Survey posted 2002-08-07 16:45 by Magnus.

Contribute ideas to surveys by sending a mail to survey@ticalc.org.

And what are the benefits of MS windows over linux?

Compatibilty with virtually anything, more people use it, better browsers, nonetheless, I like like Linux better anyway. I have SuSE 7.3 and run KDE most the time, I want to get SuSE 8, which comes with KDE3, but I don't have the money.

I have to argue about better browsers. Mozilla - outstrips IE any day, and with the support it will be getting it can only get better. And is available for most platforms.

Again yes more compatible - but if more people openly supported linux most companies would be forced to turn to the linux side (as well as MS).

Yeah, but it's not like that would really happen, since like 95% of the world uses Windows (OBTW, I made up that statistic, you can prove me wrong, if you wish)

No one can actually prove statistics wrong.
95% of all statistics are made up.

>>> "95% of all statistics are made up."
LOL my friend uses that quote a lot. :)

Oh funnily enough
94.515% of accounts here use windows as primary OS.
2.7928% of accounts here use *nix as primary OS.
2.4830% of accounts here use mac as primary OS.
0.2092% of accounts here use other 0S.
that includes the 8 atari users. Strange but I think TOS is one of the easiest, most user friendly systems I have ever used.

A site for calculator nerds isn't representive of the general population though :) Nor is michaelv.org, but it's worth mentioning that 97.13% of my visitors were on Windows and 0.768% were on Linux. The remaining percent were search bots, unknown, or Macintosh.

Fully agree, but that was there for the irony of his number - 95%, as just about this many people in ticalc use windows...

Yeah, I found that pretty amazing. (maybe 95% of statics aren't made up...) Well, actually one of my friends was curious and tried Linux. He said it was different, but it wasn't bad or anything, it just took a while to get used to.

Spot on. If you are just using OS for general use then I suppose a lot is down to personal taste.

I once tried Debian. It was pretty easy to setup and detected all my hardware on my 6 year old laptop. You have to get used to it though, just as you once had to get used to Windows.

At first you'll think that you don't have all the functionality you had in Windows, because you don't know what applications to look for and where. Actually this was the reason I switched back to Windows until a couple weeks later I switched back to Linux and it went easy as shit.

Now I run FreeBSD which is more difficult to setup as it isn't meant to be a desktop OS. (You have to recompile the kernel to built in sound support etc.) But overall I like BSD more since it's easier to maintain than a Linux box and it's more stable too. And with KDE it all just feels like Windows (too much like Windows according to some anti-MS people).

If there's one thing that convinced me to switch to a Linux or FreeBSD environment than it's the money I can spent on my hardware now. Most everyday use software is free including entire office packages, and you can believe me, that is quite some money.

If you are a normal computer user then a Unix distro won't give you more than a Windows system. You just need to sit down and make the switch and then spend your money on a new processor and more memory.

I use Mozilla with Windoze ME, and I absolutely love it. And by the way, the only time my system freezes up is when I have too much stuff open... like 10 AIM conversations, Mozilla (browser and mail client), AIM itself, WME, and then I get email... But then, that may be a combination of my lack of RAM and Windoze's alleged poor memory management...

Blech! Windows ME! I think the only good windows OS is Windows 2000 and 95B

OMG, now I really have to agree with you... WINDOWS ME SUCKS!

Okay, now for the reasons why (see comment above).

I've used Windows 3.1, 95, 98, and ME (haven't used the others enough to know them well) and the most stable is 3.1, but it's so old... and then I think Win98 is the best, and it kicks ME's butt any day, because ME has SOOOO many bugs. It locks up literally at least once a week if you use it too much, and that's a pain. I've heard SO many complaints about it... awg... don't use it.

It's not like I really have a choice... I can't afford to switch to another OS, in both money and time... And after having it for over two years, I have not had a serious problem; like Michael Vincent said, I really only have to restart when installing applications or when the power fluctuates...
(I was saying that I love Mozilla, not Windoze... I'd rather have Linux, but... yeah)

Interestingly enough once windows has been cared for very carefully for a couple of years it becomes much more stable. Mine still crashes when I do some stuff, and it refuses to run some really great DOS games, but I think that is more the change in hardware over the years. Thinking about it I think the worst bit about windows is the installer, because you can get windows much more stable then it is at first. I still find Linux much nicer though.

I ran ME for almost a year, and it wasn't that bad. It started off like 98 was, crashing occasionally, but after a few weeks the self-correcting junk or whatever MS built in fixed itself somehow, and I regularly ran for over a week between reboots. The most common problem was memory leaking, but I traced it back to certain applications like ZDS.

NO! Windows is not compatible with devices! Devices are compatible with Windows! Hardware makers make the Windows drivers, hackers make the others. So while we can talk about Linux being compatible with this and that, Microsoft never writes drivers for the new hardware. So it's not really fair to say that Windows is "compatible" with more stuff.

Yes it is. You haven't looked at all the thousands of drivers that ship on the Windows CD-ROM.

I think you will find that half of these drivers are quite generic and will drive a lot of things. Also, most of these drivers are still supplied by the manufacturers.

And his statement was perfectly correct - about OSes and hardware. It is solely down to if the Hardware Companies make the drivers for the product. NO OS is compatible with ANY hardware without the drivers.

Then perhaps instead of insulting Windows, you should start petitioning the hardware manufacturers to release Linux drivers :)

I have no complaints about windows concerning the lack of support for linux from manufacturers.
My complaints about windows are about windows. nothing else.

Do you think people don't??

What does all of this have to do with the topic?

That's sarcasm right?
Please say it is!

It's actually used by normal people? No offense, but Linux calculator users do *not* represent the majority of calculator users. Ask yourself if the average high school kid has Linux on the family computer...

My family all is customed to Windows also. I think Linux seems more for programmer people who live by themselves.

You'd be suprised but apart from changing from one system to another, being a user on a linux system is actually easier then windows (IMHO - and many other peoples) OKAY setting it up can be a bit hard but there is always a manually for what you need. and the manuals are usually helpful and clear.

And I don't live by my self.

I once set up NetBSD on a laptop. It went very smoothly, and I was reading the online documentation. However, the PCMCIA network card wouldn't work. I tried all the troubleshooting techniques and configurations in the manual. It recognized the card on boot, but it would freeze when attempting to use it. I went to all the help channels on IRC, and asked many people. We went through all sorts of stuff to try and get it to work, and it came down to that my network card wasn't supported. Windows *95* supported it perfectly.

Another case: I tried installing SuSE Linux 7.3 on a desktop, with a Cirrus Logic 2MB generic video card. This is a video card that works in every version of Windows since 95 with built-in drivers, and in 3.11 with a driver disk. There was absolutely no support for the card, and driver searches on the Internet proved that there were no drivers for the card. Linux gurus told me that I should get a new card, because something 6 years old was too old. But Microsoft supports it, so why can't Linux? Is it that hard to write backwards compatiblity? Microsoft has done an excellent job of that, and they are a huge corporation and we all know how inefficient corporations are (*cough* Texas Instruments *cough*). How am I supposed to set up Linux if the video doesn't work....KDE and Gnome were useless, and there's no reason I should have to go buy new hardware to run a new operating system. Okay, my rant is over; the message is that compatibility needs to improve.

I agree. not being able to use hardware do to lack of support sucks (like a baby at its mothers breats). Thing is writing these drivers is extremely difficult to do if you do not have detailed info. about the hardware. And manufacturers will not openly give this out - for good reasons.

You have to remember that the growth of linux is by normal people. Which is both a boon and bane. It grows faster and more efficiently - more people working on it.
The stuff is more stable - as the programs are a labour of love.
Hardware drivers are written for the hardware the person is using. Ahh damn that does cause a problem.

I take it you tried to kid linux into beliving the card was something different. Doesn't always work but sometimes it does.

Well the video card was pretty popular back in 1995 or 1996 :). I did try probably about 15 different similar drivers, none worked.

Exactly, compatibility needs to improve, dramatically. Hardware vendors need to recognize that nobody really gains anything from them withholding the technical information necessary to write good drivers for other OS's.

My whole family is accustomed to Mac's. It depends on the parents normally. Mac's should stay in the schools instead of the crapshoot HP's. the only reason that the Mac's were slow was that they were 4 yrs. old.

Yes Linux is used by normal people. The one thing that can't be done in Linux that is done in windows is the gaming.
Any application in windows has a varient in Linux.
The problem with games is that the producers don't make them for linux - although I believe Quake is being ported pretty soon - yippe!. You can however still get quite a few games fo linux but at the moment it is mostly for doing work of any kind.

The average high scool kid and family computer. Mmm. well thing is with family computers is that the average comp is bought ready built - and these usually come with MS as standard. Now think of people who build their own computers and are working to a budget.

Don't tell me you think anyone here is normal?

Normal people use it because normal people use it. Believe me, it makes less sense than GNU, but it's true. There is a term occasionally used to describe this: MINDSHARE. People buy MS products because they think, well, everyone else is doing it, so there must be some value there. It's sort of like the reason Texans buy guns. No, wait, that was a different metaphor...

People are, by instinct, lemmings. We do what the crowd does. If 95% of people are buying Windows, it takes a conscious effort to give up what other people have assumed. (When you assume things, you make an ass out of you and me.) So it's a huge feedback loop: the more idiots buy Windows, the more idiots want to email each other viruses hidden in MSWord files, so the more idiots' friends need to use Outlook to receive said viruses, which means Windows. (Or something like that.)

I'm not a lemming and I love Windows. There's simply no reason to switch. I don't care if every single program I have would run in Linux (which isn't the case, but assume it was), and I could get it all for free. Why do I want to leave something that works for me? Perhaps if I had trouble with Windows I'd feel differently.

Fine if you have no trouble with windows then setting up a new system and learning the difference would take time you wouldn't want to waste.

However that does not mean windows is better then linux.
And if you've tried a *nix system and didn't like it all the more reason to stick with MS.

But the average person who knocks *nix has never used it.

Like I said, I've tried Linux. I agree with you. I've always thought Linux is an excellent OS for servers, but not desktops I wouldn't want any of my websites running on Windows, because Windows is a horrible server. But conversely, Linux is horrible on the desktop, and Microsoft is excellent. I'm perfectly happy to run Windows XP on the desktop and have my webhosting on Red Hat with Apache.

That makes sense, I suppose... I guess it depends on what you do with your desktop. :)
Speaking of my desktop, since I lost my mousepad ages ago and never bothered to replace it, I've much preferred to use a keyboard, and there are many things that are difficult to do in Windows without a mouse. There are also GUI programs in Linux that are hard to use with only a keyboard, but there are a lot of things that can be done from the command line. I know a lot of people hate command lines, but I should point out two things - (a) Unix shells are not like the DOS shell; they're much more friendly, and (b) command lines allow you to interact with the OS in a way that working through a mess of GUI metaphors doesn't give you. Yes, command lines can be tiring after a while - Neal Stephenson called it geek fatigue - but, for me at least, not as tiring as trying to get Windows to do what I want rather than what it wants me to think that I want (because that's the only thing it knows how to do.) Speaking of fatigue, trying to pick through the metaphors here is rather tiring, too.

I agree it does depend a lot on how you set up your desktop.
And for the complete programaphiles out there you can even create your own front end for X, which is pretty cool.
And i also have to agree about using BASH - I find file management in BASH quicker than file management windows, I did however always prefer DOS for file management before I came across linux. Windows is just too resticting (like not letting you change file extensions, and trying to go through all the 'folders' to find the directory you want)
Also bash has autocomplete for file names. Once you are used to this I don't see how you can live without it.

Yes, whenever I try to use a DOS prompt now, I move very slowly because I'm always typing in part of a long filename and pressing Tab, and discovering anew that it doesn't do anything...

I'm glad I'm not the only one.

AAaaagggggggghhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Man that scream felt good, might have another one sometime.

And this damned cursed keyboard is really, really nasty - the keys don't go down too well.

AAAAaaaaaaggggggggggg hhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhhh!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Ohhhhhhh! That was better than sex.

And for all the people looking for a new game to write visit this link - http://loz.the-pub.org/games/ - also above and download countdown. Then port the game idea to a the calc. I have just written it for the 82 (and 'twill be on the site ere the end of Monday) and the game should be quite popular here.

If the screaming feels THAT good...

Not entering the debate, but you appear not to be aware of the fact that the MS Command Processor (cmd.exe) has supported tab completion since Windows NT 4.. Check article Q244407 on support.microsoft.com.

That said, CMD is still inferior to bash and the likes, but the enhanced versino that is in NT+ versions can do a lot more than the old one.

Ah, never used the CLI in any NT+ system, so I didn't realise that, Ta I'll remember that bit of info..

By the sound of it, they were talking about COMMAND.COM. Even when you use the DOSKEY tsr, you don't get completion.

Windows lets you change file extensions, you just have to disable the "hide extensions for known file types" option.

I actually love DOS...I use the DOS prompt in Windows XP when possible. Now you're going to saying that bash or another command prompt would be perfect for me (I've only used bash). I have to admit, I like bash because I'm a command-line person. But there's no good in me liking the command prompt and having no hardware nor software support.

Fair comment. But if you ever do a full update (ie a new comp) It might be worth looking at a duel boot again. Linux for work & MS for games etc. (after all <ME were all just games platforms anyway).

Hey it's quite large ( < 400 Mb) but cygwin might be good for you - it's a BASH for windows. It also lets you run Xemacs.

I actually have cygwin installed...I sometimes use uniq or run some Linux software.

What is the deal with everyone using BASH? Why not good old /bin/sh? Although personally I like CSH

More interestingly - Windows is put only all of the ready built PC's I have seen for sale in the stores - so people have it down there throughts anyway.

And THIS IS A !!FACT!! if any advert / common tongue says you want this product they will go out and buy it with no prior thought. Humans in general are very stupid animals.

throughts = throats - Have I said that I can't spell yet?

Yep, you have said that already, but don't worry, you spell better than me ;-)

Haha, funny I remember in the 5th grade spelling bee, I would have gotten 2nd place, if I spelled canteloupe right. Would have gotten 1st if I spelled silhouette right (I bet I still spelled both of 'em wrong).

I would have done much better in English at GCSE (last exams before you can legally leave school) but my english teacher was.....best not say here, children about.
'In YOUR opinion who was more evil Macbeth or Lady M'
answer:
I believe lady M was more evil because she drove M to do the murder.
teacher:
that's completely wrong she saw the error in her way at the end, she wasn't evil.
mark:
-D

Did I miss something here -In *YOUR* opinion?????

Okay, she didn't seem to nice & happy. ;-)

There was a spelling bee for me way back when, maybe third grade, who knows, it was down to me and another guy, they had to go get a higher-grade-level spelling book for us, and then they went back to the old one, and I misspelled work "wrk." I immediately realized my mistake and I've been kicking myself ever since.

Aw, I know how you feel, in 8th grade, I was in a "Math24" competition (you try to add, subtract, multiply, and divide numbers to get 24) and I made it to the state level, and I would have gotten into the finalists there, but I forgot how to do a "card" because I was so nervous. After the time was up I felt really stupid.

I won the National Junior Beta spelling bee this June (2002). I also got third last year, and first the year before that.

One of the words in my study list: pschent, pronounced 'skent'. It's the (ancient) combined crown of Upper and Lower Egypt.

Just because people use Windows doesn't mean the human race is stupid.

That is in no means what I meant.
I meant.
If the advert says you want it - over half the people who buy the product did so for only that reason - not because they need it. Take for instance something like the latest Vid. Card. Something like 128Mb RAM 266DDR? or something and all the rest. What could any normal person do with all that. They buy it because they can brag about owning it.

128MB of RAM actually does make a noticable difference with today's high-resolution and high-texture games. I've read many articles on this, and my dad used to work at a video game company, so I know that video RAM is more important than you're making it sound.

For that amount of money - I'm sorry but it isn't worth it. You like gaming that much - go out and spend the money on games.

And it was just an example to try and explain my point.

The avarage IQ however is 100. That is quite dumb.

It's that high? - did they remember to count teachers in this survey for IQs.

100 has been defined as the avarage. Actually, recently they've made IQ tests a bit more difficult (over here at least), because people were getting smarter and the avarage wasn't 100 anymore.

I tripleboot win2k, win98 and freebsd+kde at home. Win98 for games and the other two for work, internet and that sort of stuff.
Now I see my two younger brothers spend more time in kde than in win2k. They browse the web, chat using msn,... and most importantly, there are a lot more games that come with kde than with windows and they're a lot more fun too.
(and I don't have to worry anymore about any virusses or adware they bring in)