All Things Microsoft > Microsoft Software
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
Calum:
what a shame, zombie 90210 hat most of your recent comments concerning which system is better are based on two things. firstly market share, which i have already dealt with a number of times, but which you still hold up as some sort of proof that there's nothing more important than the almighty buck, and this latest pet of yours, the GUI.
a GUI does not the system make. microsoft are notorious for showing off their GUIs while cunningly steering prospective buyers clear of the vast minefields of bugs and holes in their products. Unfortunately for progress, that has spawned a generation (of which you seem to be a part) that takes these bugs for granted, convinced that they must be there, little realising that while software must contain bugs to begin with, they can always be worked out of a product (well nearly always, depending on how backwards compatible you want to be). People like you accept computer bugs that were around years ago, as if you must just live with them. It's a shame that windows users don't make more of a hullabaloo about the real issues, instead of trumpetting off about what nice pretty pictures microsoft can draw on their screens this year.
i refer you to my comments on this page.
Calum:
oh yes, and as for apple, it has always been ahead of microsoft in the GUI stakes. This machine here was brought out in 1978, and you can see here and here some pictures of VisiCalc, the first spreadsheet program, also out in 1978, running on it. The Apple II was a colour machine, and was devised as such so that Breakout and other games could be played on it in colour. To me, this pisses in the eye of those 'windows is much better than macs for gaming' pillocks. They should open their minds a bit. (and stop giving so much of a shit about computer games for a start, but that's anopther story)
here, here, and here, you can see microsoft's attempts to compete, and remember, these screenshots are not contemporary to the Apple II (here's what Gates and Allen were producing software for at about this time). These microsoft DOS screenshots date to a few years later, and that's a long time in the microcomputer business. That last one, incidentally, is the DOS port of VisiCalc.
Just thought we might be interested in the roots of nice looking GUIs... Apple has been ahead of microsoft since the GUI was invented (but never capitalised on) by Xerox at PARC. Incidentally, it turns out that they also invented the PC (the Xerox Alto) and the 10Mbps network cable too, but never marketed them.
[ November 04, 2002: Message edited by: Calum-21.2 ]
Pantso:
quote:Originally posted by Ex Eleven / b0b 2.1:
Fuck Aqua... its not open source it must be crap...
--- End quote ---
Interestingly backed up argument! Jeese! :eek: And please, do, whenever possible, avoid such stupid remarks about something you have never used before.!
Zombie9920:
quote:Originally posted by Calum-21.2:
what a shame, zombie 90210 hat most of your recent comments concerning which system is better are based on two things. firstly market share, which i have already dealt with a number of times, but which you still hold up as some sort of proof that there's nothing more important than the almighty buck, and this latest pet of yours, the GUI.
a GUI does not the system make. microsoft are notorious for showing off their GUIs while cunningly steering prospective buyers clear of the vast minefields of bugs and holes in their products. Unfortunately for progress, that has spawned a generation (of which you seem to be a part) that takes these bugs for granted, convinced that they must be there, little realising that while software must contain bugs to begin with, they can always be worked out of a product (well nearly always, depending on how backwards compatible you want to be). People like you accept computer bugs that were around years ago, as if you must just live with them. It's a shame that windows users don't make more of a hullabaloo about the real issues, instead of trumpetting off about what nice pretty pictures microsoft can draw on their screens this year.
i refer you to my comments on this page.
--- End quote ---
The GUI may not make the system, but the GUI does make the system it sits on more attractive. If the system looks attractive and is easy to use it is going to be preferred by most people(that is Humans are). Most people want something that isn't going to be painful to look at and they want something that is easy to use(not everybody likes spending alot of time dicking around with stuff). Sure MS products have holes and bugs but so does Open Source software. The only reason the millions of bugs that have been tracked in Linux weren't made publicly known is because less than 1% of the world uses Linux so most people don't really care. Why make a big public deal out of something that most people don't use? Market share makes a big difference in how hard some people try to exploit bugs for the popular system, tries to write malicious software to destroy that system, etc. That market share makes a big difference in what OS app/game programmers write thier software for and it also makes a big difference for what OS hardware makers choose to write thier drivers for. Most hardware and software companies do not even waste thier time porting thier software and drivers to Linux(why should they, they aren't going to make much profits off of Linux).
Software developers aren't very interested in writing software for Linux because it isn't popular...and more importantly, because Linux people tend to think that the source code of thier software needs to be made publically available(which means any Joe Dick in the Linux community can easily steal what those developers worked hard for to create).
When will people realize that this world doesn't revolve around free stuff. Hell no, people and companies want to make $$$. Open Source software will never be big simply because there is a lack of interest in it(a.k.a. there isn't much money to be made making stuff for it).
Bazoukas:
hmm so thats why oooohhh I dont know, the big Hollywood companies are using Linux for their graphics.
Hmm geeeezzz yeah, closed source lets you modify your app in any way you want right?
Get over it man. Most programs out there that are ported for Windows dont do anything more than the apps writen for Linux.
Please, I BEG YOU infact, to give me an example of how and where the GUI functionality of Windows is superior compared to Gnome or KDE.
And I also BEG YOU to show me a more rapid rate of development of that of the OS community. ANd please remember the OS does not have the big bucks that MS has.
And there are programs out there that are closed source for Linux, and I dont see anybody bitching about it. Infact the programs that are closed source are programs that were designed for HEAVY DUTY graphics or server tasks.
I dont know if you like Star Wars, but if you do and you already have watched Star Wars Episode II, just think of Linux when you watch the graphics.
Oh how much money did the movie make? I believe millions and millions of dollars. Same applies for Titanic, Little Stuart and so on and so on.
Oracle's prefered platform is Linux. So that should tell you something. And ORacle is Closed Source as well.
Navigation
[0] Message Index
[#] Next page
[*] Previous page
Go to full version