OS- Your opinions

The Corinthian

Originally posted by JustHalf
That's not my story - that's one referred to me after our Netsoc was having "troubles" with getting Solaris working. Ask Gerry for a more current one.

I can't stand some of the ways it acts. I much prefer FreeBSD. Mmmh, nice. But if Solaris works for you, and you're comfortable with it, respect.

I'm tempted to play with FreeBSD too, I share my apartment with a FreeBSD evangalist who's pretty much brainwashed me at this stage :rolleyes:

My only problem with non-MSOS's is that the availability of the vast majority of software packages is nil, and dealing with clinets who run MS becomes a serious headache

dahamsta

I'm tempted to play with FreeBSD too, I share my apartment with a FreeBSD evangalist who's pretty much brainwashed me at this stage

Heh, the Linux/*BSD are a bit like a cult really aren't they? (That's "cult".)

My only problem with non-MSOS's is that the availability of the vast majority of software packages is nil

It depends what kind of software you're talking about really. If you're just talking about office stuff, Linux really is getting quite mature. Gaming is a problem, but that never bothered me.

and dealing with clinets who run MS becomes a serious headache

Again though, if it's just office stuff, it doesn't have to. StarOffice is compatible with Word, and I presume other apps are too. Word bites anyway.

adam

Typedef

FreeBSD 44 ownz ever other OS, maybe with the exception of Slackware 8.0 running 2.4.x.

Just Half ok, sure I'll meet you for coffee
cout@eircom.net.

Oh und JustHalf, what distorted train of thought has led you to believe that XP will be the only OS/Large App with a restrictive licence? Not that reading the tarrot is one of my specialities, but seeing as how mß licencing has been becoming ever more restrictive und intrusive, is it not enivatible the harsh licencing will spread to all of their monopolistic softwarez?
Would you believe that after installing office97 on my mother's new XP machine that the fscker told me it wouldn't start access without a licence for it on that machine?

Hmm all I know is that I am subjected to having to use windowz all day in work and when I get home I don't know if I could think of a better way to unwind then to fsck around with BSD or Linux for 8-10 hours.

I am holding a 2k disk which may or may not get installed on my system, but seeing as how it would almost never get used I don't see why I should go to the bother of dding my various partitions to make the 2k bootloader work..... ahhh m$ aren't satisfied to monopolies the desktop they need the mbr too muhahaha.

OH and what possible reason would make me want to give microßoft more of my hard earned money to buy yet another os which is meant to have all the bug fixes that last one did not have? No way I might put 2k onto my mother's machine and father's machine in the hope that the blue screens won't be as frequent.
m??r0ß0¢T sux

JustHalf

Originally posted by Typedef
Oh und JustHalf, what distorted train of thought has led you to believe that XP will be the only OS/Large App with a restrictive licence? Not that reading the tarrot is one of my specialities, but seeing as how mß licencing has been becoming ever more restrictive und intrusive, is it not enivatible the harsh licencing will spread to all of their monopolistic softwarez?

When did I mention licensing? I was talking about registration. What with that being the words used previously and all.

Originally posted by Typedef
Would you believe that after installing office97 on my mother's new XP machine that the fscker told me it wouldn't start access without a licence for it on that machine?

Ha! Owned!

Originally posted by Typedef
Hmm all I know is that I am subjected to having to use windowz all day in work and when I get home I don't know if I could think of a better way to unwind then to fsck around with BSD or Linux for 8-10 hours.

What?

Originally posted by Typedef
I am holding a 2k disk which may or may not get installed on my system, but seeing as how it would almost never get used I don't see why I should go to the bother of dding my various partitions to make the 2k bootloader work..... ahhh m$ aren't satisfied to monopolies the desktop they need the mbr too muhahaha.

I know Mandrake overwrites the Windows 2000 bootloader with LILO by default, so it's not exclusive to Windows.

Just make a boot disk for one of your Linux variants, install Windows 2000, boot into Linux, restore LILO.

Originally posted by Typedef
OH and what possible reason would make me want to give microßoft more of my hard earned money to buy yet another os which is meant to have all the bug fixes that last one did not have? No way I might put 2k onto my mother's machine and father's machine in the hope that the blue screens won't be as frequent.
m??r0ß0¢T sux

Well, you already have it it seems, so you don't need to.

_CreeD_

One thing guys, after reading through all the different arguments...what do you actually do on your alternative OS'?

I've stuck with Win2k not because I think it's flawless but because I can get software to do everything I want (Games, Graphics and Music creation) very easily, and it runs these very well.
I've thought about putting on Linux and others but can't see the point if there's a limited software range for the things I actually need an OS to run.
Now I may be completely wrong but from every post I've seen about alternative Os' it's always seemed more of a hobby or point proving exercise for the user's (With the exception of web-developers).
Sooo, honestly, enlighten me....:)

The Corinthian

Other than the sheer range of application, many free and downloadable, of apps for Win32, that just don’t exist on UNIX, development for Win32 applications, such as COM or even Access (a quick money spinner), which many clients require, is realistically a non-starter.

So I would side with _CreeD_ on this and disagree with dahamsta – StarOffice is a good package but not much use to me if I want to do a presentation for a client for example (and anyhow, I’d never send a document to a client in Word format, I’d send it as a PDF – copy protected at that). I’m sure it’s all possible, but is it worth the extra hassle?

I tried working this way on MacOS years ago (I notice no one has mentioned MacOS), but it was impractical and fairly pointless trying to develop anything that was going to sit on a Windoze machine.

dahamsta

Viola!

I've never used KPresenter myself (not into that kind of corporate doodoo ), but it has an exellent reputation. As to sending documents, well, I have to admit that I'm a HTML addict - I use it for nearly everything. Granted, the formatting and printing capabilities don't compare, but I'm more comfortable with it, CSS has improved it a hundred-fold, and hell, it doesn't get much more compatible than HTML. If I need security, I use PGP. If my client don't have PGP, they have to get it. (But then I'm weird. ) As to Office apps, well, Star Office isn't the only one out there. In fact, the last time I tried Star Office, it truly sucked, big time. It was bloat, even worse than Office. But that was a long time ago, and there's the new version, or KOffice, or Applixware, and a few more. And if you really can't bring yourself to use one of them, there's Wine and/or VMware and Office.

I'm not saying Linux is the be-all and end-all to everything though, not by any manner of means. I'm writing this on Win2K, because I've found Linux disruptive to my productivity. But on every release of Red Hat, I try it, and it gets closer and closer to being genuinely usable from the GUI. And for me, it doesn't have to be up to perfect standards (Windows has never been anyway), it just needs to be usable, because "hackability" is a huge boon. In Windows, if I don't like the way my desktop works, or the way I dial into the network, or I don't like $blah, I can only change it within the parameters allowed within the OS. In Linux, I can quite literally do anything. And you don't need to be a hacker to do that. Shell scripts are a piece of piddle when you get the hang of it - I do in in PHP - and it's fun to experiment.

Like I said though, on every release I try it out. With Red Hat 7.1, I thought I had it, and I deleted Windows and installed Red Hat as my primary OS. Shortly afterwards, I went running back to Windows with my tail between my legs. Now I have Red Hat 7.2 installed on a new partition, and I absolutely love it. It's absolutely fantastic. The only thing holding me back from making the jump is a problem with IDSN config. As soon as I get that sorted out, I'm gone, never to return. XP isn't on the cards. And on my servers, it isn't even an option.

adam

The Corinthian

Fair enough dahamsta.

Still I am curious to know why MacOS hasn't been touted here. Opinions?

JustHalf

I use FreeBSD for programming, both for the web and for network programs. It's got a great compiler, and I find it's very open.

MacOS probably hasn't been brought up as we almost all use x86 processors!

The Corinthian

Originally posted by JustHalf
MacOS probably hasn't been brought up as we almost all use x86 processors!

D'oh

Still, in a fairly wide debate on OS's, it's curious that MacOS hasn't made an appearence at all, esp. since it's recent fore into UNIX.

Gordon

Mac OS X meant to be a very stable operating system. I can't wait to install 10.1, should be getting it soon.

A friend of mine has OSX and has had Windows and MacOS 9 working alongside each other. If an underlying os crashes OSX will not.

If Mac can make OSX for PC's with its UNIX shell or kernel or whatever it's called, they will.... own! I am thrumming my thumbs.

Slydice

What is mac os like, (possibly someone put up a screenshot?)

I've never actually used it,

In my life i've only ever used an Amiga 600, Atari <insert number> (i forget it was that long ago), Win 3.0, Win 3.1, Win 3.<number> for networks, Win 95, Win 98, Win98 SE, Win NT ,solaris, redhat, suse, and mandrake I've encountered Win ME and Win 2000.


Currently i use Win 98 SE, Mandrake 8 ( i think it is mandrake though very nice to use imo ) and Win NT pretty much daily.

Can Mac OS be compared to any of these????

Red Moose

Originally posted by _CreeD_
One thing guys, after reading through all the different arguments...what do you actually do on your alternative OS'?

I've stuck with Win2k not because I think it's flawless but because I can get software to do everything I want (Games, Graphics and Music creation) very easily, and it runs these very well.
I've thought about putting on Linux and others but can't see the point if there's a limited software range for the things I actually need an OS to run.
Now I may be completely wrong but from every post I've seen about alternative Os' it's always seemed more of a hobby or point proving exercise for the user's (With the exception of web-developers).
Sooo, honestly, enlighten me....:)

To be honest it's exactly that, but you have to remember that a significant proportion of people do not sit at a desk all day 9-5 (8-6?) using Word or making databases or spreadsheets. I prefer it as a hobby - hence why I still keep Amiga stuff around and have a ZX Spectrum emulator.

If you need stuff for work the decision seems to be rarely with you. I guess that would suck to be told what to do but hey some people mix work with play I prefer the two separate

dahamsta

What is mac os like, (possibly someone put up a screenshot?)

So it's made by Apple <apple.com> and it's called Mac OS X. Hmm... I wonder <apple.com/macosx> what the url <apple.com/macosx> could be <apple.com/macosx>???

Heh, just kidding. There's plenty of stuff on OS X there, including some QuickTime movies. Not that I'd expect anyone in their right mind to install QuickTime...

You might need this too...

heh

adam

Supercell

For those considering WinXP, just came accross an article which confirms what i personally have experienced, and why i'm back to Win2k....interesting reading imho.

http://www.infoworld.com/articles/tc/xml/01/10/29/011029tcwinxp.xml

Koopa

corinthian, why would you trust someone elses opinion on an OS without ever using it yourself?

for all you know, 2 years ago regi could have been swearing by microsoft products (hi dan!)

in the end, i use win98 because its the most convenient for me, im not running any servers so i dont "need" to run linux/unix currently, solaris is not more stable than linux, it may be more stable than the default setup or whatever of the distribution of linux you are using, but if you are going to be using the system, you will presumably be setting it up properly (not leaving it at the default installs anyway)

as for mac-os , last time i used it was probably 3 years ago, but it was horrible, it was like some nightmare version of windows where the pc told you absolutely nothing(even less than windows) about whats going on, just a bomb symbol with "system error 32423: the system will reboot" or some crap at random intervals
basically, mac-os kindof comes under windows, in the windows vs unix argument, mac-os is like a kindof even-worse version of windows

whats more, mac-os wont run on x86 based pc's, so discussing mac-os in a thread started by a guy looking for advice on what os to install on his pc wouldnt be a lot of help

Typedef

Originally posted by _CreeD_
Win2k, the first Microsoft OS that actually does what it's supposed to. Put it on and you won't regret it.

Typedef, Question, how does your seeming complete inability to get your Windows-Me working properly make Linux a better alternative Than Win2k?....
Mind you I agree totally on the XP activation sh1te.

Errrm sorry mate, I didn't design windows cause seeing as how I am an uber ha»or I would have done it properly ok?.

Secondly it is not my fault the fscking thing blue screens if I happen to try and for example write outside the constraints of an array ok, how come it is that you write outside an array in windows and if you are lucky you might be able to log-out and back in, but in *BSD & Linux variants you could leave entire megs of unfree malloc'd memory have huge array overwrites without so much as X crashing?

I have to laugh because I used to install drivers in 9x variants professionally for Gateway ie they used to pay me to do that for the masses of windows users as most ppl here seem to be ok so? So I find it a bit funny that people can/have come to me asking me to install this and that and pay me to do it, and then when I venture an opinon on something I might have (some) experience in the same set of people cast doubt on my abilities to fix windows? or when someone dares to venture away from the fold of ms_bolloxology lots of trolls such as yourself start casting aspersions on people and their abilities to fix things ha? Is it that you resent others or that you desire to drag people down to your level of bitchery?

If for example microsoft had not based ME on a 9x kernel it would have undoubtly have been more stable do you agree? If it were possible to supplant windows kernel's as readily as linux kernels do you not think I would have tried? Now seeing as how I was not consulted by Bill and co on this decision just how do you propose I stop 9x variants blue screening, nt variants gui crashes leading to grinding hault and total lack of credible security on all m$ machines? Maybe I should wave the wond of irrationality and muppetery people like you seem so fond of using, and magically fix years of deliberate mis-development?

Koopa

I find it a bit funny that people can/have come to me asking me to install this and that and pay me to do it, and then when I venture an opinon on something I might have (some) experience in the same set of people cast doubt on my abilities to fix windows?

i think its pretty safe to say at this point that the people you're arguing with here are not the same set of people who were paying you to install stuff for them at gateway.
OEM companies (like gateway) are not exactly known for their superb software installs, and brilliant configurations of their machines

Typedef

Originally posted by Koopa

i think its pretty safe to say at this point that the people you're arguing with here are not the same set of people who were paying you to install stuff for them at gateway.

Maybe so, but while I accept that some people who condone windows in favour of *nix may not be the whinging incapable users that the vast majority of windows users and abusers seem to be, how many Linux,BSD,Sun,Insert_Unix_variant users do you know who similarly defend the inadequacies of their OS at the expence of other people? If truth be told most *nix users are the most inclined to point out flaws in an OS surely? JustHalf while I may not agree with him seems to have used BSD, if you believe him. As far as _CreeD_ has indicated, he could be a stock windows 98 user who has never even seen X-Windows let alone used any kind of *nix variant and is lambasting me for daring to suggest that something is wrong with Windows, an operating system you have to pay for if you buy your system from a shop or OEM(like it or not you have to buy it in most cases right?) and that Linux at it's ever growing stages of maturity offers a better way of computing especially to people who want to use their PC for more than turning it on and watching it crash!

Yeah I guess the adage rings true,
"Argue with idots and they will drag you down to their level where they beat you with experience".

Originally posted by Koopa

OEM companies (like gateway) are not exactly known for their superb software installs, and brilliant configurations of their machines

No argument here, in fact that is one of the reasons I left, unofficial company policy was that if a call went on for longer than 15 mins the Tech was to format the harddrive, no bull it happens, this was a particularly apt fix for the broken CDROM Drive.

Still what are the chances people saying I can't fix windows and that's why windows doesn't work considering I must have installed 10,000 drivers maybe more in windows working for Gateway are, when compaired to the legions of Unix users like myself who claim that windows has been delibrately mis-developed so as to provide a continual source of customers for Microsoft is?

For example when it was established that the windows 95 kernel was unstable why did Microsoft bring out 3 more versions of windows based on this same unstable kernel?
Did I make them do that? So how is windows ME and from what I've experienced of 2k being unstable and unreliable my fault?

JustHalf

Originally posted by Typedef
Maybe so, but while I accept that some people who condone windows in favour of *nix may not be the whinging incapable users that the vast majority of windows users and abusers seem to be, how many Linux,BSD,Sun,Insert_Unix_variant users do you know who similarly defend the inadequacies of their OS at the expence of other people?

What? Please, how did anyone here "defend the inadequacies" of "their" OS at the "expen(s)e of other people"?

Originally posted by Typedef
If truth be told most *nix users are the most inclined to point out flaws in an OS surely?

Based on what?

Originally posted by Typedef
JustHalf while I may not agree with him seems to have used BSD, if you believe him.

Well, I do use it. Equally anyone else could question the accuracy of anything you have said.

And for all I know, you could agree with me. You never seem to answer my questions though.

Originally posted by Typedef
As far as _CreeD_ has indicated, he could be a stock windows 98 user who has never even seen X-Windows let alone used any kind of *nix variant and is lambasting me for daring to suggest that something is wrong with Windows, an operating system you have to pay for if you buy your system from a shop or OEM(like it or not you have to buy it in most cases right?) and that Linux at it's ever growing stages of maturity offers a better way of computing especially to people who want to use their PC for more than turning it on and watching it crash!

Here's Creed's posts:

Win2k, the first Microsoft OS that actually does what it's supposed to. Put it on and you won't regret it.

Typedef, Question, how does your seeming complete inability to get your Windows-Me working properly make Linux a better alternative Than Win2k?....
Mind you I agree totally on the XP activation sh1te.

---

One thing guys, after reading through all the different arguments...what do you actually do on your alternative OS'?

I've stuck with Win2k not because I think it's flawless but because I can get software to do everything I want (Games, Graphics and Music creation) very easily, and it runs these very well.
I've thought about putting on Linux and others but can't see the point if there's a limited software range for the things I actually need an OS to run.
Now I may be completely wrong but from every post I've seen about alternative Os' it's always seemed more of a hobby or point proving exercise for the user's (With the exception of web-developers).
Sooo, honestly, enlighten me....

Now, tell me how he has lambasted you. He seems to only ask for information (and put a dig in about your use of Windows ME).

Originally posted by Typedef
Yeah I guess the adage rings true,
"Argue with idots and they will drag you down to their level where they beat you with experience".

My god.

Only recently I was thinking of making a "Cloud Boards: the Gathering" card for me, which would make me immune to the common sense card "Don't argue with idiots".

Originally posted by Typedef
Still what are the chances people saying I can't fix windows and that's why windows doesn't work considering I must have installed 10,000 drivers maybe more in windows working for Gateway are, when compaired to the legions of Unix users like myself who claim that windows has been delibrately mis-developed so as to provide a continual source of customers for Microsoft is?

I don't really give these guys respect unless they have clear arguments for their position, and reply to questions asked of them. Something you yourself don't seem to want to do.

Originally posted by Typedef
For example when it was established that the windows 95 kernel was unstable why did Microsoft bring out 3 more versions of windows based on this same unstable kernel?
Did I make them do that? So how is windows ME and from what I've experienced of 2k being unstable and unreliable my fault?

What's your problems with the OS's? If you ask for help, we might be able to help you.

Typedef

Originally posted by JustHalf
What? Please, how did anyone here "defend the inadequacies" of "their" OS at the "expen(s)e of other people"?

Ermm the windows trolls like Creed who couldn't even be bothered installing Linux maybe?, also putting in a dig as you say about someone else no matter how funny the dig may be at the subliminal level of a lesser amobea just proves that either he is insecure about his own skills and is trying to transfer them onto me (Freud called this the lesser Techie complex) or he is just a fule.

And for all I know, you could agree with me. You never seem to answer my questions though.

I'm not sure I disagree with you if that's what you mean?

Now, tell me how he has lambasted you. He seems to only ask for information (and put a dig in about your use of Windows ME).

Well maybe you and me define lambaste differently, without getting into an etymological argument , I think I may be vindicated in it's use but, whatever.

Also seeing as how I warezd 2k this argument is a bit ludicrous don't you think , haha. ps 2k sux.

What's your problems with the OS's? If you ask for help, we might be able to help you.

Sure JustHalf, help me write a kernel which will supplant existing 9x kernels, and use it's reams of drivers but be as stable as Linux, or better yet help me get rid of this scourge on humanity,.... please, huh?

Also I can't believe you , who proports to use FreeBSD, which everyone who is not a bill_slave recognises is the world's best OS ever can possibly defend windows, when windows sucks so much. Where is the logic, dancing here? with Zephran Cochran? Tell me do you enjoy m$ asking you to pay £500 quid for their bloatware C++ compiler, or £800 for VB 6 minus the helpfiles? Wow what about if we contrast this to FreeBSD, how many compilers/intrepreters come with it 40? 50? 100?

Whats the stack boundary on an integer in your standard windows app 18 bytes 24 bytes and in BSD 12 bytes or 4 if we use -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2?

Or compile this in Vc 6
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc,char**argv)
{printf("Windowz sux\n");
return 0;};

what is this compiled 28k?
what about if we compile it on the command line in gcc?
So if we establish that windows takes up more space on a hard disk, uses more resources, does less, and is less stable than say Slackware 8.0 running 2.4.5 how in any way shape or form is windows anything other then crap forced down peoples throats, because most of us had no choice when buying our first pc's?

Bah but if you people are too insecure to go messing around with your partitions or you are afraid you might break your puter putting on *nix, then I may be presuaded to do an install for a nominal fee. How bout it Creed , JustHalf , need me to install it for you? I mean it's not like you'd be one of those muppets that call Tech Support seeing as how I'm not a Tech anymore, is it?

JustHalf

Originally posted by Typedef
Ermm the windows trolls like Creed who couldn't even be bothered installing Linux maybe?, also putting in a dig as you say about someone else no matter how funny the dig may be at the subliminal level of a lesser amobea just proves that either he is insecure about his own skills and is trying to transfer them onto me (Freud called this the lesser Techie complex) or he is just a fule.

You now insult Creed, calling him a "lesser amoeba" -- and accuse him of being a troll.

Creed, who isn't bothered installing Linux because he doesn't see a reason to. He asked for one. You haven't supplied him with one.

Originally posted by Typedef
I'm not sure I disagree with you if that's what you mean?

You have a habit of making no sense. Your sentences are incoherent, the few of your statements that are coherent are from a completely untenable position, and when we do attack the flaws in your arguments you just ignore us and spout more trash about how Windows sucks.

Originally posted by Typedef
Well maybe you and me define lambaste differently, without getting into an etymological argument , I think I may be vindicated in it's use but, whatever.

Sorry Typedef, I use the English definition of the word; ie, the correct one. Where's Creeds anger?

Originally posted by Typedef
Also seeing as how I warezd 2k this argument is a bit ludicrous don't you think , haha. ps 2k sux.

I think this argument is ludicrous because you have a disturbing tendency to ignore all the flaws in your arguments. You don't answer questions when asked.

Originally posted by Typedef
Sure JustHalf, help me write a kernel which will supplant existing 9x kernels, and use it's reams of drivers but be as stable as Linux, or better yet help me get rid of this scourge on humanity,.... please, huh?

Why should I?

Originally posted by Typedef
Also I can't believe you , who proports to use FreeBSD, which everyone who is not a bill_slave recognises is the world's best OS ever can possibly defend windows, when windows sucks so much. Where is the logic, dancing here? with Zephran Cochran? Tell me do you enjoy m$ asking you to pay £500 quid for their bloatware C++ compiler, or £800 for VB 6 minus the helpfiles? Wow what about if we contrast this to FreeBSD, how many compilers/intrepreters come with it 40? 50? 100?

Your point?

Originally posted by Typedef
Whats the stack boundary on an integer in your standard windows app 18 bytes 24 bytes and in BSD 12 bytes or 4 if we use -mpreferred-stack-boundary=2?

Yes, because a regular person gives a damn about this, and looks for this on the side of the box of the OS. What's your point?

Originally posted by Typedef
Or compile this in Vc 6
#include <stdio.h>
int main(int argc,char**argv)
{printf("Windowz sux\n");
return 0;};

what is this compiled 28k?
what about if we compile it on the command line in gcc?
So if we establish that windows takes up more space on a hard disk, uses more resources, does less, and is less stable than say Slackware 8.0 running 2.4.5 how in any way shape or form is windows anything other then crap forced down peoples throats, because most of us had no choice when buying our first pc's?

Once again, your point? You're spouting more nonsense without actually backing up any of your earlier points.

Originally posted by Typedef
Bah but if you people are too insecure to go messing around with your partitions or you are afraid you might break your puter putting on *nix, then I may be presuaded to do an install for a nominal fee. How bout it Creed , JustHalf , need me to install it for you? I mean it's not like you'd be one of those muppets that call Tech Support seeing as how I'm not a Tech anymore, is it?

Mmh, lets insult people. You seem to be getting enjoyment out of it.

Typedef, you continually insult Windows without showing that Unix is any different; and when we point out flaws in Unix, at best you don't respond directly; at worst you attack us instead of our arguments... don't be an idiot. Back up your statements. Lets have a reasonable discussion about this.

mayhem#

Typedef, you are realy going to get far with an attitude like that....

Gerry

This thread is hilarious. Typedef, a few points. Many people have arrived at a stage where they use more than one operating system, each for its own particular strong points. And so they don't continually harp on about how one or the other is the greatest thing since since sliced bread.

Yes, windows is bloated. But it still does some things better than unix, and with considerably more ease of use. The average user does not want a command line interface, they want a user friendly GUI, something which unix doesn't do nearly as well as it does on other stuff. So for example, can you run down how to get opengl and direct3d working on freebsd?

Also, you have a very narrow minded view of windows. I use it for programming, but I didn't pay microsoft a cent for this. I use gcc and activestate perl, both of which are free of charge. You are wasting your time, typing nonsense.

Also, will you come over and install slackware 2.4.5 on my machine? Like I can install freebsd ok, but I think I need some extra skillz to install slackware. I can't afford to pay you, but I'm sure you won't mind, as I was about to splash out on xp pro before you so eloquently explained how great slackware is.

Typedef

Umm yess thats it, yess, ok, if you are having problems with slack I guess I could stretch to giving you a dig out.

JustHalf
Your point? It eludes me, I'm sure the argument is clear in your own head but, putting thoughts to keyboard may not be your fortE, heres a suggestion,
write down what you mean to say, and then post it. maybe that will help?

Typedef, you continually insult Windows without showing that Unix is any different; and when we point out flaws in Unix, at best you don't respond directly; at worst you attack us instead of our arguments... don't be an idiot. Back up your statements. Lets have a reasonable discussion about this.

yawn.

come up with an agrument that entails more than a two line response to something someone else has said.
Also what are you getting so upset about, just because you think bill gates is a stud is nothing to do with me, hey that's your business not mine, ta ta.

Typedef