All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
Muzzy, why does Windows rule?
KernelPanic:
--- Quote from: muzzy ---As long as they're properly documented
--- End quote ---
I like your humour.
Refalm:
--- Quote from: muzzy ---Well, any extras they might add, would have to be in form of assemblies (i.e. APIs). As long as they're properly documented, they can be reimplemented on any platform.
--- End quote ---
Yes, like a DirectX or ActiveX API perhaps :)
muzzy:
Well, if things aren't properly documented, how are developers supposed to develop against them? Thus, no problem, unless you want to run microsoft's products on linux, in which case you might have issues with undocumented crap.
Regarding ActiveX, microsoft has no reason to implement any of it on top of .NET, as .NET can provide superior functionality.
And what comes to DirectX, I think the current windows emulators already run directx apps as well? Doesn't this mean opensource world already has implementations for them? Shouldn't be too tough to fit them to reimplement anything that microsoft provides.
Why not develop OpenGL apis or even something new for .NET instead? That way developers would again have the choice, and there'd be no lock-in issue. If you let microsoft dictate the pace even in open and standardized execution platform, it's your own damn fault of they dictate how things go. It's not Microsoft's fault if everyone else are being complete wimps and unable to implement anything worthwhile.
Kintaro:
--- Quote from: muzzy ---Well, any extras they might add, would have to be in form of assemblies (i.e. APIs). As long as they're properly documented, they can be reimplemented on any platform. Also, nobody says developers have to use what microsoft provides, there are already free implementations of all sorts of useful stuff out there. You can already, today, write gui apps in C# and GTK# so that the stuff works perfectly on both platforms... as long as Mono's implementations aren't fucked, which they often are. Just because documentation is available doesn't mean the developers reimplementing the apis get it right at first try :P
--- End quote ---
I have been learning C# and it is the best language ever. I have been learning it with Visual Studio .NET 2003 and Windows 2003 Server, both run flawlessly. I hope Mono continues to get better and bigger, I have installed it on my Linux Laptop and found some of its features quite medicore, MonoDevelop lacks features that Visual Studio .NET 2003 has, yet all they do is try to emulate it.
If your interested get oriellys Programming C#, you can aqquire them on certain networks in ebook form quite free of charge ;).
piratePenguin:
This is un-fucking-believable...
Here goes nothing:
--- Quote from: muzzy ---I suspect windows is just too complex OS for you guys, so linux and such systems might be a better choice for your needs.
--- End quote ---
Maybe Windows is too damn complex. Since when is complexity a good thing? NEVER!
I used Windows for around about five years and I learned sweet fuck all (sure I could use the "OS", but I sure as hell couldn't make it "stable"). Then, I eventually saw the light, and started using GNU/Linux, which I now love to bits (really). Ten months later, and I rekon I've learned magnitudes more about GNU/Linux than I learned about Windows in my five years or so with Windows.
Conclusion: Windows is shit.
--- Quote from: muzzy ---Average linux users know how to manage files, but how many windows users know how to manage objects?
--- End quote ---
I guess just because feck all people understands Windows, it somehow makes it better? Maybe, but only for the one in a million (you and some others) that somehow does understand it's increadible "complexity". For everyone else, including myself (even after using the OS for about five years), Windows is an unstable piece of shit.
--- Quote from: muzzy ---Indeed. The default windows configuration is quite braindead, and the users who are ignorant of how the system works will typically have a bad system as the result. If Microsoft made it easy to create installers for custom configurations, and made it legit to distribute these to whoever wants them, we could have a totally different windows world out there.
--- End quote ---
Tough shit! "Oh, if Linux supported ACLs by default, we'd have a completely different Linux out there" TOUGH!
Yes, the default Windows configuration is pretty damn shite, and only very few users (namely you, obviously) can fix it up for themselves. I've never ever used a version of Windows fit to call "stable". Ever! You obviously have, we're on a different boat. If windows were free software, you'd be able to fix whatever ya don't like, and I rekon you'd probably do a pretty good job too. Well... ya can't.
BUT: say, approx. 70% of Windows boxes suck balls (using mostly default configs), and the remaining 30% (I'm being very generous here IMO) (like your box that you had to do alot of config'in to get it run smooth) are about as stable as the average GNU/Linux box (dream on!)...
Conclusion: Windows is shit.
--- Quote from: muzzy ---I think windows haters are just ignorant, and want to see if this hypothesis holds true.
--- End quote ---
Muhahaha. Windows haters (moi) are ignorant (and I might be). Well the average Windows user is ignorant too. You're just not normal muzzy...
If you asked every computer user in the world which Operating System is their favourite, I have this mad-"hypothesis", that if anyone says "I dunno" or "What the fuck is an Operating System?!", you can guran-damn-tee that they use Windows. Would you agree, muzzy?
--- Quote from: muzzy ---Tech-savvy or not, I've found that most windows haters simply do not understand how windows works.
--- End quote ---
What percentage of Windows users would you say do understand how Windows works?
--- Quote from: muzzy ---I've found windows to be fairly stable, quite secure, and many parts are well designed. Unfortunately, microsoft values backwards compatibility more than security, so there are some total braindead things around left from single user win16 times. I wish they'd go away, however the problem only relates to win32 apis and the concerned executive subsystem. If some day we can throw that away and move completely to .NET, a lot of the problems will just simply disappear.
--- End quote ---
Again, tough shit.
--- Quote from: muzzy ---And so what if the source isn't available? There is documentation, and the binaries are still there to be analyzed. What, can't read disassembly? Well, not everyone can read C.
--- End quote ---
HOLY FUCK! Muzzy, I know for a fact that you are not stupit.
News just in: there are significantly less people that understand disassembly than understand C. Surprising isn't it? Dumbass.
--- Quote from: muzzy ---In ideal OS design, the scope of access would be minimized in all ways.
--- End quote ---
Oh no! Well I guess MS made a huge mistake by giving the default user root privileges. So much for such an excellent OS design. Heh.
--- Quote from: muzzy ---Linux isn't more secure by design, linux is totally braindead when it comes to design. No ACLs by default, everything's a one big hack, it's a wonder the OS works at all. With processes having to be suid for things to work, everything's pretty damn messy. Also, I laugh at your view that openbsd would be a champion of security. That's just ridiculous.
--- End quote ---
You aren't as smart as you initially came accross as... This is disappointing...
You're very powerful when it comes to reducing gold to nothing though. Just like MS is damn good when it comes to defeating competition.
I'm not saying this is gold or anything, but I can't wait to see what you do with it...
--- Quote from: muzzy ---I know linux, and it's a horrible mess. Just because the source is available doesn't make it any better technically, it's just a matter of freedom. Yeah, I value freedom and that's good stuff about linux, and I hope all of the computing industry will head to move free direction. Some of the things I dislike about proprietary software is that I'm not supposed to fix them, and I'm not supposed to ask the authors about their design and implementation decisions. If I do, they'll likely threaten to sue. This however isn't just a Microsoft issue, it's got to do with the whole industry.
--- End quote ---
The freedom is nice, and I value it greatly, but I must disagree that free software is only an extra freedom. It's a freedom to do something! Surely I shouldn't have to explain this. A freedom is more than something to add to your list of freedoms.
Do you think that Linux would have gotten this far if it was not free software?
Also, muzzy, would you care to explain why my GNU/Linux box has never suffered a hard lock-down in the ten months I've been using it? And why Windows has locked down hundreds of times (on different boxes) in the five years I've used it? 'Cause I'm dying to know. The Linux kernel might well be one big hack, but it sure is a damn good hack.
I'm gonna close here 'cause I needa sleep...
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version