I have been using Linux exclusively for the last year,but no more!

[Brad4321]

brad4321, just like the guy who said 'linux is better than sliced bread' was overstating, so are you. It depends on your hardware and what you do, but it's simply not right to make a blanket statement that Linux isn't ready to replace Windows XP. I run Linux exclusively on both my systems and have done (through various systems) for three years, and I can do everything I want to do. If this isn't the case for you, fine, but say 'this isn't the case for me', not 'this isn't the case for everyone in the world'.

For the home user, linux is not ready to completely replace XP. Linux still has a few problems left, but in no way is that preventing linux from being used. What it does do, however, is prevent linux from completely dominating XP, which it does not do. If you choose to use linux and "have it do everything you want it to do", I am not here to stop you or say that is impossible. Linux was able to do everything I wanted it to do also. However, by no means does that say it has surpassed XP in everything. If you are willing to make linux work for you, then so be it. However, notice the key word of "make".

 

[oldpablo]

On wireless, no, centrino *isn't* the easiest card to get working, because it wasn't documented for a long time. Now it is and the drivers for it work fine, but Intel still won't release the firmware under a free license, so you have to provide that yourself. Mandrakelinux 10.1 is tested to support all Centrino wireless networking out of the box providing the user provides the firmware from their Windows driver CDs.

brad4321, just like the guy who said 'linux is better than sliced bread' was overstating, so are you. It depends on your hardware and what you do, but it's simply not right to make a blanket statement that Linux isn't ready to replace Windows XP. I run Linux exclusively on both my systems and have done (through various systems) for three years, and I can do everything I want to do. If this isn't the case for you, fine, but say 'this isn't the case for me', not 'this isn't the case for everyone in the world'.

When I said not ready to replace XP I was meaning across the board, sorry for the confusion. It may work flawlessly for you, but XP works flawlessly for <insert really high percentage here maybe 90%> of "computer users" and I would say that 90% could not just up and replace their XP install with Linux easily and cheaply (hardware, time, whatever). Thats the end result. It's like I could make a game with the best visuals/plot EVAR, but make it only run on Kyro2 cards. The result would be me going out of business despite the uberness of the game.

Linux is awesome. Its uber. But its not touchable by far too many people unless "something" gets changed. The "click" needed for the mainstream to just snatch it up. Its close I think since you can get machines from Walmart with it preinstalled. But it still has a ways to go. You could draw a parallel with AMD/Intel. We all know AMD is "teh k1ng" for enthusiasts, but they still have yet to smack the hell out of intel "as a company." Until AMD has as much product placement in grandmas/oems/businesses brains as Intel does, it'll still be behind.

I'll have to try Mandrake out. But oh no! The book I have covers the Fedora distro! I'd feel like I was cheating or something learning linux with a book for another distro...

 

[GreNME]

You know, nothing that has been said so far has disputed my original statements that without caveats—those being costing lots of time and requiring a general increase in lower-level knowledge of the OS—Linux is just not "there" yet. There is this whole large block of general users out there, both in Apple and PeeCee land, who only barely have a concept that the software they run is even operating on something called an "oh-ess" at all. Sure, people automatically assume Windows when they hear "operating system," but most barely know what Windows is, if at all. It's just the thing that has the icons that they run their programs on. That's it.

When *nix gets to that point of obfuscation, it'll be a lot closer. It can be done—loads of working Linksys routers can't be wrong—but that it isn't done more on the end-user interface level is what holds it back. We can argue technical merits and definition of granularity in features until we're blue in the face, and it'll never address the parts that keep that ever-elusive marketshare away.

 

[AdamW]

Well, I agree with a lot of what was said above, but there are a few buts...

OldPueblo: "but XP works flawlessly for <insert really high percentage here maybe 90%> of "computer users"

!!!!

Come on, you *know* this is BS. There isn't an operating system in the *world* which works flawlessly for 90% of its users. This is why people hate computers. This is why I'd bet a lot of the people on this forum get a few calls a month from friends for whom they are the nominated 'geek who knows how to fix my PC'. I'm sure not saying Linux is any better, of course it's not - I spend a lot of my spare time helping people fix Linux (why? Cos I'm weird). How many XP machines have you seen where apps stop working mysteriously and everything grinds to a halt (usually because the user went to fifteen thousand porn sites and downloaded every crappy P2P app they could lay their hands on)? Sure, good users know how to avoid this, and it's not exactly Windows' fault - but then, good Linux users know how to setup their hardware, and the fact that this can be hard for first-time users isn't exactly Linux's fault, either. It doesn't matter - Linux can be hard for people to use, and Windows installations can get so screwed up they're utterly useless. Computers *in general*, for anyone who doesn't actually *enjoy* learning their particularities, are a huge pain. Ask any of your non-techie friends and they'll agree.

GreNME: you can already buy Linux systems like that; they're assembled with hardware that's known good on Linux and pre-installed with something like Linspire or Xandros. It's an often-made point, but a valid one, that comparing *installing Linux on a system that was bought with Windows and attempting to use it* with *running Windows on the box you bought with it pre-installed* is not a fair comparison. It's a *useful* comparison, because as you correctly say this is something Linux needs people to do in order to gain usage, but it isn't *fair*.

Besides, the comments I've written on this thread have been with the audience in mind. This is a fairly geeky hardware forum. I'd imagine the slightly derogatory term 'average home user' doesn't cover many people here. I'd say anyone who knows enough about computers and is sufficiently 'geeky' and 'experimental' enough to, say, use the bridge trick to unlock a CPU or install a watercooling system or mod their case or switch the cooler on their graphics card *could* run Linux, were they so inclined to, and probably many of them would enjoy the experience in some way.

Oh, OldPueblo, one more thing - YMMV, but I've never found books a terribly useful way to learn Linux, because they get outdated so fast. I'd be amazed if there was a book out there that knows anything about hal and udev, for instance, but they're integral parts of the latest Fedora or Mandrake releases. I find the system documentation and user forums / mailing lists far, far more useful - for a newbie Mandrake user I'd recommend http://www.mandrakeusers.org/ , the #mandrake IRC channel on Freenode and also *every* new Mandrake user should visit http://easyurpmi.zarb.org/ before doing anything else. I don't know the equivalents for Fedora as I don't run it, but I'm sure they're out there.

 

[GreNME]

It's an often-made point, but a valid one, that comparing *installing Linux on a system that was bought with Windows and attempting to use it* with *running Windows on the box you bought with it pre-installed* is not a fair comparison.

I don't disagree with that.

I just don't think it's a reasonable thing to be comparing to begin with in terms of the "why" behind the case.

 

[starhawk]

if we want it, let's make it.

 

[JARofHERB]

Ok eveyone;
I started this thread,,,,
And I had a very clear reason for doing so( Which I will disclose). I canot believe that i have 2,015 views, which is almost surpassing the stickys But anyhow I knew that it would be very high, due to the nature of the post, and I know that this was ment to be( I needed Insight, for my path, because I will be a major influence on the industry in a few years!! This is Written!! ).When I started this thread I was intent on seeing how fragmented we are, and this proves to me this very point. Anyhow I have observed how fragmented we are as "computer enthusiasts" "geeks" or what ever popular catch phrase we have nowdays. Do you all see how truely Infant our industry is? How fragmented are we in our ideas of an "operating system"! The thing is that our industry is so truely young, and this really provides to me and eveyone else who has the vision, the proof of this point. Now I am going to make somthing clear to everyone. There is a reason we have developed 4 major operating systems ( LINUX, UNIX of all varients , OSX , WINDOWS). It is because there is not one definitive operating system. We need a variety for many reasons. You all know that every O/S has its own definitive strenghts and weaknesses.Every one here knows that!!!
So we need to keep this in mind at all times. We have many parts of a "whole" that makes up the computing industry. Soon people who do not realise this will. The auto industry has many diffrent companys, and there exists many diffrent types of vehicles. No one can dispute this fact! It is known to all people that we need a few Varieties of vehicles because each one has a diffrent Purpose! And operating systems are no diffrent. Now let us people who are going to shape the industry create a diffrent enviroment. We will now unite to create a seamless computing experience. We will soon have so much Compatibility and Co-operation between all camps! You all will see, the power to shape many aspects of the force behind this movement. The other people who are involved in this, have already been active in creating the enviroment for this to happen!!!! I am one of many visionaries, and we have been probing many communities such as this for the general ideals of the subject that is the nature of my post. Thanks to all who have responded to my post, your ideas have much more power that you realise.

 

[AdamW]

hey, I feel like it's the 1960s.

 

[Elledan]

how hard would it be to make a *nix os that was, interface wise, a complete clone of windows xp? perhaps even with similar file compatibilities?

While not *nix, ReactOS does pretty much what you want, and more.

ReactOS could also feature a Linux sub-system in the future, allowing it to seamlessly run Linux applications.

In my opinion, Linux will never take off as a desktop OS. It's pretty much unbeatable as a server/embedded OS, but if there's one thing which stops it dead in its tracks in the desktop OS market, it's the 90+% market share of Windows. It's the classical catch-22: Linux won't become a popular desktop OS until many drivers and popular applications are made available for it, but drivers and popular applications won't be made available for Linux until it becomes a popular desktop OS.

ReactOS skips this entire catch-22, by allowing one to use Windows drivers and applications, giving it instantly the possibility of gaining a 90+% desktop OS market share

At the moment, the goal for ReactOS is to make it a clean-room implementation of Windows NT (NT, 2k, XP), but once that goal has been reached, there are many interesting features which could be added, from complete OS sub-systems to whatever people can come up with.

 

[GreNME]

<OT>

hey, I feel like it's the 1960s.

All we are saying is give peace a chance...
</OT>

 

[The_Mage18]

Thank you [MS]. I was wondering when someone was going to question my credentials. Been posting here almost 2 years, and this is the first one.

Reason I only have Dual 1.2's is because upgrading Dual Procs is pricey, and when one works on computers all day at work, (The cutting edge of tech) you just want the home box to work.

If you still want proof, instant message me your email account, and I will email you from my Microsoft account. (On IRC when I logged into the Windows XP help channel, someone thought I was spoofing the return address of proxy.microsoft.com, and then thought I spoofed the email, so there is no pleasing some people.)

Nice! For some of the things your company has done that I hate, it makes me feel better knowing that they do some things right. Honestly, I'm impressed that an MS employee is posting in a Linux based thread with educated, truthful information instead of LINUX SUX!!!


For the record, I loved Win2K and wish MS would have added HT, SATA and better wireless support.

 

[JARofHERB]

Hey Elledan, its cool that you know of ReactOS. I work with a major developer that is swinging on over to this form of operating system and it has a bright future indeed. Allthough it is in its infancy, still a very promiseing Operating System. I am really Impressed by this community Thanks again to all who have made this thread great!!

 

[JARofHERB]

Hey Elledan, its cool that you know of ReactOS. I work with a major developer that is swinging on over to this form of operating system and it has a bright future indeed. Allthough it is in its infancy, still a very promiseing Operating System. I am really Impressed by this community Thanks again to all who have made this thread great!!

 

[GreNME]

Nice! For some of the things your company has done that I hate, it makes me feel better knowing that they do some things right. Honestly, I'm impressed that an MS employee is posting in a Linux based thread with educated, truthful information instead of LINUX SUX!!!

Imagine that—people exist that you have to judge on merit, not what you think of their employer.

For the record, I loved Win2K and wish MS would have added HT, SATA and better wireless support.

Microsoft has HT support for 2000, Win 2k supports SATA (as long as you have the drivers), and wireless in 2k is still better than Linux (I suggest SP4 for the best support).

 

[The_Mage18]

Microsoft has HT support for 2000

Have you setup Win2K server on a Dual Xeon w/ HT or run 2K on a HT machine? It's buggy. There's a knowledge base article stating that while it does run and yes it sees HT as a seperate processor, there are errors that will occure since HT isn't really a seperate processor. Ranma if you know of the article I'm talking about it'd help to post a link.

and wireless in 2k is still better than Linux (I suggest SP4 for the best support).

It works, that's about all I can say for SP4 in 2K. Even then forget switching between access points or networks without some level of reconfiguration. The hospital I work at has to rely on a third party utility to have the laptops switch APs reliably.

I've never had a single problem with PRISM chipset cards or the ndiswrapper utility with my wireless cards. Works everytime I've setup Suse, Mandrake, Fedora, Red Hat, and Knoppix. The wireless card in my Toshiba actually drops signal far less (if at all) under *nix than it does in XP or 2k SP4. On both my desktop and laptop the throughput is higher too.

 

[GreNME]

Have you setup Win2K server on a Dual Xeon w/ HT or run 2K on a HT machine?

Yepper. One of my clients—a medical facility—is running 2K Server on a dualie Xeon.

It's buggy.

Sounds like a personal problem. Works perfectly fine at my client's site.

There's a knowledge base article stating that while it does run and yes it sees HT as a seperate processor, there are errors that will occure since HT isn't really a seperate processor. Ranma if you know of the article I'm talking about it'd help to post a link.

Why don't you provide the link? Since HT instructions are done at the hardware level, what you are suggesting sounds spurious, at best. Works just dandy in Linux as well, and all kernel rewrites were for were to optimize for the stuff going on at the hardware level.

You sound more like you don't understand how HT works, considering how you're suggesting that it's a software problem. You may want to look into updating your BIOS if you're having serious problems.

As for wireless:

It works, that's about all I can say for SP4 in 2K. Even then forget switching between access points or networks without some level of reconfiguration. The hospital I work at has to rely on a third party utility to have the laptops switch APs reliably.

Sounds like a configuration problem to me. Works fine in the hospital near my home—I even have a family member who works there in case management who uses a laptop with it all over the building with no problems. No 3rd party software to keep it working between APs.

I've never had a single problem with PRISM chipset cards or the ndiswrapper utility with my wireless cards. Works everytime I've setup Suse, Mandrake, Fedora, Red Hat, and Knoppix. The wireless card in my Toshiba actually drops signal far less (if at all) under *nix than it does in XP or 2k SP4. On both my desktop and laptop the throughput is higher too.

Once again, sounds more like a personal problem. I have four different wireless cards and have tested three of them personally on Linux with both Linksys and D-Link wireless APs, and with the exception of the Orinoco card, problems always arise from having to make sure the card is associating with the AP, as there are some environments with APs from other networks that seem to interfere. That is, if the other cards even work to begin with, since one of my cards has a Broadcom chip that has no working driver for *nix.

You talk a lot of shit when you bring up wireless as if it works better in *nix. Where the hell were you when I was posting that I couldn't get *nix to connect to my WEP wifi network, when XP was having no problem (and later I found 2k also had no problem)? I went as far as doing the following:
1. Disable MAC filtering
2. iwevent & iwconfig interface essid ssid (replace "interface" with the actual interface name)
3. iwconfig interface key hex_key

With no joy. When WEP was on, *nix could not connect with my Orinoco card at all, while Windows could. It still can't. It associates with the AP just fine, because it's connecting when WEP is off, but as soon as WEP is on I get nothing. Neither here nor Ars could solve the problem, and it has remained unresolved. So, no offense, but all your talk about *nix being better with wifi sounds like a load of bullshit with me: the drivers worked, the network works otherwise (and with other OSes), yet there is no discernable rhyme or reason why WEP does not work.

Try another argument, and be sure to avoid the "change distro" caveats, because that is equally bullshit when it comes to such widely-supported hardware like the Orinoco cards. If you want, you can even search the thread out in the Linux forum and offer suggestions there. I'm willing to bet you won't be able to come up with anything new that will fix it (though if you do, it'd be great).

 

[Elledan]

Hey Elledan, its cool that you know of ReactOS. I work with a major developer that is swinging on over to this form of operating system and it has a bright future indeed. Allthough it is in its infancy, still a very promiseing Operating System. I am really Impressed by this community Thanks again to all who have made this thread great!!

I've been keeping an eye on ReactOS since it's early 0.1 days (CLI-only ). At first it seemed like a a nice idea, right now it might just cause a small revolution once they get all basic features working and stable. Can't wait for 0.3

 

[Ranma_Sao]

Yepper. One of my clients—a medical facility—is running 2K Server on a dualie Xeon.


Sounds like a personal problem. Works perfectly fine at my client's site.

*SNIP*

It's not buggy per say, it's just not perfect. The scheduler in 2K see's all the logical procs, as physical procs, so it doesn't schedule things as well as 2K3 and XP do for HT machines. (It also doesn't halt the logical procs giving more proc "bandwidth" when not being used as smart as 2K3. Does it work? Yes. Is it buggy? No. Could it be better? Yes, run 2K3

 

[GreNME]

It's not buggy per say, it's just not perfect. The scheduler in 2K see's all the logical procs, as physical procs, so it doesn't schedule things as well as 2K3 and XP do for HT machines. (It also doesn't halt the logical procs giving more proc "bandwidth" when not being used as smart as 2K3. Does it work? Yes. Is it buggy? No. Could it be better? Yes, run 2K3

Well, yes, I knew it saw logical processors as physical ones, but that doesn't necessarily mean there's any problem scheduling-wise. It just means that it isn't XP or 2k3, just like you said.

Gee, I really wish the 2.4 *nix kernel had the stuff the 2.6 kernel did... Oh, wait, I could always just run the newer software.

 

[The_Mage18]

Once again, sounds more like a personal problem. I have four different wireless cards and have tested three of them personally on Linux with both Linksys and D-Link wireless APs, and with the exception of the Orinoco card, problems always arise from having to make sure the card is associating with the AP, as there are some environments with APs from other networks that seem to interfere.
You talk a lot of shit when you bring up wireless as if it works better in *nix.

Ok, someone needs to chill out. I was only posting on my experience and in no way stated that you were doing something wrong or that your problems were not valid ones.

The drivers I'm using in XP are the Toshiba drivers for their card and yes I have downloaded the latest version. For reference it's a 2455-S3001 model laptop. With both my WEP11 Linksys and the new Motorola WR850GP http://broadband.motorola.com/consumers/products/wr850gp/ I haven't had any significant problems with *nix associating with the AP with WEP enabled. Boot into Windows, it loses signal and the throughput is decent, but could be better. Boot into Linux, the signal doesn't drop anywhere near as much and the throughput is better. I made no modifcations to the AP or the router once I replaced the AP, the only thing that changed was the OS on the laptop. Under Fedora Core 2, I had to use the ndiswrappers and the Windows drivers. Even then, it still connects more reliably and with better sustained transfer rates than in XP with the same driver. That's pretty conclusive evidence of Linux having a better network implementation than XP IMHO.

My desktop is a different matter. On that machine, it's the same in either Linux or XP but it has a different network card. My desktop has a Linksys PCI 802.11g card. Under Linux, I'm using the ndiswrappers and the same driver used in Windows XP.

Where the hell were you when I was posting that I couldn't get *nix to connect to my WEP wifi network, when XP was having no problem (and later I found 2k also had no problem)?

Never saw that post. Sorry, I'm human.

Here's my setup:
Channel 11
WEP enabled w/ 128-bit and Random Key
Unique SSID
SSID Broadcast on

I have had a problem with Linux connecting to my AP or Router if SSID broadcast was disabled. Even with it connecting properly, if I disable SSID broadcast, I can no longer connect. To help compensate for this, I enabled MAC filtering. Even with SSID broadcast disabled, any one of the WIFI finders or Netstumbler will find your network. All the SSID Broadcast turned off does for you is keep a nearby XP machine from popping up a box stating it found another network. It doesn't stealth or increase security on your network by any means.

Try another argument, and be sure to avoid the "change distro" caveats, because that is equally bullshit when it comes to such widely-supported hardware like the Orinoco cards.

Where did I say anything about distros? I listed the distros that I had no problems connecting to my wireless network with but I don't recall ever telling you to change distros or that one distro works better for wireless than another. Yes, you're right. The distro you use is meaningless now that most of them are built on many of the same packages.

 

[GreNME]

tangent:

Even with SSID broadcast disabled, any one of the WIFI finders or Netstumbler will find your network. All the SSID Broadcast turned off does for you is keep a nearby XP machine from popping up a box stating it found another network. It doesn't stealth or increase security on your network by any means.

I get tired of hearing this. I'd give anyone who can crack my wifi network in a week $500 US.

 

[AdamW]

grenme: if you're running any kind of wireless network with WEP (and no VPN), a cracker could access it by monitoring approx. 2hrs of encrypted traffic. So unless you're changing keys every two hours, yep, it's vulnerable. It's a known, published weakness in WEP's encryption mechanism with exploits in the wild. There's literally no way to run a secure network protected only with WEP. (If you use a VPN it's fine). This is why WPA exists. Having *said* that though, unless there's a good cracker with an explicit grudge against you, you're probably fine. With the amount of ENTIRELY insecured wireless networks that exist in the world, no cracker is going to spend two hours in a car with an antenna to crack Joe Random's WEP. He'll just go use Joe Random's next door neighbour's completely open network instead.

 

[GreNME]

grenme: if you're running any kind of wireless network with WEP (and no VPN), a cracker could access it by monitoring approx. 2hrs of encrypted traffic. So unless you're changing keys every two hours, yep, it's vulnerable. It's a known, published weakness in WEP's encryption mechanism with exploits in the wild.

Not without sufficient weak packets. And trust me, anyone who told you two hours was lying.

Are you saying you're interested in making a quick $500?

[edit] And I never said WEP was the only security. My point was that "seeing" my network means squat—not that anyone can see my network unless they are really looking to begin with.

 

[starhawk]

i like the idea of ReachOS but i'd like to see a *nix os that is more than 90% compatible with all four major operating systems and is still open source.

this os would likely downsize microsoft faster than you can say "bill gates".

...excuse me, i must go, the Computer Nazi aka Mother is telling me the world will end if i do not.

 

[Elledan]

i like the idea of ReachOS but i'd like to see a *nix os that is more than 90% compatible with all four major operating systems and is still open source.

It's spelled 'ReactOS' (ROS).

ROS is 100% GPL. ROS will become 100% compatible with existing Windows (NT/2k/XP) applications and drivers. ROS can become 100% compatible with most, if not all, Linux applications.

What are those 'four major operating systems' you're talking about? The desktop market has one (Windows), the server market has three (Linux, UNIX (e.g. AIX) and Windows) and the embedded market too many to count.

 

[GreNME]

You left out OS X.

 

[Codegen]

For the ReactOS thing, I smell lawsuit.

 

[Elledan]

You left out OS X.

OS X is hardly a 'major' (desktop or server) operating system with a market share of under 5%.

 

[XOR != OR]

OS X is hardly a 'major' (desktop or server) operating system with a market share of under 5%.

What might be more interesting to know is: 1) What's it's growth look like? and 2) What's the #2 desktop out there.

 

[starhawk]

hehehe... using mozilla to view this since i'm at the unc law library with Mother. they had it here and i figured i might as well try it out.

the 4 major os's i was thinking of are:
- Microsoft Windows
- Apple Mac OS
- Linux (in its infinite varieties)
- Unix (in its infinite varieties)

also... what is GPL?

 

[Elledan]

hehehe... using mozilla to view this since i'm at the unc law library with Mother. they had it here and i figured i might as well try it out.

the 4 major os's i was thinking of are:
- Microsoft Windows
- Apple Mac OS
- Linux (in its infinite varieties)
- Unix (in its infinite varieties)

MacOS is 'significant', but not 'major'. Developers have heard of it, a decent number of people are using it, but it's not mainstream.

Linux is growing faster than MacOS in terms of market share on the desktop, but so far it's 'only' a major server OS.

Unix is obviously a server/mainframe OS.

Windows is a desktop OS. It's not an embedded OS, or a good server OS.

So even if you were to lump all different types of OSs (desktop, server) together, then you'd end up with three OSs, not four.

also... what is GPL?

*shock*

http://www.gnu.org/licenses/licenses.html#GPL

 

[Elledan]

What might be more interesting to know is: 1) What's it's growth look like?

Ever since Jobs took control of Apple, the number of Macs sold has climbed away from a nosedive to a steady grow. However, MacOS (X) requires an Apple system, which makes it less easy to switch to this OS, and not everyone who buys a Mac run MacOS on it. Yellowdog Linux, for example, is quite commonly used on PPC.

The number of Linux desktops grows much faster.

and 2) What's the #2 desktop out there.

At the moment it's Linux

 

[starhawk]

well... here is my first impression of an open-source program. i'm trying firefox right now... and i must say, it's certainly interesting.

it's not really as user-friendly as internet explorer or netscape really are. i'm not sure why, it's not the features or anything... i just get this "don't f*** with me" feeling from it. however, it is similar in form to internet explorer, and i'm going to use it for a while longer, to see how it affects me.

the main thing i don't like is that it does not include the same sort of support for a mouse wheel that internet explorer does, and it's a little confusing and bothersome to me to click outside the window that i'm typing in, and then scroll up or down. i also miss the ability for a page to update automatically (like in my email, it doesn't automatically mark emails as read without refreshing the page). also, it is slightly slower than internet explorer. i'm not really sure why.

however, it is growing on me, and i may switch permanently. i really don't know just yet.

 

[Wolf31o2]

For the ReactOS thing, I smell lawsuit.

No chance unless they decide to start stealing Microsoft code outright, which is harder than you woudl think, seeing as how the Microsoft code isn't plastered all over the place like the ReactOS code.

One of the ReactOS developers is a personal friend of mine, and the truth is that Microsoft hasn't paid them the least bit of attention. Microsoft simply doesn't care about the little guy in these situations. Perhaps if ROS was much more capable, they would see it as a threat, but for now, I'm sure it is perceived as a simple toy capable of performing a very limited set of Windows' functionality.

 

[Elledan]

No chance unless they decide to start stealing Microsoft code outright, which is harder than you woudl think, seeing as how the Microsoft code isn't plastered all over the place like the ReactOS code.

One of the ReactOS developers is a personal friend of mine, and the truth is that Microsoft hasn't paid them the least bit of attention. Microsoft simply doesn't care about the little guy in these situations. Perhaps if ROS was much more capable, they would see it as a threat, but for now, I'm sure it is perceived as a simple toy capable of performing a very limited set of Windows' functionality.

The same issue is also being discussed on the ROS forum: http://reactos.com/forum/viewtopic.php?t=100

And I agree on the 'perceived threat' view. You thought that MSFT was getting scared of Linux? Just wait until ROS begins to be noticed by the mainstream press and we'll see MSFT attack in a fashion which would put a pack of rabid dogs to shame

 

[AdamW]

starhawk: given that Netscape was the basis for Mozilla and 'new-generation' versions of Netscape (7.x onwards) are just rebranded versions of Mozilla (have you seen the new one? It's hideous) I'd be amazed if Firefox was really less user-friendly than Netscape at least. I think the word you're looking for is 'different' . For instance, the mouse wheel thing always pisses me off when I have to use IE - I'm never quite sure WHAT'S going to scroll when I move it. In Firefox, I know - the element I'm in will scroll. It's just a case of what you're used to.

The things that will probably convince you to stay with Firefox: tabbed browsing, RSS feeds (a lot of sites like HardOCP - basically anything that's more or less a journal, a long front page full of short updates that gets updated frequently - will have RSS feeds. In Firefox, if you look at the status bar, there'll be an orange button down there. If you press it you can add the RSS feed as a 'live bookmark'. Put it on your bookmark toolbar and when you click it, you'll get links to all the stories on the page, and it's always up to date. I have live bookmarks for OSNews, Linux Today and The Register on my toolbar - helpful as anything) and, here's a big one, some of the plug-ins! My number one plugin - adblock. http://adblock.mozdev.org/ . Get it, install it, then go to the forum, go to the sticky thread called 'advanced filters', go to the page linked in the final post, and download the most recently dated filter list there. Install it (there's instructions, it's dead simple) as your adblock filter list. Now go browsing around some sites that are usually chock full of adverts. Notice the difference yet? Adblock is utterly brilliant. It uses regular expressions for filters, which makes it very powerful, it doesn't just *hide* ads but rather it never downloads them at all, and it reflows the content to fill the space they would be in. To block ads on hardocp, add 'hera.hardocp' to the filter list; now look at the front page. All those banner and flash ads are gone and the content fills all the space. It's amazing, I couldn't live without it.

 

[starhawk]

they are gone...

i must pick up my jaw...

now if someone could only trip over my "how the heck do i install this stinking theme" thread and give me some help there...

 

[GreNME]

OS X is hardly a 'major' (desktop or server) operating system with a market share of under 5%.

What the hell are you smoking? Not only is it the #2 desktop out there, but it has more than twice the market share of Linux, which you mentioned.

Let me know when you get your head out of your ass.

 

[GreNME]

The things that will probably convince you to stay with Firefox: tabbed browsing, RSS feeds (a lot of sites like HardOCP - basically anything that's more or less a journal, a long front page full of short updates that gets updated frequently - will have RSS feeds.

Well, I use Avant Browser, which has all of that plus group favorites and toggable security settings (block popups, block images, block flash, etc.) that are configurable buttons for right on the front of the browser.

 

[BobSutan]

Everyone needs to chill out and watch the flames.