you were being dishonest not acknowledging server and desktop versions anyway.)

Miss "I'm a computer expert" is now welcome to crap all over whatever she sees fit, and make an even bigger fool of herself.

I'm a guy. That picture is Ann Coulter. Why did you have to try and bring gender into this?

I'm a guy with 20 years experience working in IT btw. Like I said, leave your Ivory tower and get some real world experience. Oh, and also, you seem to be trying to make this spat with me Windows vs Linux, and I think you are guilty of trying to make out that I am against Linux in favour of Windows. Nowhere have I said that. I have installed Linux for business applications many times. I have used it at home.

My problem with you, is that you post unsubstantiated claims, and they are wrong.

But please, have a go at substantiating the first thing I called you on, that MS are kept afloat by gaming revenue. You are guilty of trying to draw the debate into new waters, but making all the same mistakes again.

Anyway, gaming revenue, over to you.

 

[phlogistician]

, you're a died-in-the-hole PC person, I see.

Again, another fallacy. I started working on multi user mid range computer systems, using such OS's as TOPS-20, VMS, System38, OS/400, Reality, Pick, Ultrix, Digital Unix, SunOS, Solaris, AIX, then all Microsoft products from DOS3 to date (bar Server 2008 which I have not deployed yet), OS/2, and various other OS's that never got a hold, such as PC-DOS on Apricot and Tangerine systems.

Before using computers for a living, I programmed Sinclair ZX-81's and Spectrums, BBC Micros, did a bit of FORTH on the Jupiter ACE, and learned 6809 assembler, all just for fun.

 

[Vkothii]

Vista is a released product! You can walk into a store and buy a copy!

Well you just go right ahead then!
And, you keep saying things like: "Windows vs Linux", and "business applications", you keep going on about servers and desktops.

Which is a part of what I've been talking about (the part you don't seem to have heard of). MS doesn't really get a look-in there, sorry.

P.S. having some female image for an avatar (except temporarily) makes me think that poster is female, when they display it for like, ever, particularly. I should, of course, assume I'm talking to a computer from now on.

P.P.S. MS still have NT derivatives, and a games market. Of course they don't just build OS software, of course they have shitloads of apps.
But of course they all need OSes, which are all NT derivatives. So I'm back where I started saying they have NT which I flagged with "XP", a games console, and not much else.
Look I'm still saying it, good grief!
And who TF is Ann Coulter? Should I know?

 

[phlogistician]

And, you keep saying things like: "Windows vs Linux",

LIAR. I used that phrse ONCE, and it was in this context;

Oh, and also, you seem to be trying to make this spat with me Windows vs Linux

I do not keep saying it, I have said it once in the context of you drawing it into that. But here you are falsly accusing me of repeatedly using the phrase, when anyone reading the thread can see that isn't the case. You are a LIAR.

and "business applications", you keep going on about servers and desktops.

Which is a part of what I've been talking about (the part you don't seem to have heard of). MS doesn't really get a look-in there, sorry.

IDIOT. MS Products rank at No1 and No2 most popular desktop OS! Amongst server OS's, they are keeping up with AIX, Solaris, Linux, and HP-UX.

P.P.S. MS still have NT derivatives, and a games market. Of course they don't just build OS software, of course they have shitloads of apps.
But of course they all need OSes, which are all NT derivatives. So I'm back where I started saying they have NT which I flagged with "XP", a games console, and not much else.

Because MS apps run on MS OS's, you discount them and say 'not much else'? They have an annual revenue of $44Bn, making them a major player.

You are clearly outgunned here. Leave your ivory tower and get some experience.

 

[John99]

I hope Vkothii is not serious.

MS became popular when 3.0 was released and actually that is the same time that PC's became popular...coincidence? probably not.

Here is from the Wikipedia article "History of Microsoft":

Microsoft Windows scored a significant success with Windows 3.0, released in 1990. In addition to improved capabilities given to native applications, Windows also allows a user to better multitask older MS-DOS based software compared to Windows/386, thanks to the introduction of virtual memory. It made PC compatibles serious competitors to the Apple Macintosh. This benefited from the improved graphics available on PCs by this time (by means of VGA video cards), and the Protected/Enhanced mode which allowed Windows applications to use more memory in a more painless manner than their DOS counterparts could. Windows 3.0 can run in any of Real, Standard, or 386 Enhanced modes, and is compatible with any Intel processor from the 8086/8088 up to 80286 and 80386. Windows 3.0 tries to auto detect which mode to run in, although it can be forced to run in a specific mode using the switches: /r (real mode), /s ("standard" 286 protected mode) and /3 (386 enhanced protected mode) respectively. This was the first version to run Windows programs in protected mode, although the 386 enhanced mode kernel was an enhanced version of the protected mode kernel in Windows/386.

Due to this backward compatibility, Windows 3.0 applications also must be compiled in a 16-bit environment, without ever using the full 32-bit capabilities of the 386 CPU.

A "multimedia" version, Windows 3.0 with Multimedia Extensions 1.0, was released several months later. This was bundled with "multimedia upgrade kits", comprising a CD-ROM drive and a sound card, such as the Creative Labs Sound Blaster Pro. This version was the precursor to the multimedia features available in Windows 3.1 and later, and was part of the specification for Microsoft's specification for the Multimedia PC.

The features listed above and growing market support from application software developers made Windows 3.0 wildly successful, selling around 10 million copies in the two years before the release of version 3.1. Windows 3.0 became a major source of income for Microsoft, and led the company to revise some of its earlier plans.

So basically a decade later and it was user familiarity that kept them coming back to it.

Win NT and Win 2K were milestones in GUI OS design. They were easy to use, easy to find files, for corporate use they were superb.

Win95 was a step away from the simple file server type OS that NT was and was really concentrated on multimedia and games. The problem was all kinds of different hardware\drivers and slow CPU's.

Around this time I started using BeOS R4.5 - http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Image:BeOS_Desktop.png

Which was a good alternative OS but no software was developed for it so what good was it.:shrug:

Back to Windows. Win95 and 98 pretty much sucked but XP Pro changed all that and now Vista, which if MS actually built the whole system like Mac does would run great for everyone.

Linux is very good but nowhere near as easy to configure as Windows. The new releases from Ubuntu and OpenSUSE are close but you still need to sit in front of it for a day or two to get it running the way you want.

The only reason Linux desktops are free is because not many people would pay for it. I can tell you that with no competing OS's that Linux desktop version would not be free and the server version is certainly not free. As far as i remember anyway.

 

[phlogistician]

Ah, BeOS! I had a bootable CD with that on, played with it a bit, but never got round to doing a full install.

I keep meaning to slap Ubuntu on my laptop. Tried it on an old spare one but I guess it was too old, got some compatability issues.

 

[John99]

Had to throw BeOs into it.

One problem i have found with Linux is that it has serious issues with putting a system to sleep. Ubuntu is closest to getting it to work but on the systems i have used it was hardly perfected.

 

[CharonZ]

Before using computers for a living, I programmed Sinclair ZX-81's and Spectrums, BBC Micros, did a bit of FORTH on the Jupiter ACE, and learned 6809 assembler, all just for fun.

Ooooooh the sinclair!! I had one, but unfortunately at that time I could not afford the memory expansion *sob*.

OS/2 all the way! Always wanted to say that. And I would have kept Ubuntu if I was able to run my wireless with WPA with it.
But in any case, in bioinformatics areas Solaris systems and sometimes certain linux distros (often Debian or Fedora) are more prevalent than MS (mostly XP). Though in other academic areas you will often find either Mac or MS.
Same as most companies do actually. Either MS or a Mac system. I would not be surprised if Mac is catching up to MS now (and although OSX is a Unix derivative it should not be counted towards the Linux lot).

 

[Vkothii]

Yes well.
Everyone (except me) knows that Microsoft rules the world of computers.
Absolutely. Their position at the top is guaranteed by the vast range of systems products they've managed to kluge together from the only really stable OS they ever had.

Good thing they've managed to diversify and develop NT into so many different areas. The commercial area, the... commercial area, and the... oh well.
Good thing they realised there was a great big games market.
Just as well their brand new NT derived OS is such a runaway success.
And that all the apps they've developed can run on any OS you like as long as it's NT. You don't have to pick the version of applications software that will run on the particular NT derivation, they all run the same stuff.

If that's not a formula for success, I don't know what one is.

 

[John99]

NT is the file system, just as HFS is the mac file system.

 

[Vkothii]

NT is the file system

Have another try.