Author Topic: All this habla houbla with MS's GUI  (Read 2177 times)

Calum

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,812
  • Kudos: 1000
    • Calum Carlyle's music
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #15 on: 4 November 2002, 14:55 »
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.
visit these websites and make yourself happy forever:
It's my music! | My music on MySpace | Integrational Polytheism

Calum

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,812
  • Kudos: 1000
    • Calum Carlyle's music
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #16 on: 4 November 2002, 15:52 »
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 ]

visit these websites and make yourself happy forever:
It's my music! | My music on MySpace | Integrational Polytheism

Pantso

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,249
  • Kudos: 55
    • http://www.support-freesoftware.org
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #17 on: 4 November 2002, 19:13 »
quote:
Originally posted by Ex Eleven / b0b 2.1:
Fuck Aqua... its not open source it must be crap...


Interestingly backed up argument! Jeese!   :eek:  And please, do, whenever possible, avoid such stupid remarks about something you have never used before.!

Zombie9920

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 1,309
  • Kudos: 33
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #18 on: 4 November 2002, 20:18 »
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.



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

  • Member
  • **
  • Posts: 866
  • Kudos: 140
    • http://whitehouse.com
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #19 on: 4 November 2002, 20:35 »
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.
Yeah

Calum

  • Global Moderator
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 7,812
  • Kudos: 1000
    • Calum Carlyle's music
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #20 on: 4 November 2002, 20:49 »
quote:
Originally posted by Zombie9920:
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).
those people should get a mac, that's what it's for.  
quote:
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.
 You speak utter rubbish there, my funky friend, most of the bugs and holes in open source software *HAVE* been found, and that's why open source software kicks bum while microsoft plods on creating a range of software designed to keep people buying the same old claptrap without anything new ever actually being developed.  
quote:
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,
those people must be V E R Y  S T U P I D. Do they think market share equals users? have they heard of timesharing? have they heard of a licence that allows a single copy of a program to be copied and redistributed infinitely, with no 'market share' ever being involved?  
quote:
tries to write malicious software to destroy that system, etc.
actually i think you will find that people don't write malicious software for a system that they have no hope of ever breaking into, hence people write malicious software for windows, which is deliberately insecure in order to create an antivirus software industry.  
quote:
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.
actually it's politics and backhanders that influence driivers being written, and even that doesn't work, what with may drivers for linux equalling their windows counterparts and in more and more cases bettering them. Many of these drivers are written by hardware manufacturers themselves, as i am sure you are aware.  
quote:
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).
'waste their time'? those who take the leap of faith early will make the most money and those who don't will be scrabbling for pickings. Tell me why (or don't bother, as is your usual response to questions you know you can't answer) you think they can't make any money by porting to linux programs that they have already written, compared with the wealth you seem to think can be had by writing new programs from scratch for a system that will become obsolete in five years time when everybody realises that their brand new $400 operating system won't do anything for fear of violating copyright law?

 
quote:
Software developers aren't very interested in writing software for Linux because it isn't popular...
hmm, interesting how there's shitloads of software for linux then, isn't it? i wonder who wrote it all? not developers then, i suppose? maybe these magical developers you mention aren't that important then? what planet are you on?  
quote:
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).
you think they think that you mean. your interpretation of the GPL is substandard, to be polite, and whatever you think about what other users think, how does that have any bearing on the licence that a particular developer or company ships their software under? don't answer if it's too hard a question, i know you prefer not to strain your 'mind'.

 
quote:
When will people realize that this world doesn't revolve around free stuff.
many people do know that already. You must have a limited view of the world, and i pity you if you really do confuse 'freedom' with 'free lunch'. Some people are just in this world to make money, and i really do pity them at the end of the day.
quote:
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).

it is big already. suck it.

[ November 04, 2002: Message edited by: Calum & his insidious little spies ]

visit these websites and make yourself happy forever:
It's my music! | My music on MySpace | Integrational Polytheism

hm_murdock

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 2,629
  • Kudos: 378
  • The Lord of Thyme
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #21 on: 7 November 2002, 21:57 »
<Jack Nicholson>

Why can't we all just get along?

</Jack Nicholson>

Linux has good points and bad points.
Mac OS/Mac OS X has good poits and bad points.
Windows XP has good points and bad points.

Linux has fewer bad points than good, is controlled by no corporate body, runs on a lot of hardware, good and bad, and is really, really cool.
Mac OS is roughly half and half, but Apple is too bubbleheaded to have gotten IBM to design some big-iron hardware before now, and Apple corp. sucks, so it has that against it.
Windows XP has roughly half and half, but is made by MS and therefore has that against it.

Linux is the best of them all. Now everybody go away and be happy using what you've got. Oh, and Zombie, stare at the watch...

::waves a watch::

You will use Linux... you will use Linux... you will use Linux.

Even Paul Thurott, the guy who does wininformant.com news has a G4 and also runs Red Hat. He's an ubergeek that favors Windows. He doesn't seem to harbor much, if any, love for MS, but he's fond of XP. Let's all be ubergeeks and love all computers, but hate MS. We can do it. We really can.

Feel the love!  
Go the fuck ~

psyjax

  • VIP
  • Member
  • ***
  • Posts: 1,871
  • Kudos: 55
All this habla houbla with MS's GUI
« Reply #22 on: 7 November 2002, 11:44 »
windoz sux
Psyjax! I RULEZZZZ!!! HAR HAR HAR