What Keeps You Off of Windows? 2071
J. J. Ramsey asks: "schnell has already asked the question What's Keeping You On Windows? It seems only fair to ask the opposite question. For those of you who have elected to not use Windows, what keeps you away from it? Concerns about stability? Security? Dislike of Microsoft's business practices? Or are you simply a fan of your chosen platform and just don't care about Windows one way or the other?" Might recent events sway your decision to keep Microsoft's premier software offering off of your computer?
The fact that it is so difficult to administer. (Score:5, Informative)
Curiously, in the last year I have actually started using Windows for the first time.
It has been the most difficult platform I have ever had to administer. Setting up even trivial network configurations is near impossible, with seemingly endless screens to move through, and very poor documentation.
Tasks that are trivial under Unix, have thus far eluded me. I still don't know how to set up DNS under Win2K.
Doesn't that sound like precisely the Why $FREE_UNIX_SYSTEM Can Never Succeed on the Desktop Argument? I am sure that Windows is no harder to administer than Unix. But I have fifteen years of Unix adminning experience, and zero Windows experience. To people who grew up on PC-DOS and Wintel, it is as intuitive for them as dd is to me.
So, for everything that matters to me (writing, email, network infrastructure) I use the Sun. For everything that is trivial and fun (websurfing, chat) I use the Winblows box.
Once you go Free, you'll never go back (Score:5, Informative)
haven't looked back. I was a long time Windows user and programmer
(going all the way back to 3.0---just remember how great it was when
3.11 came out!), but I'd grown tired of the bulk and cost of Windows.
When Microsoft finally stabilized Windows with XP it was too little,
too late.
What keeps me going back to Windows is simply that I don't need to.
Here I sit with
0. A Unix command-shell that let's me do real work
1. A perfectly nice GUI (I'm using GNOME)
2. A stable web browser and email program (Firefox and Thunderbird)
3. A good personal finance application (gnucash)
4. Instant messaging (GAIM)
5. Outlook compatibility (Evolution)
6. A stable operating system that doesn't hide things from me
7. Speed, such speed, compared to XP.
8. No viruses, worms, and other crap targetting Windows
9. Graphics editing (The GIMP)
10. Multimedia (mplayer, XINE, etc.)
11. Complete office suite (OpenOffice.org)
12. Built in firewall (iptables)
13. A really cool spam filter/email sorter [sf.net]
Why would I go back?
0. Windows costs $$$ to buy and they've got this evil registration scheme
1. It seems like every week some worm or other would be able to take out my machine
2. No freakin' idea what all these services and things are doing
3. A web browser and other components integrated into the system like some sort of cancer.
and bottom line
5. Microsoft's software just isn't cool. It's like some pale imitation of cool software with just the minimum set of features to make the average Joe go "cool" while drooling into his beer.
John.
home/work (Score:2, Informative)
I had Zero on my Linux box.
last year we were running AIX at work. reboots were once every 6 months.
now we have windows. we reboot 6 times a day.
i'll stick with what works. it's not windows.
My answer. (Score:2, Informative)
Yes.
Re:Nothing really. Especially fonts. (Score:4, Informative)
Open up the KDE control center, and go to the fonts tab. Drop a font in, or choose it via the file dialog. Press OK. Font installed.
As for fonts looking good, if you use a modern distribution with xft2 and fontconfig installed, fonts look better than under Windows.
Two words... (Score:3, Informative)
I upgraded my wife's computer over the weekend (new Mobo, CPU, and Video) and I had to re-activate Windows. No problem? I don't think so.
I ended up having to call into their help line and read something like 25 numbers to a voice-recognition system and to get something like 25 chars back from a RealLiveHuman(tm) 5 minutes later.
So, all should be good, right? Wrong! Simply moving the HD over to the new configuration and installing the correct drivers made the MOST UNSTABLE system I've ever used. So, I tried going back to a restore point -- guess what? It was PRE-ACTIVATION so I had to call again. Still, after another call, the machine was broken.
Finally, I decided to just re-install. Guess what, ANOTHER CALL!
It's just silly that Microsoft is SO concerned about their $100-or-so per computer that they make people jump through these hoops. It's like the music business: people who want to use the product will buy it, either with a PC or stand-alone. The people who illegally copy it weren't going to pay for it anyway.
Fortunately, there's a happy ending: all this nonsense has my wife willing to try Linux (Fedora Core) so we'll be giving that a shot! (on a new HD, so we can go back to Windows if we have to...)
Cheers,
Ken
Re:The fact that it is so difficult to administer. (Score:3, Informative)
The U of MN has a great community of windows people who actualy know what they're doing.. if you google for "disable lanman" the first thing that comes up is a U of MN security document for setting up windows without old (easy to crack) lanman hashes.
We also have a fairly good linux communit, www.tclug.org. We used to have beermeetings.. but the people who organized it lost interest.
UI Inconsistencies, Annoyances (Score:3, Informative)
I know that already. Why does it need to tell me?
I could go on and on. Usability problems in Windows are so numerous, and usually inconsequential or tiny when considered individually. But as a whole, they add up, and it's why I use a Mac running OS X at home, even though I'm forced to use Windows at work.
Oh... another favourite? When I reduce my resolution, Windows re-arranges my desktop icons. When I increase the resolution back (perhaps after doing a presentation when hooked up to a projector) the icons do not go back to where they were. Very annoying if you care about where icons are on your desktop. Mac OS X conveniently remembers where your icons were at the higher resolution and puts them back where they belong (where they were before you reduced the screen resolution).
Re:What keeps me off? (Score:4, Informative)
You know, I feel sorry for you and the people expressing similar sentiments. I like WindowMaker and X-chat, OS X and Qt, iTunes and Excel. And, Lord help me, I love my TiBook. It's pleasurable to work with tools you enjoy, and let you extend yourself. What they make you use at work is one thing, but I can't imagine sitting at a home computer boiling with demented rage at Rob Enderle. I doubt if the ex-Mrs. Enderle* does that.
* Purely hypothetical -- I have no idea if such a person exists or not, or what OS she uses.
Re:One thing (Score:2, Informative)
When you get your windows box set up "just right", go into linux (or boot on a linux cd... linux doesn't even need to be on that computer). The do something like:
(first assume that your backup location is at
# dd if=/dev/hda1|gzip -c |dd of=/backup/winbackup_20040607.gz
When windows gets dicked up, just go back into linux and reverse it:
# dd if=/backup/winbackup_20040607.gz| gunzip -c |dd of=/dev/hda1
and reboot.
You can do that with cat and such as well. I do it with dd so that this can be done over ssh easily:
# dd if=/dev/hda1 |gzip -c |ssh backupserver "dd of=/backup/winbackup_20040607.gz"
and
# ssh backupserver "dd if=/backup/winbackup_20040607.gz"|gunzip -c |dd of=/dev/hda1
Like I said, you can probably avoid the "dd"s and use cat, but I know this works for me. And I'd rather spend time on slashdot than find other solutions!
This works extremely well if you can get all your apps to use another location to store data. Get your mozilla profiles, "my documents" and other defaults to go to a D: or network drive. Then, you don't have to change anything to get back up and running.
Re:Mac OS X - quality which Microsoft can never ma (Score:5, Informative)
That's funny, when I eject a device, a little icon appears on my system tray. Double click it, pick the one you want to turn off, and a message tells you it's ready to go. How would anybody know that? If you unplug something without doing this, you get a nice little message explaining it to you, and it shows you what to do.
I doubt it's as nice as what Apple has, but it's nowhere near as dramatic as you're making it out top be.
Re:One thing (Score:5, Informative)
In addition, if you change workstations you can take your virtual system with you. You'll never notice the difference.
VMWare costs money, but compare the price to the hours you waste fucking with hosed Windows installations. It's a freaking deal.
Re:Why I run Linux (Score:4, Informative)
I'm going to reply to my own comment to remark why my wife currently uses Linux. I'm a technical person (sysadmin) but my wife has her BA in Literature and her MA in Theology. No technical background there. And she also is as non-technical as you can get.
But my wife asked to move off Windows. Why? Because she was tired of Windows viruses, of always having to apply updates to Windows (sometimes that would break her system ... usually when a paper was due the next day.) Generally, she considered Windows to be buggy, and Microsoft software (Office, ..) to be just as buggy.
Today, my wife is happily using Fedora Core on her 600MHz 128MB laptop. Try running Windows XP in that footprint. She runs Mozilla for her browser and to check email, she finished her thesis work on StarOffice (she felt a little better about using an office suite she had to pay for - no problem on my end .. whatever makes her more comfortable with Linux.)
She's writing a book for publication using OpenOffice (after the thesis was finished, she decided to give OpenOffice a try.) She visits web sites that use flash or java plugins, and is able to see all the content.
As far as my wife is concerned, Linux is just as good as a Windows box. Or rather, Linux is even better. When she sees that another round of Windows viruses has appeared, she sort of cackles about those "poor Windows users." :-)
Re:Nothing really. Especially fonts. (Score:3, Informative)
I only use Windows now for testing webpages in IE (yuck) and the occasional Flash creation.
Re:Mac OS X - quality which Microsoft can never ma (Score:2, Informative)
For a basic level user, there is considerable confusion between ejecting your floppy/CD and ejecting the device (assuming an external drive).
Apple's GUI, even in its OSX form, is generally, I find, easier to use than Windows (a reason I switched for home purposes), but not in this example! In XP you can safely dismount a device simply by right-clicking on its icon in My Computer.
Re:Nothing really. Especially fonts. (Score:5, Informative)
-Mark
Re:Sparky the Penguin replies (Score:3, Informative)
Bob
Re:Mac OS X - quality which Microsoft can never ma (Score:2, Informative)
Seriously, the trash-becomes-eject thing is a nonissue. It's just a shortcut that you don't have to use.
Re:I'm cheap... (Score:3, Informative)
Re:I'm cheap... (Score:2, Informative)
Also, if you already know Perl, ActiveState released a COM-scripting library for use in this application called ActivePerl. It will allow you to write windows shell scripts with perl if you'd prefer.
ActivePerl Product Page [activestate.com]
20 Reasons (Score:1, Informative)
To give some background, I'm a software developer and (these days) an sys admin as well. I originally started on Windows, and gradually switched to Linux sometime in the RH 5.x days. Now I use Gentoo and manage servers running FC.
Here are some reasons I don't use Windows anymore:
Re:The fact that it is so difficult to administer. (Score:3, Informative)
You hit straight to the nail.
Back in 2001, I was still very much pro-MS guy. I had used linux, started to understand its benefits compared to Windows like scriptability - W2k/WBA is quite good, too, but NT4 was horrible without something like Cygwin, and it didn't help me a bit as I did not really know Unix.
I first played with Slackware at 1997, at home. Back then, I only had a modem, and downloading anything was rather hopeless. The distro was really primitive comparing to today's distros, and I really felt it was just a toy.
Then, at 2001, the company I was working for at that time hired a guy to develop Java servlets. I had just started to get the company network managed - when I came a year earlier, it was hell; a totally unmanaged local network and web administration outsourced to a company, which was totally incapable to provide any customer service whatsoever. As the company had both W98 and WNT4 boxes, and I knew the W2k was coming, I decided to upgrade all boxes to W2k ASAP to make the network management easier, and manage the webserver by myself in the future, and the CEO agreed.
Anyway, that Java coder absolutely wanted to place his creation to a Linux box! I rather opposed, but as we were both geeks we get to talks rather easily, and I finally agreed to install a RH6.2 box as a new web server, if he'd just make it easy enough for me to administer. I had a little earlier got broadband at home, and had briefly tested RH6.0, but although I had started to understand Linux a little better, I still did not know a lot about Apache, Tomcat or any other its server software. I then learned Linux yet a little better, although not that much yet, and started to believe it as a possible server alternative.
Btw, back then I was running an MS DNS software, and actually I found it rather straightforward, although I don't really remember that well anymore. In WNT4 that was a separate app, but in W2k that was some MMC snap-in. But then again I later found BIND to be a rather straightforward too, and it only became a burden later, when I first learned about chrooting.
At 2001 that company was aquired by a major publishing company, and I worked few months in a new position, where I also had to learn Macs. I have to say, that I really loved the Mac OS 9's UI compared to Windows, but I hated the poor memory management and multitasking. However, I also briefly tested Mac OS 10.0.3, and although that felt cool, it was not yeat ready for primetime use. I left the company before I could've get my hands to 10.1.
Later at that autumn, I finally made the switch at home, and it happened all of sudden; I had just upgraded my home box (which was an about one year old W2k install) to XP few weeks earlier, when Explorer got really broken; every time I opened any folder, it opened a search box instead - i.e. the default context-menu-function for directory had changed from "open" to "search". I've usually been quite pro with registry, so I tried to fix that - I tried really hard, and spent a lot of time. But somehow, I failed anyway.
As I thought the nature of the problem, I came to conlusions that I probably couldn't fix it without reinstall, and as the problem was in settings, which theoretically worked correctly - just a wrong option had been selected - a reinstall over existing install probably wouldn't have fixed anything and I'd had to do a clean install.
Now, just the thought about the work required for that really made me felt pissed, and as a MS customer, I started to do what any rational customer does, when (s)he isn't satisfied with a product: I started to look for alternatives! I downloaded a beta copy of Sta
Several reasons (Score:3, Informative)
2. Security. I don't mean security from "hackers". I mean I want to be sure that my OS isn't reporting information back to HQ.
3. DRM. Don't want it.
4. Power. Linux comes with an amazing array of development tools. I know this probably doesn't matter to Joe User, but when I got into computers, "user" and "programmer" were synonymous. I'm still a programmer. And I still don't want to pay hundreds or thousands of dollars for compilers.
5. Stability. Frankly, Windows' bugginess doesn't bother me too much on a desktop. You get used to it. But I wouldn't want to run a server on it.
6. Efficiency. I don't like to buy new machines any more often than I have to. To quote Bill Gates, "What do I look like? The queen?" If I have to upgrade my hardware, it better be because of an actual application, not my freaking OS.
7. Accountability. Closed-source companies are accountable to no one. If they close up shop, I'm screwed if I need their app. With open source, that can't happen to me.
All Windows has that I can't live without comes from Adobe. When Adobe sees the light or WINE supports Photoshop, MS can kiss my skinny white butt.
Re:I live without Windows (Score:3, Informative)
If you place second, middle, last in your class because someone else had better grades than you, that's one thing. It's quite another to have someone pay the teacher to flunk you out of school so they can be head of the class.
Why does a difference between morality and legality needs to be distinguished in such a case?
Re:Nothing really. Especially fonts. (Score:4, Informative)
It's even easier with Mac OS X. If you have the Fonts folder in a Finder sidebar or on the Dock you just drag the files to the folder icon and they are installed. The Font Book application that comes with Mac OS X is also great for managing your fonts, as well as installing them.
Not only that but also Mac OS X has much better typography than Mac OS 8.6. It's Display PDF all the way through from font handling to printing. The antialiasing is smarter, the kerning more exact, better handling of Unicode and right-to-left character sets. The text just overall looks better and more consistant.
Re:Question about article summary (Score:4, Informative)
Re:My default Linux install is just more USEFUL (Score:3, Informative)
Despite the name similarity, I think outlook is pretty much a completely different program from outlook express
Re:One thing (Score:1, Informative)
Re:Question about article summary (Score:3, Informative)
and i don't neurotically install patches, i have them automatically installed. i also don't fear attachments as i just delete the ones that look suspicious. there is no microsoft mentality at work here aside from the security through obscurity that you used as your reasoning for linux's and apple's lack of viruses.
Linux just is "better." (Score:3, Informative)
Then there's the fact that I run many servers on my desktop computer and don't quite do "desktop computing" with it. Word processing? I certainly don't need that, just need Vim. Anyone with a good distro gets automatic updates of their software, or at least automatic notification. That way I can get security updates the day they're released instead of having to visit each server's page daily to check for updates, were I to try to use the programs in Windows. Besides, I'm sure there's something that I use regularly which lacks a Windows port (I know my webcam software which I wrote myself wouldn't work under Windows.)
I like to see my computer as the "ultimate setup" where everything I can do it so easily accessible. One of the few reasons I used to boot into Windows was to burn CDs and use Paint Shop Pro, but I've since learned that PSP runs fine with Wine and once I get off my lazy butt I'm gonna figure out how to configure this system to burn CDs
I switched because... (Score:2, Informative)
At the time I bought my first Powerbook (Fall '01), I was thinking of buying a Sony VAIO and dual-booting Linux and Windows. However, it became obvious from the way PC laptop vendors supported Windows that having support for a Unix-like platform that could also be a multimedia "workstation" wasn't likely.
Microsoft Windows licensing, for the home user with multiple PCs, is very expensive to maintain legitimately. I know I'm the exception, but I actually bought Windows for each machine I installed on, and with three PCs, the prospect of buying a fourth machine and paying that much for Windows licenses was a major deterrent.
In fact, when Apple started updating OS X on an annual basis (which they won't do after 10.4 "Tiger"), I was worried I had jumped from the frying pan into the fire, until I saw this [apple.com] and realized that growing the population of Macs in my home wouldn't be cost prohibitive.
Obviously, with Linux, it would be even cheaper.
That said, I can also add the following reasons why I haven't "switched" back:
Overall, the question now is... having invested now in two Powerbooks and a dual G5... why would I want to switch back to Windows?
Re:One thing (Score:3, Informative)
Why the hell does it matter? He was asked why he doesn't use windows. His answer is "because my friends break it."
Seems like a reasonable reason to me.
Re:No usable shell. (Score:1, Informative)
http://www.microsoft.com/windows/sfu/
You must use NTFS with it.
I hate the criminal monopoly microsoft and use linux because it is more fun. But if you are stuck with windows, services for unix is nice to have.
Re:I live without Windows (Score:2, Informative)
Easy. Windows is the bane of any system admin (Score:3, Informative)
Now on my non-Windows rocking G4 TiBook computer:
No more DLL hell
No more registry labyrinth
Strong security
Less administration
A GUI with elegance and easy of use
Power of Open Source tools and BSD
Things work out of the box
Great industrial design and sense of style.
Finally, ONE computer to control PCs, Macs and Unix/Linux computers, contained in a sleek portable laptop.
A system administrator's dream. It was tough to get the laptop during budget cut's, yet everyone who's seen me use it will agree it was worth every penny. I get a LOT of work done on OS X
Pick the right tool (Score:2, Informative)
For heavy duty data analysis, bioinformatics programming, compiling data from several sources into one sorted file, intensive modeling, or any other problem that would take hours by hand but several minutes with a script, I maintain one linux installation. It didn't take my coworkers long to figure out that they could do a few things much more efficiently on my machine, and that for some things, they should just come and ask me if I could write the program.
As I get better at admining it, I'll open up SSH so I can do some work from home, transfer files, provide accounts to coworkers who are already savvy enough to still use the old university unix servers to check email, and probably build some sort of network jukebox in so I don't have to tote my CDs up to the lab.
The point here is that I pick the best tool for the job. Neither Windows or Unix fits the bill all the time. Sometimes neither does - there is some really nice Mac only stuff out there. Fortunatly, since OSX came out, I can sit down at a Mac and pull up a unix prompt - I know what to do with that...
Why use Linux? Total control (Score:3, Informative)
Here's something I can never do on Windows:
Lets pick one of those processes at random, oh, gpm! Now what the hell does that do? man gpm gives me some information. Oh, it's not enough? No problem!
apt-get source gpm and I've got the source in 30 seconds, beckoning me to change it. Why change it? Well, call me crazy, but I think it'd be neat for gpm to kill every process straight up to init on a given terminal if I hold mouse-1 and mouse-2 for 5 seconds -- this way I can be sure that a trojan isn't capturing my login information next time I type it in*.
Total elapsed time: 10 minutes?
I could not do this on Windows, certainly not in under 10 minutes. I don't mean the end result, I mean the process. Microsoft thought of this problem and Windows NT makes you ALT-CTRL-DEL to login (which can be compromised just like my gpm security feature can be compromised). But the point is that I added this feature to my system in 10 minutes.
I could just as easily be annoyed at, oh, every time I try to su to root and mistype my password, su sleeps for 3 seconds and catches CTRL-C so I have to sit and wait (or ^Z and kill -9 $1 which isn't as convenient as ^C or just having it reprompt me). I can change that in the time it took me to write this. Under Windows, I just can't manage this level of control.
* Yes Linux provides this feature via SYSRQ but I don't like all of the other side-effects of enabling SYSRQ. OH WAIT, I CAN CHANGE THAT TOO!
Still using Windows (Score:2, Informative)
I have been using Linux for the last 5 years, servers and desktop.
However I still use XP on occasion cause I find that some of the (paid for, commercial) software is still light years ahead of Open Source. There is no comparison between Quanta or Bluefish, and Dreamweaver. GIMP is a great tool, however the UI is still a long way behind Fireworks.
Although I know I would save many hours of effort in the long run, I would still not put my parents through attempting to use linux. My girlfriend has enough problems with it!
Basically, Linux is very good. I know many people that use it exclusively, however somethings are still slicker in Windows.
me: started with Xwindows (openwindows)... (Score:2, Informative)
I cannot stand the ms-windows environment.
It doesn't work right.
You can't maximize ONLY vertically xor horizontally.
Your current task MUST be the one on top.
No virtual desktop.
No choices/configurability.
Basically, I've always found ms-windows to be confining. I get claustrophobic.
The only time I spent any length of time running ms.. I was typing into a terminal window onto a unix box.
Granted ms-windows xp has fixed some of the problems I have with ms stuff. The problem is, they've not done enough, and they're trying to charge me 5-10 times the worth of the environment.
using unix is still a no-brainer.
Re:One thing (Score:2, Informative)
So clearly, 'limited user' is not the way to properly limit the users so they cannot install spyware.
I don't know if that is true or not. But I do know that when you set up an admin account for the folks, and user accounts for the kids, the kids will only use the parents account. Typically the parents could use a user account and not complain much, but the kids are the ones who want to visit sites that require lowering security in the browser, install games and such. The parents may try to monitor the kids at first, but they will get tired of the pestering and just give up the password. Too much experience with this.
The reasons are legion II (Score:5, Informative)
Myr reasons for avoiding windows.
1. Poor quality of UI.
2. Inconsistant UI
3. Age of the technology
4. Number of security holes
5. Lack of applications (Ok the big names are here but the range of applications and things I can do are really small.)
6. Spend more time getting things to work, vs time working to get things done.
7. Two words, Memory Hog
8. Slow as molasses.
9. Poor interoperability with other OS's
10. Poor interoperablility with Windows OS's
11. Poor networking ability.
12. Too many things done autmagically that I can't control or turn off.
13. Too many decisions made by Bill as to what I want.
14. Controls and commands that do what they want despite what is claimed or I want.
15. Preponderance of ancient technology. (IE and Outlook for example)
16. Lack of knowledgeable support (it costs more to get to your problem, than it does to solve your problem. (Yes my monitor is turned on, how does this make Outlook crash?))
17. High cost of hardware. (I have to replace to keep running, not replace when EOL is reached.)
18. I don't like renting software. (or cars, or clothing, or or or.)
19. Lack of configurability.
20. I don't like communism and I don't like M$ for the same reasons.
21. Poor inter application communication.
22. Did I mention that it is butt ugly?
23. I'm sick and tired of Blue and Grey.
24. Poor language support. (If it ain't MFC or C# they don't want it to work.)
25. Forced upgrades.
26. Gates and Balmer support the shrub
27. Lack of control of what my computer is doing.
28. Poor Quality control
29. One size does not fit all (are you listening RH?)
30. Because applications install and run like leaches hanging on a hikers leg memory control is lacking.
31. No true multi-user environment.
32. Poor multi-tasking support.
33. Poor or no documentation of commands available.
34. Poor Double Byte and Unicode support
35. Poor Memory management.
36. And on and on and on and on and on.
Re:As a developer... (Score:3, Informative)
C:\ != /, no way man. Show me how to map a drive as a subdirectory of C:\.
1) Right-click "My Computer", choose "Manage", choose "Disk Management"
2) Right-click partition, choose "Change Drive Letter and Paths", click "Add", pick folder to map partition to.
3) Press OK, it's done.
Requires NTFS for this to work, but I don't think that's a big deal.
[]s Badaro
Why I am migrating my PCs to Linux (Score:2, Informative)
1. Cost - I can't afford to buy 5 XP PROs, 5 Office XPs, and renew 5 Norton Antivirus licences every year for the 5 PCs I have in the house. I do have 2 out of the five running XP PRO (dual booting to XP) so me and my son can still play DirectX games.
2. Product Activation - this feature has really soured me to Windows but at the same time opened my eyes to Linux and OSS (OOo, Evolution, etc.).
Re:Here's the short list... (Score:1, Informative)
Windows supports excellent security, I'd argue better in some ways than Unix. It's just not set up properly by default. In fact, it's a bit of a challenge to set it up properly and then poke holes through it for all the incompetent application programmers.
poor stability
58 days, 7 hours, 34 minutes, 47 seconds (and counting)
This is a heavily used desktop machine, Windows 2000. Stability issues are almost universally due to bad hardware or bad drivers.
no built in firewall or other security features
XP has a built in firewall. What other security features do you want?
want to do everything for you
Yes, and I want the computer to do everything for me. That's what it's for. I don't necessarily want it to do them Microsoft's way, but you already covered that.
(I'm just keeping misinformation in check here, many of your points are valid.)
Re:I live without Windows (Score:2, Informative)
Causing competition to fail is not even necessarily profitable. It could be counterproductive. So please show some thought before you speak. Maybe read the Wealth of Nations again, or that new book by John Kay, Culture and Prosperity.
Re:Profit vs. Production (Score:3, Informative)
I recall the scene in Pirates of Silicon Valley:
Steve Jobs: 'Our product is better. We make better stuff.'
Bill Gates: 'You don't get it, do you? It doesn't matter.'
Re:I'm trying... (Score:2, Informative)
OpenGL "no longer useful"? You need a good, long talk with a certain mr. Carmack, methinks. OpenGL is the platform where the bleeding edge features first emerge.
And, please, don't believe the MS BS about DirectX being "The Platform". OpenGL is still widely used, because it's good.
Take a look at the top ten list of online games from gamespy.com/stats:
1. Half Life -- has OpenGL support (and the OpenGL renderer is far superior to the D3D renderer)
2. America's Army -- has OpenGL support
3. Battlefield 1942
4. Call Of Duty -- OpenGL only
5. Wolfenstein: ET -- OpenGL only
6. Neverwinter Nights -- OpenGL only
7. Battlefield: Vietnam
8. Unreal Tournament 2004 -- has OpenGL support
9. Quake 3 Arena -- OpenGL only
10. Soldier Of Fortune 2 -- OpenGL only
8 of the 10 most popular games at the moment use (or can use) OpenGL. 5 of them are OpenGL-only.
Why, all of the above, of course. (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Wrong question? (Score:2, Informative)
Re:Mac OS X - quality which Microsoft can never ma (Score:3, Informative)