Discussion Forums > Technology
Windows 7 and general bitching about OSes
xShadow:
--- Quote from: dankles on February 07, 2009, 12:16:47 AM ---@xShadow:
I really don't feel like explaining myself twice. And I don't think I'm over reacting in what I've said after reading your post.
My first post explanation is Reply #162
Just to summarize though:
-My point is to bash the DRM philosophy of MS more than promote linux. Go use something else for all i care(BSD/Solaris/even Mac(without DRM Itunes) is better).
-there are plenty of options that don't involve MS. I've seen many many many network setups that don't require MS stuff and they work great.(google it)
--- End quote ---
Explaining yourself twice? More like you fucking failed to explain yourself adequately the first time. Your points all involve vague concepts, and whenever someone counters you, you just keep repeating the same thing. That doesn't work very well in debates. Your second point was already COMPLETELY countered by my first paragraph (and then Lupin's first paragraph above). Are you reading impaired?
Second, there is no "DRM philosophy", there's just something called "DRM", and that DRM is actually required to use music that I've downloaded. If I didn't have it, then all of these Ruckus tracks (I get Ruckus for free, since I'm enrolled in a college) wouldn't work, at all. Microsoft is NOT THE ONE USING DRM, for fuck's sake, it's ALWAYS the choice of outside companies. Granted, it is true that they mostly started using this because it was already in Vista, but something like this was coming down the tube, inevitably. Like Lupin said, it probably wasn't really Microsoft's incentive; all software companies want some security in their investment. That is also perhaps the reason they don't want to develop for Linux. Either way, the fact that my system has some kind of DRM on it, makes it so that I can play stuff that requires it; I get access to free, legal music that I can download easily. Is it worth the tradeoff of having some DRM thing on my computer that doesn't do shit to impair my use of it (and still lets me pirate MP3s if I so choose)? Fuck yeah.
I just can't see where you're coming from; oh, that's because you're coming from nowhere; everything you said has been countered already, and you seem to not be able to come up with a damn thing, so you just keep repeating yourself. If that's what keeps going, then this isn't something that's worth taking part in, and your opinion should just be ignored entirely.
That aside:
--- Quote ---the UAC control panel will run in a high integrity process, which requires elevation. That was already in the works before this discussion and doing this prevents all the mechanics around SendKeys and the like from working. Second, changing the level of the UAC will also prompt for confirmation.
--- End quote ---
Hmmmm.... Yeah, I have some people at my dorms using the user account control on other people's systems to basically lock people out of the user management area by using their own account to create a dummy admin account. If that isn't some really, really bad control, I don't know what is. I just decided to just disable UAC on my system; it seemed to serve no real purpose. I hope it's better in W7.
Lupin:
i think the problem with drm is not the idea but the implementation. will anyone complain if it's working properly? if the billions of itunes downloads provide any hints, i think no one will complain. despite that, it's still better that there are no drm of any form for anything.
let's take windows genuine advantage for example. the check nags you if you're using a pirated copy of the software. the check also sends something back to microsoft's servers from the rumors i've heard. given these ideas i think the following are problems with wga: (1) if your os is flagged down as pirated by the check even if it's legit, (2) what's the info being sent by wga back home. (1) can be solved by some better checking algorithm by the wga. (2) can resolved by having some independent group verify what wga is sending back home. if these are met, will people complain about this drm? chances are no.
i can't say much about wga though. i didn't install the wga. i get security updates manually and install them manually. i usually reinstall windows every 6 months (because my registry is too messy to deal with) using my own slipstreamed windows installer that contains all the updates released since the last service pack.
AceHigh:
--- Quote from: dankles on February 06, 2009, 11:00:59 PM ---What kind of business stuff can't Linux run? or at least have an equal counter part application (there are a few, but most can be matched by linux).
--- End quote ---
Ok genius, here are a few: CAD programs like Pro/Engineer, Solidworks; VSM programs like Proteus, Multisim, Ultraboard and OrCAD.
And look at one of the world's biggest robot manufacturer ABB, they had UNIX based interface (Conductor UX 5.0), but told their customers to switch to Windows (Conductor NT) in order to get more features.
The truth is, industry used UNIX back in the old days but almost all big manufacturers use Windows today.... or if they don't like it, they make their own dedicated software like KUKA robotics manufacturer.
--- Quote ---So okay, Linux can keep all of its wonderful advanced features, while I stay with the applications that count (that is, any application ever released; compare that to your library. >_>).
--- End quote ---
Word!
CrystalKaeru:
A discussion like this one is completely unnecessary. Whether a company choose one OS or another isn't a proof that that OS is better, just that that OS is better for that company. You can't argue about which OS is the best, or why one OS is better than another. One OS is not better than another, for the very same reason one car isn't better than another car, or anything else for that matter. No, different OS'es is good on different things, and not even necessarily that. Different OS'es is different even if they are equally good on the same things. Everything is about what you like the best or what fit your needs.
There is a reason why people use different OS'es, why some use Linux, other Windows, MacOS and so on. If one OS where better than another, people wouldn't use different OS'es. But people do, and reading this proves that. Some people think that Windows is superior, other think Linux is way better. But all this is the peoples own opinions. And it is impossible to develop a perfect OS, because everyone got different things they like and different needs. More than 100 linux distributions, each one thinking they are the best one, is proof enough for this, right?
Furthermore you never use the operating system as it. You always customize it, removing some programs, adding others, and make changes to the configuration, just so everything fit your needs. Everything is about what you like best yourself, and a discussion about which one is the best is completely unnecessary. You simply use the one you like the best, and others use what they like the best.
iindigo:
--- Quote from: NetJonte on February 07, 2009, 10:46:41 AM ---A discussion like this one is completely unnecessary. Whether a company choose one OS or another isn't a proof that that OS is better, just that that OS is better for that company. You can't argue about which OS is the best, or why one OS is better than another. One OS is not better than another, for the very same reason one car isn't better than another car, or anything else for that matter. No, different OS'es is good on different things, and not even necessarily that. Different OS'es is different even if they are equally good on the same things. Everything is about what you like the best or what fit your needs.
There is a reason why people use different OS'es, why some use Linux, other Windows, MacOS and so on. If one OS where better than another, people wouldn't use different OS'es. But people do, and reading this proves that. Some people think that Windows is superior, other think Linux is way better. But all this is the peoples own opinions. And it is impossible to develop a perfect OS, because everyone got different things they like and different needs. More than 100 linux distributions, each one thinking they are the best one, is proof enough for this, right?
Furthermore you never use the operating system as it. You always customize it, removing some programs, adding others, and make changes to the configuration, just so everything fit your needs. Everything is about what you like best yourself, and a discussion about which one is the best is completely unnecessary. You simply use the one you like the best, and others use what they like the best.
--- End quote ---
Quite right, saying Windows is the best OS because it's what's used by companies in their offices and manufacturing plants is like saying Linux is best because it's used on the bulk of the internet's servers. It's too broad of an assumption; while one might need a wide palette of applications to choose from, another might need more flexibility and customizability at the OS level, while another might want a *NIX without the hassle and annoyances that come with Linux. Different people's needs are *gasp* different.
However, I think the main point Dragoon, xShadow, etc were trying to drive home was the sheer universality of Windows when it comes to being able to run software. While I agree with this, I wish they wouldn't dwarf down the Linux and OS X software selection to be smaller than they actually are - both have several thousands of applications that can run on them natively (Last count on OS X was somewhere around 10,000, and for Linux, just take a look at the program installer for Ubuntu - the list there is massive). The specific programs they need just might not be included in that selection.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version