I hate Microsoft!!!!!!!!!!!!!!!

Kadano

Well... I've been using Windows XP for several years. But there are just so many things that are just bad, I don't even want to start writin' them.
So I tested opensuse 10.2. I really liked it, but pieces of it (eg yast) are quite crappy.
Now I use linuxmint. It's ubuntubased, fast, etc. etc. But it's GUI is not easy to configure, so I'm waiting for the KDE 4 Mint release, or enlightenment (it looks so awesome, but I haven't managed yet to install it properly with synaptic).
I play hardly any games, just some GBA/NDS emulated via VBA and no$gba.
Amarok is PERFECT, but I'm still waiting for a GOM-like (gomplayer.com) allaround-mediaplayer that's capable of ALL formats.
Openoffice has everything I need. GIMP is excellent.

Let's compare Windows XP, Windows Vista and Linux.
Windows XP boots very fast. There are loads of apps for it and it's quite good. EXE installs very fast. Style/Theme manipulation: not possible (at least for free).
Windows Vista... well... my grandma has Vista. It's supposed to be easy in use, but actually it's just confusing, slow as hell and lacks the innovations MS said it would have are either stolen by Mac or Linux. AERO is crap.
Without aero it's pretty fast, though. So yes, it's probably just as fast as XP. But... there is nothing that's actually BETTER than XP. MS noticed this, so they won't make a XP-version of Directx 10 (although it's indeed possible^^), just for making people buy it.

Linux can do EVERYTHING XP or Vista can. Compiz Fusion and Beryl are great, amarok is excellent, gimp too (but can't staisfy the needs of real pros). It's extremely fast and can be configured however you want. With good package managers (NOT yast) apps can be installed just as fast and easy as in windows.

Mac is... well, It has it's excellent sides. But if there were some guys writing a user-friendly UI for Linux, Mac would hardly have any pros. (Maybe KDE 4 and the next enlightenment do just this...)

So, why should I pay a lot of money for a OS that's everywhere inferior? Because of the apps. There are so many great programs for Windows (all the games) that just aren't available for Linux.
So, I can understand why so many ppl stick to Windows. Because of the programs. Linux lacks a lot of great programs.
But don't forget: It's NOT Microsoft that makes these programs. It's Adobe etc.
So, I hate Microsoft Windows, but I don't hate the programs for Windows.

And for sure, Microsoft wasn't the one that brought electronic life and computers to the mass lol... but very amusing to read this post...

Windows is popular for it's many programs. But that's not Microsoft's achievement. Gates was just fast and he created the FIRST Os for the masses... but nowhere the best. This effect is still continuing, and thus there are so many Windows programs and games. It has the largest market.

SteveMB93

Well I haven't had any problems with XP, so your results may very. I play a lot of games, and XP is the best hands down.

kadajawi

Oh my god. No. What a bunch of nonsense. PCs were there long before IBM thought of it, they never thought PCs were going to be successful. Then they had to realize that they were, and wanted to compete in that area. Apple introduced the Apple II in 1977, the IBM PC was introduced 1981. 1973 there was the Xerox PARC Alto, which was the first personal computer with a GUI... it remained a non commercial product however because the bosses at Xerox didn't think anyone could want one. Commodore, Atari and Tandy were in the PC business before IBM entered it, too.

Apple was always a competitor for IBM, they never worked for IBM as far as I know. They wrote the OS for their hardware themselves. Microsoft approached IBM when they heard that IBM needs an operating system for their PC (which was quickly hacked together), and sold them an OS. That they didn't had, at that time, and they couldn't write one just in time. So they bought something from another guy for I think like $50000, and modified it a bit. That became DOS.

Btw. Apple always produced PCs, right from the start, way before IBM did. At one point Wozniak, the guy who designed the Apple computers, had to show the Apple I or II to his employee HP, according to his contract. They rejected it. After that Apple started to sell their garage built computers on their own. Microsoft was there before IBM introduced the PC too, they wrote software for other personal computers.

Anyway, back to the Microsoft/IBM story... Microsofts contract with IBM included that Microsoft would be paid a small fee per PC sold by IBM and that Microsoft had the right to bundle the software with other computers too. IBM obviously didn't expect that soon after IBM PC compatible computers would flood the market. This small line in the contract built Microsofts success and that is why computers have become popular the way they did.

Anyway, while the UI of Windows is not as good as Mac OS, it still is better than Linux (at least KDE 3.5, haven't tried Gnome or KDE4). And Windows is quite an archivement. XP runs pretty well, eventhough there is a huge variety of hardware for it, with crappy drivers. One of the reasons OS X runs so well is that the hardware is mostly controlled by Apple, and they don't have to support a lot hardware. That makes things easier. Many of Vistas problems are because of the DRM that is integrated. Hopefully, with the industries turning away from DRM, Microsoft will remove it too.

DaremoS

What is the nonsense smart guy?

With your writing you have just confirmed the original post!!! :D

You simple added more information

DimaMP4

I don't use any other MS software than the OS.

Get Open Office.

XP works just fine for me.

Web browsing: Firefox (the best browser atm)
MSN: Miranda IM. (very "lightweight" app, customizable with plugins, skins and such)
Mediaplayer(s): VLC for movies, Foobar2000 for music.

kadajawi

Not really. You said that IBM invented the PC. That is wrong. Jobs, that means Apple, never wrote the OS for the IBM PC, in fact Apple were there and built PCs before IBM thought about the IBM PC. Quite possibly IBM started the development of the IBM PC when they saw Apples success with personal computers.
You even said that it wasn't Apple who invented personal computers... which is true, but IBM came even later.
Read again what you wrote
So where did I confirm what you wrote? You've got most of the facts wrong.

The only thing you have got right is that Microsoft made IBM PC compatible computers possible, and therefore lay the foundation for their own success and maybe the success of computers, though I'm sure that without Microsoft personal computers would have become successful too.

nvit

Majority of these programs were wroten due to powerfull development toos provided by Microsoft.