Android & Window 7 w/64 bit OS question/complaint?

[PeteEU]

Bull shit, the "bad rep" is only MS techs bad mouthing Linux. Compared to true geeks I'm a novice and I have no issues with Linux except when it comes to gaming which is the only reason I still use Windows. Everyone I've loaded Mint or Ubuntu for (that is not a gamer) absolutely loves it and has no desire to go back to Windows.

Same here.. if I could get my games to run in linux without having to jump through hoops, then I would jump on the linux bandwagon.. but guess what... I cant!.. so fuck Linux. I dont want to reboot every fucking time I get the urge to kill some dragons or play some Football Manager.

I also understand that most people will go with what they are familiar with, no problem, no skin off of my nose, it's a personal choice. Why bad mouth any of them for the express purpose of steering people one way or the other? Kinda silly if ya think about it but then again this is a "political" message board, negative is king.

You mean like Linux and Apple fanboys have been doing for decades against Windows?

I remember a discussion I had with a danish linux fanboy.. the typical type .. glasses with long hair, pale white and no girl friend and he was an experimental physicist. Any ways the amount of badmouthing of Microsoft he and his friends could spew out in 10 minutes was amazing. But even he admitted he had a windows partition for games and testing of windows programs he wrote at times.... funny eh?

Apple has also for decades bashed Microsoft on security and malware/spyware. Hell it has been a selling point for them for decades... and now that they finally have gotten a noticeable market share, then suddenly the security holes that have existed for decades in their products are being exposed and the amount of malware/spyware against Apple products is increasing fast. And the ironic thing is that Apple OSX has been the software with most security flaws of all programs for years.. much more than Microsoft's products and just ahead of Adobes.. Funny how we rarely hear about that eh?

Point is, all sides in the OS wars have been throwing mud against the other OSs for decades, it is nothing new.

 

[Ringel05]

Bull shit, the "bad rep" is only MS techs bad mouthing Linux. Compared to true geeks I'm a novice and I have no issues with Linux except when it comes to gaming which is the only reason I still use Windows. Everyone I've loaded Mint or Ubuntu for (that is not a gamer) absolutely loves it and has no desire to go back to Windows.

Same here.. if I could get my games to run in linux without having to jump through hoops, then I would jump on the linux bandwagon.. but guess what... I cant!.. so fuck Linux. I dont want to reboot every fucking time I get the urge to kill some dragons or play some Football Manager.

I also understand that most people will go with what they are familiar with, no problem, no skin off of my nose, it's a personal choice. Why bad mouth any of them for the express purpose of steering people one way or the other? Kinda silly if ya think about it but then again this is a "political" message board, negative is king.

You mean like Linux and Apple fanboys have been doing for decades against Windows?

I remember a discussion I had with a danish linux fanboy.. the typical type .. glasses with long hair, pale white and no girl friend and he was an experimental physicist. Any ways the amount of badmouthing of Microsoft he and his friends could spew out in 10 minutes was amazing. But even he admitted he had a windows partition for games and testing of windows programs he wrote at times.... funny eh?

Apple has also for decades bashed Microsoft on security and malware/spyware. Hell it has been a selling point for them for decades... and now that they finally have gotten a noticeable market share, then suddenly the security holes that have existed for decades in their products are being exposed and the amount of malware/spyware against Apple products is increasing fast. And the ironic thing is that Apple OSX has been the software with most security flaws of all programs for years.. much more than Microsoft's products and just ahead of Adobes.. Funny how we rarely hear about that eh?

Point is, all sides in the OS wars have been throwing mud against the other OSs for decades, it is nothing new.

Never said they haven't but why contribute to it?

 

[PeteEU]

Bull shit, the "bad rep" is only MS techs bad mouthing Linux. Compared to true geeks I'm a novice and I have no issues with Linux except when it comes to gaming which is the only reason I still use Windows. Everyone I've loaded Mint or Ubuntu for (that is not a gamer) absolutely loves it and has no desire to go back to Windows.

Same here.. if I could get my games to run in linux without having to jump through hoops, then I would jump on the linux bandwagon.. but guess what... I cant!.. so fuck Linux. I dont want to reboot every fucking time I get the urge to kill some dragons or play some Football Manager.

I also understand that most people will go with what they are familiar with, no problem, no skin off of my nose, it's a personal choice. Why bad mouth any of them for the express purpose of steering people one way or the other? Kinda silly if ya think about it but then again this is a "political" message board, negative is king.

You mean like Linux and Apple fanboys have been doing for decades against Windows?

I remember a discussion I had with a danish linux fanboy.. the typical type .. glasses with long hair, pale white and no girl friend and he was an experimental physicist. Any ways the amount of badmouthing of Microsoft he and his friends could spew out in 10 minutes was amazing. But even he admitted he had a windows partition for games and testing of windows programs he wrote at times.... funny eh?

Apple has also for decades bashed Microsoft on security and malware/spyware. Hell it has been a selling point for them for decades... and now that they finally have gotten a noticeable market share, then suddenly the security holes that have existed for decades in their products are being exposed and the amount of malware/spyware against Apple products is increasing fast. And the ironic thing is that Apple OSX has been the software with most security flaws of all programs for years.. much more than Microsoft's products and just ahead of Adobes.. Funny how we rarely hear about that eh?

Point is, all sides in the OS wars have been throwing mud against the other OSs for decades, it is nothing new.

Never said they haven't but why contribute to it?

human nature... you see it in the US political spectrum on an almost hourly basis

 

[Ringel05]

Same here.. if I could get my games to run in linux without having to jump through hoops, then I would jump on the linux bandwagon.. but guess what... I cant!.. so fuck Linux. I dont want to reboot every fucking time I get the urge to kill some dragons or play some Football Manager.



You mean like Linux and Apple fanboys have been doing for decades against Windows?

I remember a discussion I had with a danish linux fanboy.. the typical type .. glasses with long hair, pale white and no girl friend and he was an experimental physicist. Any ways the amount of badmouthing of Microsoft he and his friends could spew out in 10 minutes was amazing. But even he admitted he had a windows partition for games and testing of windows programs he wrote at times.... funny eh?

Apple has also for decades bashed Microsoft on security and malware/spyware. Hell it has been a selling point for them for decades... and now that they finally have gotten a noticeable market share, then suddenly the security holes that have existed for decades in their products are being exposed and the amount of malware/spyware against Apple products is increasing fast. And the ironic thing is that Apple OSX has been the software with most security flaws of all programs for years.. much more than Microsoft's products and just ahead of Adobes.. Funny how we rarely hear about that eh?

Point is, all sides in the OS wars have been throwing mud against the other OSs for decades, it is nothing new.

Never said they haven't but why contribute to it?

human nature... you see it in the US political spectrum on an almost hourly basis

Oh, I'm all too aware it's human nature I just chose to try and rise above it, at least that aspect of it.

 

[PeteEU]

Never said they haven't but why contribute to it?

human nature... you see it in the US political spectrum on an almost hourly basis

Oh, I'm all too aware it's human nature I just chose to try and rise above it, at least that aspect of it.

HA!. good luck on that front. Now back to playing Football Manger 2012... on my windows machine because it dont work in Linux

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Ah...an OS troll.
Been there done that...if writing a word document is that difficult for you - then yes, anything other than what you have been doing for 20 years would not be advised.

Gaming? Linux isn't made for gaming, never has been, never claimed to be - doubtful it ever will.
As for a pure operating system? Sorry - leagues above Windows.
So let's rate what is most important...and who, IMO leads:

Security...obvious - Linux
Speed...not even a contest - Linux, I bet I can power up an average Linux PC, power it down, and power it back up again in the time it takes a Windows machine to boot up.
Durability - sorry, not even close again. I have ran Linux for 2 years on this PC - it is exactly as fast as the day I bought it - and I have a mountain of software on it.
Cost - not only is Linux of course free, but with Windows, unless you want to crawl along, you need at least twice the computing power to operate
with comparison to a Linux box running on a 5 year old machine even.
Software availability - no contest, WIndows. But this is only because if their marketshare.
Hardware compatibility - not even in the same ballpark. Out of the box Ubuntu, Linux Mint or any other major flavor will work perfectly fine without installing a single thing. I have digital cameras, video cameras, cellphones, scanner-printed, Widescreen TV (Linux supports HDTV jacks out of the box) dual monitors - all work flawlessly.- most without installing anything.

As far as an OS - Linux is just flat out better. The only thing Windows has over Linux is gaming and software availability....and virus/malware.

 

[PeteEU]

Ah...an OS troll.
Been there done that...if writing a word document is that difficult for you - then yes, anything other than what you have been doing for 20 years would not be advised.

Gaming? Linux isn't made for gaming, never has been, never claimed to be - doubtful it ever will.
As for a pure operating system? Sorry - leagues above Windows.
So let's rate what is most important...and who, IMO leads:

Security...obvious - Linux
Speed...not even a contest - Linux, I bet I can power up an average Linux PC, power it down, and power it back up again in the time it takes a Windows machine to boot up.
Durability - sorry, not even close again. I have ran Linux for 2 years on this PC - it is exactly as fast as the day I bought it - and I have a mountain of software on it.
Cost - not only is Linux of course free, but with Windows, unless you want to crawl along, you need at least twice the computing power to operate
with comparison to a Linux box running on a 5 year old machine even.
Software availability - no contest, WIndows. But this is only because if their marketshare.
Hardware compatibility - not even in the same ballpark. Out of the box Ubuntu, Linux Mint or any other major flavor will work perfectly fine without installing a single thing. I have digital cameras, video cameras, cellphones, scanner-printed, Widescreen TV (Linux supports HDTV jacks out of the box) dual monitors - all work flawlessly.- most without installing anything.

As far as an OS - Linux is just flat out better. The only thing Windows has over Linux is gaming and software availability....and virus/malware.

In other words you know you lost the argument so you refuse to debate and just repeat you falsehoods over and over again. Not to mention bring up a few other falsehoods.. but hey what ever floats your bubble.. dont want to debate, then that is fine...

 

[iamwhatiseem]

Ah...an OS troll.
Been there done that...if writing a word document is that difficult for you - then yes, anything other than what you have been doing for 20 years would not be advised.

Gaming? Linux isn't made for gaming, never has been, never claimed to be - doubtful it ever will.
As for a pure operating system? Sorry - leagues above Windows.
So let's rate what is most important...and who, IMO leads:

Security...obvious - Linux
Speed...not even a contest - Linux, I bet I can power up an average Linux PC, power it down, and power it back up again in the time it takes a Windows machine to boot up.
Durability - sorry, not even close again. I have ran Linux for 2 years on this PC - it is exactly as fast as the day I bought it - and I have a mountain of software on it.
Cost - not only is Linux of course free, but with Windows, unless you want to crawl along, you need at least twice the computing power to operate
with comparison to a Linux box running on a 5 year old machine even.
Software availability - no contest, WIndows. But this is only because if their marketshare.
Hardware compatibility - not even in the same ballpark. Out of the box Ubuntu, Linux Mint or any other major flavor will work perfectly fine without installing a single thing. I have digital cameras, video cameras, cellphones, scanner-printed, Widescreen TV (Linux supports HDTV jacks out of the box) dual monitors - all work flawlessly.- most without installing anything.

As far as an OS - Linux is just flat out better. The only thing Windows has over Linux is gaming and software availability....and virus/malware.

In other words you know you lost the argument so you refuse to debate and just repeat you falsehoods over and over again. Not to mention bring up a few other falsehoods.. but hey what ever floats your bubble.. dont want to debate, then that is fine...

Specifically...what above is false?

 

[Ringel05]

Ah...an OS troll.
Been there done that...if writing a word document is that difficult for you - then yes, anything other than what you have been doing for 20 years would not be advised.

Gaming? Linux isn't made for gaming, never has been, never claimed to be - doubtful it ever will.
As for a pure operating system? Sorry - leagues above Windows.
So let's rate what is most important...and who, IMO leads:

Security...obvious - Linux
Speed...not even a contest - Linux, I bet I can power up an average Linux PC, power it down, and power it back up again in the time it takes a Windows machine to boot up.
Durability - sorry, not even close again. I have ran Linux for 2 years on this PC - it is exactly as fast as the day I bought it - and I have a mountain of software on it.
Cost - not only is Linux of course free, but with Windows, unless you want to crawl along, you need at least twice the computing power to operate
with comparison to a Linux box running on a 5 year old machine even.
Software availability - no contest, WIndows. But this is only because if their marketshare.
Hardware compatibility - not even in the same ballpark. Out of the box Ubuntu, Linux Mint or any other major flavor will work perfectly fine without installing a single thing. I have digital cameras, video cameras, cellphones, scanner-printed, Widescreen TV (Linux supports HDTV jacks out of the box) dual monitors - all work flawlessly.- most without installing anything.

As far as an OS - Linux is just flat out better. The only thing Windows has over Linux is gaming and software availability....and virus/malware.

In other words you know you lost the argument so you refuse to debate and just repeat you falsehoods over and over again. Not to mention bring up a few other falsehoods.. but hey what ever floats your bubble.. dont want to debate, then that is fine...

He made some serious points and in my experience I've found all of what he posted to be more or less true. Looks to me like you're the one who's unwilling to debate and only wants to bad mouth and trash "the opposition". Interesting.........
So tell me again, what do you do for a living?

 

[PeteEU]

Ah...an OS troll.
Been there done that...if writing a word document is that difficult for you - then yes, anything other than what you have been doing for 20 years would not be advised.

Gaming? Linux isn't made for gaming, never has been, never claimed to be - doubtful it ever will.
As for a pure operating system? Sorry - leagues above Windows.
So let's rate what is most important...and who, IMO leads:

Security...obvious - Linux
Speed...not even a contest - Linux, I bet I can power up an average Linux PC, power it down, and power it back up again in the time it takes a Windows machine to boot up.
Durability - sorry, not even close again. I have ran Linux for 2 years on this PC - it is exactly as fast as the day I bought it - and I have a mountain of software on it.
Cost - not only is Linux of course free, but with Windows, unless you want to crawl along, you need at least twice the computing power to operate
with comparison to a Linux box running on a 5 year old machine even.
Software availability - no contest, WIndows. But this is only because if their marketshare.
Hardware compatibility - not even in the same ballpark. Out of the box Ubuntu, Linux Mint or any other major flavor will work perfectly fine without installing a single thing. I have digital cameras, video cameras, cellphones, scanner-printed, Widescreen TV (Linux supports HDTV jacks out of the box) dual monitors - all work flawlessly.- most without installing anything.

As far as an OS - Linux is just flat out better. The only thing Windows has over Linux is gaming and software availability....and virus/malware.

In other words you know you lost the argument so you refuse to debate and just repeat you falsehoods over and over again. Not to mention bring up a few other falsehoods.. but hey what ever floats your bubble.. dont want to debate, then that is fine...

Specifically...what above is false?

1. Security. Linux is only "secure" because no one can be bothered making virus and malware since not many use it. And how secure is Linux exactly considering the amount of systems that get hacked all the time? Flaws in Apache and other linux system need plugging all the time. Claiming security is a hyperhole, the same hyperhole Apple users have been using for decades and who now are being caught with their pants down. Security will always depend on the idiot behind the keyboard... and since most people who use Linux are nerds to a degree then of course they will spot what virus/malware there is for Linux, where as the average Windows user is not an expert and is targeted by criminals simply because 90% of the world uses Windows. I have not had a virus or malware for almost 5 years now, and dont even run anti-virus most of the time, but then again I know what too look for and avoid..

2. Speed. Define it.. start up and close down? SSD or not? base install, or after years of use? I have seen a windows 7 pc boot up in 3 seconds.. but that of course was on SSD. Now I do not deny that the more crapware you install on you windows PC the slower it can get.. but hey at least Windows PCs have crapware and a wide variety of programs to use. Oh and my linux box is just as "fast" as my Windows box to load.. just saying.

3. Software availability... yea of course programers make Windows programs because that is what people want since everyone is on Windows. There are more and more programs being made for Apple too now, since they have gained market share, and of course with that comes the usual problems of malware, spyware and crapware and compatibility issues. I really dunno if it is a plus or negative.. the less choice, the more secure you are after all..

4. Hard compatibility... seriously? So you are saying that if I went down and bought a HP Eprinter or similar that I could just plug it in a linux box and it would work with all its functions? As for the things you list.. Windows supports that out of the box as well.. so... As for dual monitors.. well the Ubuntu version I have installed dont support that unless you mean cloning one screen on another.. Windows 7 supports dual and more screens and stretching the desktop across the number of screens you have which I have gotten addicted too heh.

And then finally you final comment. So linux is flat out better expect in two key areas of the pc... Software and games.. you do realise that is why we have PCs.. for the software and games?

You also forgot user friendlyness and ease of install. Not to mention all the bits you buy.. phones, printers, scanners and so on will work on a Windows machine because they are designed for, where as on a Linux box you might have to write the drivers yourself or wait till a compatible driver comes out.. ups...

Like it or not, Windows is superior over Linux on pretty much everything but price and a maybe speed over time (but that is very much users dependent).

 

[iamwhatiseem]

In other words you know you lost the argument so you refuse to debate and just repeat you falsehoods over and over again. Not to mention bring up a few other falsehoods.. but hey what ever floats your bubble.. dont want to debate, then that is fine...

Specifically...what above is false?

1. Security. Linux is only "secure" because no one can be bothered making virus and malware since not many use it. And how secure is Linux exactly considering the amount of systems that get hacked all the time? Flaws in Apache and other linux system need plugging all the time. Claiming security is a hyperhole, the same hyperhole Apple users have been using for decades and who now are being caught with their pants down. Security will always depend on the idiot behind the keyboard... and since most people who use Linux are nerds to a degree then of course they will spot what virus/malware there is for Linux, where as the average Windows user is not an expert and is targeted by criminals simply because 90% of the world uses Windows. I have not had a virus or malware for almost 5 years now, and dont even run anti-virus most of the time, but then again I know what too look for and avoid..

2. Speed. Define it.. start up and close down? SSD or not? base install, or after years of use? I have seen a windows 7 pc boot up in 3 seconds.. but that of course was on SSD. Now I do not deny that the more crapware you install on you windows PC the slower it can get.. but hey at least Windows PCs have crapware and a wide variety of programs to use. Oh and my linux box is just as "fast" as my Windows box to load.. just saying.

3. Software availability... yea of course programers make Windows programs because that is what people want since everyone is on Windows. There are more and more programs being made for Apple too now, since they have gained market share, and of course with that comes the usual problems of malware, spyware and crapware and compatibility issues. I really dunno if it is a plus or negative.. the less choice, the more secure you are after all..

4. Hard compatibility... seriously? So you are saying that if I went down and bought a HP Eprinter or similar that I could just plug it in a linux box and it would work with all its functions? As for the things you list.. Windows supports that out of the box as well.. so... As for dual monitors.. well the Ubuntu version I have installed dont support that unless you mean cloning one screen on another.. Windows 7 supports dual and more screens and stretching the desktop across the number of screens you have which I have gotten addicted too heh.

And then finally you final comment. So linux is flat out better expect in two key areas of the pc... Software and games.. you do realise that is why we have PCs.. for the software and games?

You also forgot user friendlyness and ease of install. Not to mention all the bits you buy.. phones, printers, scanners and so on will work on a Windows machine because they are designed for, where as on a Linux box you might have to write the drivers yourself or wait till a compatible driver comes out.. ups...

Like it or not, Windows is superior over Linux on pretty much everything but price and a maybe speed over time (but that is very much users dependent).

Nevermind...I assumed you knew what you were talking about, but after reading just half of the above it is clear you do not.
You may know how to tool around in Windows better than most, but you don't know half what you think you do..seeing the limited experience that you have.
I should have known when you kept making a big deal about how hard it is to go from Office to another office suite.

 

[PeteEU]

Specifically...what above is false?

1. Security. Linux is only "secure" because no one can be bothered making virus and malware since not many use it. And how secure is Linux exactly considering the amount of systems that get hacked all the time? Flaws in Apache and other linux system need plugging all the time. Claiming security is a hyperhole, the same hyperhole Apple users have been using for decades and who now are being caught with their pants down. Security will always depend on the idiot behind the keyboard... and since most people who use Linux are nerds to a degree then of course they will spot what virus/malware there is for Linux, where as the average Windows user is not an expert and is targeted by criminals simply because 90% of the world uses Windows. I have not had a virus or malware for almost 5 years now, and dont even run anti-virus most of the time, but then again I know what too look for and avoid..

2. Speed. Define it.. start up and close down? SSD or not? base install, or after years of use? I have seen a windows 7 pc boot up in 3 seconds.. but that of course was on SSD. Now I do not deny that the more crapware you install on you windows PC the slower it can get.. but hey at least Windows PCs have crapware and a wide variety of programs to use. Oh and my linux box is just as "fast" as my Windows box to load.. just saying.

3. Software availability... yea of course programers make Windows programs because that is what people want since everyone is on Windows. There are more and more programs being made for Apple too now, since they have gained market share, and of course with that comes the usual problems of malware, spyware and crapware and compatibility issues. I really dunno if it is a plus or negative.. the less choice, the more secure you are after all..

4. Hard compatibility... seriously? So you are saying that if I went down and bought a HP Eprinter or similar that I could just plug it in a linux box and it would work with all its functions? As for the things you list.. Windows supports that out of the box as well.. so... As for dual monitors.. well the Ubuntu version I have installed dont support that unless you mean cloning one screen on another.. Windows 7 supports dual and more screens and stretching the desktop across the number of screens you have which I have gotten addicted too heh.

And then finally you final comment. So linux is flat out better expect in two key areas of the pc... Software and games.. you do realise that is why we have PCs.. for the software and games?

You also forgot user friendlyness and ease of install. Not to mention all the bits you buy.. phones, printers, scanners and so on will work on a Windows machine because they are designed for, where as on a Linux box you might have to write the drivers yourself or wait till a compatible driver comes out.. ups...

Like it or not, Windows is superior over Linux on pretty much everything but price and a maybe speed over time (but that is very much users dependent).

Nevermind...I assumed you knew what you were talking about, but after reading just half of the above it is clear you do not.
You may know how to tool around in Windows better than most, but you don't know half what you think you do..seeing the limited experience that you have.
I should have known when you kept making a big deal about how hard it is to go from Office to another office suite.

And all you have shown is that you are a die hard linux fanboy who like most Linux fanboys have zero clue about the real world of consumer computing.

Is my experience with Linux limited? Yes I admit that fully.. and why is it limited? Because it is a piece of shit software that is not user friendly and I simply dont have the energy or time to start to learn how to do simple tasks in Linux. Its office is does not look like what I am use too and that means I have to learn a new office suit. Linux cant play games, a big no no and then there is of course the whole installing software problem... funny how my Ubuntu install requires a ton of extra installs to play a simple avi file.

The very fact that you dont seem to comprehend that people are beings of habit and the idea of starting to learn new software, office or OS, is simply one step too far for not only most people but even corporations. Just think about the amount of money corporations could save if they went with Linux? Why dont they? Because all their workers would have to be retrained ... and that costs far far more.

Like it or not, going from Wordperfect to Word is a big deal, and going from Office to Open office is a big deal for most people out there. Maybe not for you or me, but for the average user it is and the fact that you dont seem to comprehend this fact, pretty much seals the deal on you being a Linux fanboy.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

1. Security. Linux is only "secure" because no one can be bothered making virus and malware since not many use it. And how secure is Linux exactly considering the amount of systems that get hacked all the time? Flaws in Apache and other linux system need plugging all the time. Claiming security is a hyperhole, the same hyperhole Apple users have been using for decades and who now are being caught with their pants down. Security will always depend on the idiot behind the keyboard... and since most people who use Linux are nerds to a degree then of course they will spot what virus/malware there is for Linux, where as the average Windows user is not an expert and is targeted by criminals simply because 90% of the world uses Windows. I have not had a virus or malware for almost 5 years now, and dont even run anti-virus most of the time, but then again I know what too look for and avoid..

2. Speed. Define it.. start up and close down? SSD or not? base install, or after years of use? I have seen a windows 7 pc boot up in 3 seconds.. but that of course was on SSD. Now I do not deny that the more crapware you install on you windows PC the slower it can get.. but hey at least Windows PCs have crapware and a wide variety of programs to use. Oh and my linux box is just as "fast" as my Windows box to load.. just saying.

3. Software availability... yea of course programers make Windows programs because that is what people want since everyone is on Windows. There are more and more programs being made for Apple too now, since they have gained market share, and of course with that comes the usual problems of malware, spyware and crapware and compatibility issues. I really dunno if it is a plus or negative.. the less choice, the more secure you are after all..

4. Hard compatibility... seriously? So you are saying that if I went down and bought a HP Eprinter or similar that I could just plug it in a linux box and it would work with all its functions? As for the things you list.. Windows supports that out of the box as well.. so... As for dual monitors.. well the Ubuntu version I have installed dont support that unless you mean cloning one screen on another.. Windows 7 supports dual and more screens and stretching the desktop across the number of screens you have which I have gotten addicted too heh.

And then finally you final comment. So linux is flat out better expect in two key areas of the pc... Software and games.. you do realise that is why we have PCs.. for the software and games?

You also forgot user friendlyness and ease of install. Not to mention all the bits you buy.. phones, printers, scanners and so on will work on a Windows machine because they are designed for, where as on a Linux box you might have to write the drivers yourself or wait till a compatible driver comes out.. ups...

Like it or not, Windows is superior over Linux on pretty much everything but price and a maybe speed over time (but that is very much users dependent).

Nevermind...I assumed you knew what you were talking about, but after reading just half of the above it is clear you do not.
You may know how to tool around in Windows better than most, but you don't know half what you think you do..seeing the limited experience that you have.
I should have known when you kept making a big deal about how hard it is to go from Office to another office suite.

And all you have shown is that you are a die hard linux fanboy who like most Linux fanboys have zero clue about the real world of consumer computing.

Is my experience with Linux limited? Yes I admit that fully.. and why is it limited? Because it is a piece of shit software that is not user friendly and I simply dont have the energy or time to start to learn how to do simple tasks in Linux. Its office is does not look like what I am use too and that means I have to learn a new office suit. Linux cant play games, a big no no and then there is of course the whole installing software problem... funny how my Ubuntu install requires a ton of extra installs to play a simple avi file.

The very fact that you dont seem to comprehend that people are beings of habit and the idea of starting to learn new software, office or OS, is simply one step too far for not only most people but even corporations. Just think about the amount of money corporations could save if they went with Linux? Why dont they? Because all their workers would have to be retrained ... and that costs far far more.

Like it or not, going from Wordperfect to Word is a big deal, and going from Office to Open office is a big deal for most people out there. Maybe not for you or me, but for the average user it is and the fact that you dont seem to comprehend this fact, pretty much seals the deal on you being a Linux fanboy.

Got it - so you are a Microsoft certified tech most likely. Or a tech-field support staff that works on M$ computers.
All you guys are the same - you can't debate point on point - all you guys do is vehemently attack Linux with no basis other than "it is crap...too hard...not compatible...etc. etc." with zero experience using Linux.
I have probably been associated professionally and unprofessionally on all three systems longer than you have been alive. I even bet you I know more about the Windows architecture than you do. I know why it is more insecure, you don't. All you know to say is what you have been told - that Linux is only safer because viruses are not written against it - which is actually irrelevant. As you might know, only about 1/4th of 1 percent of all viruses written even work. Not the kind of security I am talking about, nor what ayone in the industry is talking about when they are referring to OS security.

"Ton of extra installs to get an avi file to work" - an example of your hyperbole.
Here is how hard it is...click system -> click software center -> click restricted codecs...and in about 1 minute - done....WOW...that is sooooooooooooooooo HARD!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

You show your bias as apparent as the morning sun.
My preference stems directly from three decades of use and support. I don't say Linux is superior because of some love for Linux - I say it because it is factually correct.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Win7 is not Vista.

Yes it is, it's Vista SP3

Yes it's still a Microsoft product but it beats Vista hands down in almost every category.

Really?

In WHAT way?

The first thing we have to quell is the bullshit that Vista was a bad OS, it was and is a great OS.

Vista suffered three problems;

1. Most of the computer hardware when it was released couldn't handle it. Microsoft flubbed this by detailing specs that were absurd for the advanced OS. The MAIN difference in Windows 7 and Vista is simply that hardware has gotten powerful enough to run the OS comfortably.

2. Drivers. Vista had a brand new driver model - the exact model used by Windows 7. Vista didn't support a lot of hardware - or rather a lot of hardware didn't support Vista. Over the years, drivers have been written. ANY hardware that supports Windows 7 also supports Vista, the driver model is the same one.

3. Dishonest advertising. Apple did what Apple does, engaged in FUD and false advertising.

If you do move up the problem you'll face is, there is (last I checked) no upgrade from XP to Win7 which means you'll have to do a clean install which in and of itself is a far better method than upgrading you existing OS anywho.

Agreed, used the 64 bit OS and do a clean install.

When XP was top, I used Linux most of the time. Windows Vista/7 has brought me back to Microsoft. I still have Kubuntu set as a dual boot, but rarely use it.

 

[Uncensored2008]

Give me a good reason why someone who is your average-basic home computer user...should buy a new computer to replace one that is working fine, just to go from XP to Win7.

[crickets]

Why I run Linux

Win 7> Linux > XP

Simple as that.

 

[Navy1960]

Give me a good reason why someone who is your average-basic home computer user...should buy a new computer to replace one that is working fine, just to go from XP to Win7.

[crickets]

Why I run Linux

Unfortunately most won't try Linux, they've either never heard of it, heard and believe all the Microsoft negative propaganda about it or a simply afraid to try something "new and unfamiliar".

I started using Ubuntu alongside Win7 and can tell you since I started using it, I spend much more time with Ubuntu than I do Win7.

 

[Uncensored2008]

I started using Ubuntu alongside Win7 and can tell you since I started using it, I spend much more time with Ubuntu than I do Win7.

I'm just the opposite. I had been using various Linux distros and PC-BSD a lot in the early 2000s. I had gotten to hate XP and all the viruses. But Windows 7 is a far more stable and polished OS than any of the distros. I don't have to pay for anything, so Kubuntu, et al being free isn't a factor for me.

I can't even get an SSL-VPN client for my Palo Alto on Ubuntu, much less decent drivers for most of the printers, barcodes, scanners, POS terminals, etc. I love root level Linux, it reminds me of the early days of CP/M and DOS - but it isn't practical or efficient for production use.

 

[Navy1960]

I started using Ubuntu alongside Win7 and can tell you since I started using it, I spend much more time with Ubuntu than I do Win7.

I'm just the opposite. I had been using various Linux distros and PC-BSD a lot in the early 2000s. I had gotten to hate XP and all the viruses. But Windows 7 is a far more stable and polished OS than any of the distros. I don't have to pay for anything, so Kubuntu, et al being free isn't a factor for me.

I can't even get an SSL-VPN client for my Palo Alto on Ubuntu, much less decent drivers for most of the printers, barcodes, scanners, POS terminals, etc. I love root level Linux, it reminds me of the early days of CP/M and DOS - but it isn't practical or efficient for production use.

One of the reasons I moved in that direction or am moving in others , because quite frankly am just a little bored with the Win XXX platform. Your correct that Ubuntu has it's issues but to me at least that's what makes it fun, and like you root level Linux is so like DOS and CP/M days. While not in a production environment and an old warhorse put out to pasture a long time ago LOL, I like to tinker with this technology. On a side note have you tried EEEVpn? or Cyberoam VPN Client for Ubuntu?

 

[Uncensored2008]

One of the reasons I moved in that direction or am moving in others , because quite frankly am just a little bored with the Win XXX platform. Your correct that Ubuntu has it's issues but to me at least that's what makes it fun, and like you root level Linux is so like DOS and CP/M days.

I completely agree.

While not in a production environment and an old warhorse put out to pasture a long time ago LOL, I like to tinker with this technology. On a side note have you tried EEEVpn? or Cyberoam VPN Client for Ubuntu?

I have to interact with a hardware based VPN. For software based VPN those would be fine, but I need to tunnel through a Palo Alto firewall, which means using the client they supply. If anyone else could tunnel through, then I'd be moving on to Sonic or back to Cisco.

 

[iamwhatiseem]

I started using Ubuntu alongside Win7 and can tell you since I started using it, I spend much more time with Ubuntu than I do Win7.

I'm just the opposite. I had been using various Linux distros and PC-BSD a lot in the early 2000s. I had gotten to hate XP and all the viruses. But Windows 7 is a far more stable and polished OS than any of the distros. I don't have to pay for anything, so Kubuntu, et al being free isn't a factor for me.

I can't even get an SSL-VPN client for my Palo Alto on Ubuntu, much less decent drivers for most of the printers, barcodes, scanners, POS terminals, etc. I love root level Linux, it reminds me of the early days of CP/M and DOS - but it isn't practical or efficient for production use.

Wha... did you just say Linux isn't practical for production use?
Define production please.