Stop Microsoft
All Things Microsoft => Microsoft Software => Topic started by: Talium on 17 August 2004, 13:38
-
Well we all know that Windows has many many bugs but I was wondering if there is good about it and if it has any advantages.If you know any please write. (http://tongue.gif)
-
Compared to other operating systems Windows has two perceivably good things going for it:
- Nearly any piece of hardware is Windows compatible
- It has the largest selection of software
Both of these attributes have their caveats. Supporting such a large amount of hardware often results in flakey drivers, or seemingly unsolvable conflicts. And while Windows has a large selection of software, 95% of it is garbage. Likewise, the hardware market is filled with tons of generic crap, and staying on top of who makes the best parts oftentimes requires hours of web research before building your own box. It's a double-edged sword.
That said, I'd answer your question more directly and say no, there is no inherent advantage to running Windows. The two points mentioned above are not because Windows is technically superior, but because we live in a digital hegemony, and developers and hardware manufactures produce to supply its demands.
After spending a few years away from Windows I literally cringe when I see the unintuitive nature of it. Take something simple like accessing a WebDAV share; in OS X I just hit Command + K and type in the address, but in Windows you have to hop through a number of steps in its "Add Network Place" wizard. One is constantly berated with a bunch of reminders, warnings, pop-ups, and helpers. Why can't I just work? Why does the desktop have to be the equivalent of a construction zone, with millions of signs, lights, flagmen, and potential accidents that need to be avoided? I just want to get my work done!
Then I remember the mentality of Microsoft's audience. MS emerged out of a corporate culture, where everything needed to be neatly presented in a chart, graph, or memo; where being overly cautious, overly structured, and void of humanistic common sense is a positive attribute. Windows' target audience is the same idiots who need reminders on their McDonald's coffee cups that "this beverage may be hot."
So maybe there is something good about Windows. Its utter mediocrity provides a nice point of comparison; a point where you can say "here is the wrong way to do things" then move in the other direction.
[ August 17, 2004: Message edited by: bedouin ]
-
Personally, I still think I can do most of the stuff I do in good old DOS.
-
"I was wondering if there is good about it and if it has any advantages.If you know any please write."
I know one:
(http://www.otakupc.com/etsig/dolphin.gif)
Live Free or Die: Linux
If software can be free, why can't dolphins?
-
Yeah, but the Linux command is cooler:
-
Windows has lots of good stuff
1. Easier to network than any other OS.
2. Easier to get support when you need it. Linux users will yell at you to RTFM, and Mac users will turn your question into a list of reasons why you are still better off using a Mac instead of a PC.
3. Better driver support. Buy an ATI video card, benchmark it in Windows (with a game like RTCW), then benchmark it in Linux. You'll find that the game will run significantly slower in Linux.
4. The Windows swap file is part of the same partition as your data which means the swapfile's size can be changed on the fly. Linux's swap file is a different partition all together, so if you want to increase the size of the swap file, you have to delete the swap partition as well as a data partition. If you only created 2 partitions on your Linux machine, / and swap, you have to format the entire hard drive.
5. Windows has the settings in a more logical location. For example, if I want to change the resolution of my monitor in Windows, I can do it by right clicking on the desktop, click on properties, then go to the settings tab. In Mandrake 8.0 with KDE, you can't change the resolution by clicking the right or middle mouse buttons on the desktop; you have to go into the mandrake control panel.
6. Windows users don't need to run around downloading dependencies just so they can compile a program they want to use. Try compiling WINE on Mandrake 8.0 and you'll see what a nightmare dependencies can be. There are at least 10 different dependencies you need to track down before you can even try to compile WINE, and even then it's kind of tricky.
7. Games. Having to emulate Windows in Linux just to play a DirectX based game is ridiculous.
8. I'm not sure if this is still true, but in the past Linux would have problems trying to use integrated hardware. Windows doesn't have problems with integrated hardware.
9. In Windows, everything is GUI. In Linux, most things are still console. Having to compile every piece of software is all console. Changing user passwords is console. Changing user access to files and folders is console. If you really know how to use the console, the console can be quick, but if you're an average user who sort of knows some of the commands, constantly going back to Linux In A Nutshell to check the command syntax can be very time consuming. In Windows, if you don't know what you are doing, you can still poke around in the GUI to try to accomplish something. In the Linux console, you either know it or you don't. You don't just magically think of the command "chroot" then continue on with whatever you were trying to do.
10. Windows can uninstall things. In Linux, you can only uninstall things that were installed through RPM. Programs installed by compiling a source cannot be uninstalled unless you just happen to save the source, but then again, who saves the source to every program they compile??
Criticism is welcome ;)
-
quote:
Originally posted by ShawnD1:
1. Easier to network than any other OS.
How is it any easier than OS X, that uses Rendezvous? And easier is such a relative description; give actual examples. Many of us consider Microsoft's networking wizards much more difficult to deal with than anything Linux has to offer.
Say I'm near an open wireless connection. In OS X my computer automatically joins and configures itself to use it, with no intervention on my part. No wizards; no steps. It just works, whether I just woke it from sleep or had it open for 2 hours.
The last time I used a Linux distribution I saw GUIs for configuring Samba, network adapters, etc. I'm not sure what would make networking in Windows radically easier.
quote:
2. Easier to get support when you need it. Linux users will yell at you to RTFM, and Mac users will turn your question into a list of reasons why you are still better off using a Mac instead of a PC.
Join a Windows support channel sometime, packed with individuals who are supposedly 'certified' to deal with its problems. If the problem isn't beyond the realm of a simple fix, they will either ignore you or suggest a reinstall (usually the later).
Linux users on the other hand will generally tell you what's wrong, and are actually able to identify what an error means (assuming you can't on your own -- since they're not that cryptic). After the problem has been diagnosed, they may expect you to have enough initiative to repair it on your own, and with Google that's not very difficult.
As far as Mac support is concerned, I've never faced what you describe. There's plenty of chat rooms, websites, and discussion boards with people who can usually solve your problem. Then again, my problems have always been minor, which says something about the OS itself.
quote:
3. Better driver support. Buy an ATI video card, benchmark it in Windows (with a game like RTCW), then benchmark it in Linux. You'll find that the game will run significantly slower in Linux.
This was addressed in my last post. The most popular OS will naturally have more support; that says nothing about the inherent quality of the OS itself, especially when certain manufactures refuse to release specifications for their product that would allow improved driver support to occur.
And besides, if one is a dedicated user of any alternative OS he or she is willing to check compatibility before purchasing hardware. It's kind of like buying a transmission for a Chevy and expecting it to work fine in your Nissan (possibly a bad analogy, I'm not a car person).
quote:
4. The Windows swap file is part of the same partition as your data which means the swapfile's size can be changed on the fly. Linux's swap file is a different partition all together, so if you want to increase the size of the swap file, you have to delete the swap partition as well as a data partition.
You do realize Linux can be configured to use a swap file as well don't you? I'd imagine it might take a slight performance hit though, just as Windows does for not implementing a swap partition.
And you do realize swap space can be resized with a partitioning utility right?
OS X has your beloved swap file by the way, and it can also be configured to use a swap partition if one desires.
quote:
5. Windows has the settings in a more logical location. For example, if I want to change the resolution of my monitor in Windows, I can do it by right clicking on the desktop, click on properties, then go to the settings tab. In Mandrake 8.0 with KDE, you can't change the resolution by clicking the right or middle mouse buttons on the desktop; you have to go into the mandrake control panel.
Well, I'm not sure what's illogical about having display settings in the control panel. In OS X there's a nice little icon in my menu bar that brings up a pull-down menu letting me select the resolution on all of the attached displays, along with some other options. You seem to be addressing learned connivence more than logic. A logical person wanting to change his/her display settings is going to look in a control panel before right clicking and searching contextual menus. Or in the case of OS X -- it's blatantly obvious without doing either.
quote:
6. Windows users don't need to run around downloading dependencies just so they can compile a program they want to use. Try compiling WINE on Mandrake 8.0 and you'll see what a nightmare dependencies can be.
I tend to agree here, which is one reason I'm not using Linux as a desktop OS. However, why do you keep referencing a two-year old Linux distribution (Mandrake 8?) It's at 10 now you know.
quote:
7. Games. Having to emulate Windows in Linux just to play a DirectX based game is ridiculous.
Maybe you should be upset at the game developers who chose to use proprietary tools, not an OS that cannot natively support them. Do you complain that your Gamecube can't play Xbox games?
quote:
8. I'm not sure if this is still true, but in the past Linux would have problems trying to use integrated hardware. Windows doesn't have problems with integrated hardware.
I'm assuming by integrated hardware you mean stuff like onboard sound cards and video? See answer to #3.
quote:
9. In Windows, everything is GUI. In Linux, most things are still console. Having to compile every piece of software is all console. Changing user passwords is console. Changing user access to files and folders is console . . . In Windows, if you don't know what you are doing, you can still poke around in the GUI to try to accomplish something. In the Linux console, you either know it or you don't.
Granted it's been 2 years since I've used Linux as my desktop OS, I vividly remember there being GUI tools to accomplish everything you mention (adding users, file permissions, etc). I'm only assuming that has improved.
And in Linux if you don't know what you're doing there's man, which tends to tell me more than I need to know. There's nothing stopping you from poking around in console.
Then again, I'm an OS X user -- so I can accomplish things either way.
quote:
10. Windows can uninstall things. In Linux, you can only uninstall things that were installed through RPM. Programs installed by compiling a source cannot be uninstalled unless you just happen to save the source, but then again, who saves the source to every program they compile??
Uninstalling in Windows would be nice -- if it actually uninstalled everything. That means cleaning up my registry, and not leaving files or empty folders behind. Not to mention those instances where the uninstaller malfunctions, and ends up creating more problems. Or how about those wonderful spyware apps I clean off my friend's computers, that require one to be on-line to uninstall?
In OS X I drag an app to the trash -- bam, it's uninstalled.
-
quote:
5. Windows has the settings in a more logical location. For example, if I want to change the resolution of my monitor in Windows, I can do it by right clicking on the desktop, click on properties, then go to the settings tab. In Mandrake 8.0 with KDE, you can't change the resolution by clicking the right or middle mouse buttons on the desktop; you have to go into the mandrake control panel.
Mandrake has settings in a more logical location. For example, if I want to change the resolution of my monitor in KDE, I can do it by going into the mandrake control panel. In Windows, you can't change the resolution by going into the mandrake control panel, you have to right click on the desktop, click on properties, then go to the settings tab.
quote:
6. Windows users don't need to run around downloading dependencies just so they can compile a program they want to use.
Really, they don't? The last time I tried to compile a program I wanted to use in Windows, I found there wasn't even a compiler, let alone the required libraries/dependencies. What you really mean is that Windows users don't have a hard time compiling programs because they don't have the ability to compile programs in the first place. Or maybe what you really mean is that installing from binary packages is easier than installing from source which, considering the option to install from binaries also exists in UNIX systems, is a non-argument.
And if you use a program like apt-get (installing programs with which is massively less time-consuming than installing programs in windows) it will install all dependencies for you. Of course that won't work if you're compiling from source but, as I said, that's not really a fair comparison to make considering you can't do that out of the box in Windows anyway.
quote:
9. In Windows, everything is GUI. In Linux, most things are still console.
You're citing arguments against Windows, not for it. One of the major reasons why Windows is so unusable, awkward and unstable is that "everything is a GUI". It's easy to build graphical front-ends to console tools, which is why if you use a distribution like Red Hat or Mandrake, you get GUIs to do pretty much everything.
quote:
10. Windows can uninstall things. In Linux, you can only uninstall things that were installed through RPM. Programs installed by compiling a source cannot be uninstalled unless you just happen to save the source, but then again, who saves the source to every program they compile??
See rebuttal to point 6.
-
What do you like about Windows?
I like the folowing things about Windows:
- The hardware support, if you buy a digital camera, scanner or printer it usually comes with windows drivers.
- Troubleshooting, the configuration is journalled so if you fuckup the registry or install the wrong device driver, it's easy to revert back to the previous configuration. This is especially useful for graphics drivers, if you set your monitor to a mode it doesn't like you wait for 15 seconds and it reverts back to the previous mode.
- Easy installation/uninstallation of software, I know this is easy in Linux too, but standards are a problem in Linux as there are so many different package standards, if a package is unavailable for the distro you use, you have to do a manual install. This is also a major fuckup factor with Windows as things don't always uninstall cleanly, and there is often lots of shit left behind to slow your system down. I have a feeling that this is spyware, but friends of mine have said that it's just due to incompetent programmers.
Edit: USB tags
[ August 24, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
-
quote:
Troubleshooting, the configuration is journalled so if you fuckup the registry or install the wrong device driver, it's easy to revert back to the previous configuration. This is especially useful for graphics drivers, if you set your monitor to a mode it doesn't like you wait for 15 seconds and it reverts back to the previous mode.
The registry is one of the worst things about windows. In UNIX there is nothing so stupid as a single "configuration", so there's no need to journal it. If you change a particular setting and you're concerned about fucking it up, there's nothing stopping you from backing up the config file in question.
And as for troubleshooting in general, it's often impossible in windows due to lack of coherent error messages, and general poor design, over-integration etc.
-
Yes the registry is terrible, but what do you do if a when your installing some software it's installation program fucks up thus corrupting some of your configuration files?
In Windows XP I could just restore the system back to how it was before.
I still like the driver roll back feature though, and the automatic switch to a generic 16 colour VGA mode helped me with installing a new graphics card.
EDIT: spelling
[ August 24, 2004: Message edited by: Aloone ]
-
quote:
4. The Windows swap file is part of the same partition as your data which means the swapfile's size can be changed on the fly. Linux's swap file is a different partition all together, so if you want to increase the size of the swap file, you have to delete the swap partition as well as a data partition. If you only created 2 partitions on your Linux machine, / and swap, you have to format the entire hard drive.
That is, to be quite blunt, ignorant.
The reason to put the swap file on its own partition is that it increases performance. You do not take performance hits from either resizing the swap file or having it be fragmented.
Its also easier to put the swap file on a hard drive other than your primary hard disk, which also increases performance.
You can, and should do all these things in Windows if you care about performance.
Linux also supports swap files on a regular filesystem. This is the only way Windows does it. You can use only a swap partition, a swap file (on a normal filesystem), a swap partition and a swap file, etc. etc. etc.
Windows swap is not superior to Linux swap.
[ August 24, 2004: Message edited by: M. O'Brien ]
-
I can do better than you at replying to his post. No, not better, just more Jimmy James-like.
quote:
Windows has lots of good stuff
It sure does.
quote:
1. Easier to network than any other OS.
Um... Yes and no. Networking is a black mark on all OSes currently. I've had Windows boxes hook right up to a network and immediately see each others' file shares and open them. I've had Linux just work, as well. I've also seen both of them just not work. Shitty.
quote:
2. Easier to get support when you need it. Linux users will yell at you to RTFM, and Mac users will turn your question into a list of reasons why you are still better off using a Mac instead of a PC.
Not all Linux users are like that. I hate people who say "RTFM, n00b. and if u want teh manuel u haf 2 GOOGLE, N00B". I thought the same way a while back, because the only exposure I had to Linux users was here at fuckMicrosoft, and they, honesty, were none too helpful.
I, however, will go out of my way to give you a hand, and so will many others.
quote:
3. Better driver support. Buy an ATI video card, benchmark it in Windows (with a game like RTCW), then benchmark it in Linux. You'll find that the game will run significantly slower in Linux.
My NVidia GF4 is faster in Linux than in Windows.
quote:
4. The Windows swap file is part of the same partition as your data which means the swapfile's size can be changed on the fly. Linux's swap file is a different partition all together, so if you want to increase the size of the swap file, you have to delete the swap partition as well as a data partition. If you only created 2 partitions on your Linux machine, / and swap, you have to format the entire hard drive.
I think bedouin covered this very well, save for the fact that he failed to mention that Windows NT can be easily made to use a dedicated swap partition.
quote:
5. Windows has the settings in a more logical location. For example, if I want to change the resolution of my monitor in Windows, I can do it by right clicking on the desktop, click on properties, then go to the settings tab. In Mandrake 8.0 with KDE, you can't change the resolution by clicking the right or middle mouse buttons on the desktop; you have to go into the mandrake control panel.
Yeah, but since when did anybody say that it was a rule of human interface that the DESKTOP was in any way related to the display. It's much more logical to associate the display with other hardware or system settings than it is to associate it with colors and desktop picture.
quote:
6. Windows users don't need to run around downloading dependencies just so they can compile a program they want to use. Try compiling WINE on Mandrake 8.0 and you'll see what a nightmare dependencies can be. There are at least 10 different dependencies you need to track down before you can even try to compile WINE, and even then it's kind of tricky.
It's called apt. Get it, use it, love it.
quote:
7. Games. Having to emulate Windows in Linux just to play a DirectX based game is ridiculous.
But it works, and works well. I've seen many DX games that run BETTER in WineX.
quote:
8. I'm not sure if this is still true, but in the past Linux would have problems trying to use integrated hardware. Windows doesn't have problems with integrated hardware.
In the past and present, Windows XP still does not support the USB host controller on my dad's 1999-ish Dell workstation. Why is that? Who knows. Linux supports it.
quote:
9. In Windows, everything is GUI. In Linux... blah ...you were trying to do.
Yay. I can do nearly anything via GUI or the shell. Same in *nix and Windows.
quote:
10. Windows can uninstall things. In Linux, you can only uninstall things that were installed through RPM. Programs installed by compiling a source cannot be uninstalled unless you just happen to save the source, but then again, who saves the source to every program they compile??
I've found that in my experience, typically *nix users don't uninstall things. That just doesn't matter.
-
quote:
Say I'm near an open wireless connection. In OS X my computer automatically joins and configures itself to use it, with no intervention on my part. No wizards; no steps. It just works, whether I just woke it from sleep or had it open for 2 hours.
Well I've never tried wireless, so MacOS probably does wireless a lot better. For wired connections with a router, I just plug computers into the router, turn them on, and they're automatically ready for sharing.
quote:
Join a Windows support channel sometime, packed with individuals who are supposedly 'certified' to deal with its problems. If the problem isn't beyond the realm of a simple fix, they will either ignore you or suggest a reinstall (usually the later).
When you have a Windows problem, you should talk to real tech people, not some certified jerk who knows nothing. Places like Ars Technica and Anandtech are where you should go when you have a Windows problem. Hardware enthusiasts are usually familiar with operating systems as well. ;)
When asking Linux questions, the people at Anandtech and Ars Technica are not so bad. The people you really need to avoid are the people in unix-only type forums and newgroups. If you ask a question that requires anything less than an IT degree to answer, they'll just make fun of you. :mad:
quote:
[about drivers]This was addressed in my last post. The most popular OS will naturally have more support; that says nothing about the inherent quality of the OS itself, especially when certain manufactures refuse to release specifications for their product that would allow improved driver support to occur.
I agree that better driver support is not because Windows is a better OS, but using Windows still gives the advantage of better drivers.
quote:
And you do realize swap space can be resized with a partitioning utility right?
Not with Mandrake's utility, Disk Drake. If you try to resize a partition, it warns you that everything on the partition will be deleted.
quote:
why do you keep referencing a two-year old Linux distribution (Mandrake 8?) It's at 10 now you know.
I used Mandrake 8.0 longer than any other Linux versions, so it's what I'm most familiar with. I tried 9.0, and it was pretty much the same. 10 is probably the same as well.
quote:
Maybe you should be upset at the game developers who chose to use proprietary tools, not an OS that cannot natively support them.
I'm not sure about the Linux situation, but I know DirectX can be ported to MacOS fairly easily with the use of MacDX. Devs who stay away from porting to the Mac are doing so because they don't think they can get a return on the time and money spent trying to distribute a Mac version. It doesn't have anything to do with incompatibility. After all, BF1942 was ported to the Mac.
quote:
I'm assuming by integrated hardware you mean stuff like onboard sound cards and video? See answer to #3.
The problems were not about "good enough" Linux drivers. The problems were about a total lack of compatibility. Those problems are probably fixed by now though.
quote:
And in Linux if you don't know what you're doing there's man, which tends to tell me more than I need to know. There's nothing stopping you from poking around in console.
Man only helps you if you almost know what you are doing. You can type "man chroot" to get help, but if you didn't know the command chroot before that, there's not really much you can do with the man pages.
quote:
Uninstalling in Windows would be nice -- if it actually uninstalled everything. That means cleaning up my registry, and not leaving files or empty folders behind. Not to mention those instances where the uninstaller malfunctions, and ends up creating more problems. Or how about those wonderful spyware apps I clean off my friend's computers, that require one to be on-line to uninstall?
Although the uninstall process is really half-ass, it at least deletes the bulk of the files. When trying to remove a Linux program installed from compiling a source, you have to hunt down every file it created. A few files in the libraries, some under usr, a few in the man pages, the binary in one of the bin folders. If you use Linux for 1 year, you'll find that your hard drive is just a mess. You have garbage files everywhere that are pieces of programs you wanted to get rid of. In Windows, garbage reminiscence is usually just left in the registry where it can be removed by one of the many free registry cleaning tools. Garbage files left in Linux are not as easy to clean because you can't just run a program to detect if the files are useful.
-
quote:
Not all Linux users are like that. I hate people who say "RTFM, n00b. and if u want teh manuel u haf 2 GOOGLE, N00B". I thought the same way a while back, because the only exposure I had to Linux users was here at fuckMicrosoft, and they, honesty, were none too helpful.
People only say "RTFM" when someone is being lazy i.e. asking someone else to answer a question that they could more easily answer themselves.
And if you search this site's UNIX forum for the phrase "RTFM", you get about 10 hits from the last 2 years, and most of those aren't actually people telling someone else to RTFM.
-
Its funny that even now, the same myths and FUD can still be debated over and over again.
I agree with jimmy james that networking can be tricky no matter what OS you use. However, in my experiance I have never had any problems in linux. Plenty in windows.
I've NEVER EVER had ANY linux user say RTFM......
That (to me) is a myth.
and for me, windows has really bad driver support and if you want any software that is half decent. Be prpared to pay out LOTS of money or pirte it. Eather case. You might get infected. Or if you are a 'power user' and patch your box. You arn't going to get any work done any ways (dido after the 6 months time line.). Thats after the fact that the average price for a machine (here in canada) is over a grand easy! Also windows does not follow any standards what so ever. If one person has a machine that is running windows 98 and then wants to upgrade to XP you better find out first whether your application can fist be able be supported in XP. Most times the answer is a definate no. Even to application to application. M$ Office 97 vs M$ Office XP. Where only the document itself is being shared, will still not work!
But windows is good. It is good at something. That is to write those viruses, trojans and spyware. It is easy to infect that machine and great for testing such stuff for a n00b that wants to know how that stuff works. Windows is a great hobby OS! You can even wirte one trojan and unlike legit software and or patches etc... It will run on all version of windows, heck you can even discover more ways to do the same thing! Like I have said a great hobby OS.
(http://graemlins/thumbsup.gif)
[ August 31, 2004: Message edited by: kn0wn / BOB ]
-
Off topic:
Go kill yourself, Solaris.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Canadian Lover:
Off topic:
Go kill yourself, Solaris.
Canadian Lover, that slur was uncalled for; Kn0wn was posting insightful comments in this thread. The same cannot be said of your disparaging remarks towards Kn0wn, including the thread you started in the Lounge (if anyone wonders why I edited the URL, it was because he was deliberately pointing it towards the forum member in question to encourage negative publicity towards him).
This behaviour will not be tolerated in my sections. Consider yourself warned.
-
quote:
Originally posted by Laukev7 / BOB:
Canadian Lover, that slur was uncalled for; Kn0wn was posting insightful comments in this thread. The same cannot be said of your disparaging remarks towards Kn0wn, including the thread you started in the Lounge (if anyone wonders why I edited the URL, it was because he was deliberately pointing it towards the forum member in question to encourage negative publicity towards him).
This behaviour will not be tolerated in my sections. Consider yourself warned.
When Quirk disagreed with me, he told me to kill myself. The mods did jack shit. Therefor I must have the right to be a dick. It's fair.
-
I don't recall seeing TheQuirk interrupting discussions about Microsoft Windows just to tell you to kill yourself. There was no substance to your post; you posted this for the sole reason to harass a forum member.
I have interveined against Jimmy James when he harrassed you, at my own perils. And if you're going to harass people, then I'm going to do the same against you. It's only fair.
You'd better stop this, and now. Your track record puts you in a very bad position to negociate.
[ August 31, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]
-
quote:
Originally posted by Laukev7 / BOB:
I don't recall seeing TheQuirk interrupting discussions about Microsoft Windows just to tell you to kill yourself. There was no substance to your post; you posted this for the sole reason to harass a forum member.
I have interveined against Jimmy James when he harrassed you, at my own perils. And if you're going to harass people, then I'm going to do the same against you. It's only fair.
You'd better stop this, and now. Your track record puts you in a very bad position to negociate.
[ August 31, 2004: Message edited by: Laukev7 / BOB ]
Fine.
-
quote:
the only exposure I had to Linux users was here at fuckMicrosoft, and they, honesty, were none too helpful.
Corollary: I should note that this was back during the "dark days" of summer/early fall of 03 when we had a lot of really crappy people here. Many of the *nix guys we have now (who are many of the same people) will help out a lot.
-
----MS emerged out of a corporate culture, where everything needed to be neatly presented in a chart, graph, or memo; where being overly cautious, overly structured, and void of humanistic common sense is a positive attribute. Windows' target audience is the same idiots who need reminders on their McDonald's coffee cups that "this beverage may be hot."-----
Mind if I put that in my signature?
-
quote:
Originally posted by JanusChrist:
----MS emerged out of a corporate culture, where everything needed to be neatly presented in a chart, graph, or memo; where being overly cautious, overly structured, and void of humanistic common sense is a positive attribute. Windows' target audience is the same idiots who need reminders on their McDonald's coffee cups that "this beverage may be hot."-----
Mind if I put that in my signature?
If no one else is complaining about that, I don't see any reason why not.