craig1410
|
| posted on 5/10/04 at 11:48 PM |
|
|
Steve,
I agree with some of what you said above but I don't think you can compare 95,98,ME to 2000 and XP due to the significant differences in the
architecture. I am using W2000 Pro right now because it is stable and does everything I need it to. I use Windows XP Pro on my company laptop
(I'm a software consultant btw) because this is the company standard and it does run better on laptops due to better power management and
hardware support.
If you want to avoid having XP moan at you to reregister when you make hardware changes then use the corporate version, it doesn't need
activation! I'm not encouraging piracy but the way I look at it, if you pay for the software then you should be allowed to use it without
getting hassle every time you change the hardware!
Ideally, I hope to make the break and start using Linux as my desktop operating system shortly and be done with Microsoft for good! I have been using
Linux since around 1994 and have a couple of servers up in my attic which act as firewall and web server amongst other things. Linux can do almost
everything which Windows can do and a great deal more besides and it is virtually free and doesn't suffer from the usual security weaknesses as
Windows. The only reason I have not yet dropped Windows is because I have a few Windows games which I play (mainly F1 sims and Counterstrike) which
require windows. I think the next time I reinstall my machine I will create a dual boot with a copy of windows XP on a small games only partition and
the rest set up for use with Linux. Everything else (Office progs, email, browser, software development tools etc etc) which I use every day is
supported in Linux and I can always use something like VM Ware to run the few apps which won't run in Linux directly (eg. Visual Basic)
Anyone else out there made the switch to Linux on the Desktop?
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
|
|
Peteff
|
| posted on 6/10/04 at 10:12 AM |
|
|
use winbollox 2008
They'll be releasing a beta version of it in 2012, shortly followed by a series of patches. I formatted a computer for a friend recently,it was
constantly crashing, and installed my old copy of 98 on it to check it over. I gave it back to him and he upgraded it to ME with his disk,and it broke
again. Firefox runs on my 2000pro alright but you can use MYIE2 which is based on Explorer and has tabbed browsing and other features if you want the
add ons.
yours, Pete
I went into the RSPCA office the other day. It was so small you could hardly swing a cat in there.
|
|
|
blueshift
|
| posted on 6/10/04 at 10:52 AM |
|
|
Ditto craig's comments about 95, 98, me vs 2000 and XP. the latter two have a significantly better architecture and it shows in stability, lack
of driver problems and weird bugs. NT4 was pretty rock solid too, but not as flexible, no USB support, innapropriate for a modern desktop OS.
I ran FreeBSD as a desktop OS for a while. I would do again, but I am a lazy fart these days and prefer to spend my time climbing and building cars
rather than tinkering around getting my computer working just so. linux may be more plug-and-play these days but I wouldn't use it for snobbery
reasons 
|
|
|
Noodle
|
| posted on 6/10/04 at 10:55 AM |
|
|
I've got a couple of machine's I've been running Linux on (Mandrake 9.2 and Fedora Core 2)
I dual boot my laptop from XPSP2 to Fedora, but I haven't gone over completely because I still have software that needs Windows.
However, once I get an FC2 server setup here at home (that'll be my development and email server), that I can access from any different email
client Outlook/Evolution etc, then I'll be almost completely Linux, with 2 servers and 2 desktops.
I have a machine in my garage that's been running as a server on Mandrake since Christmas and has yet to put a foot wrong. Deeply impressive
stability.
I administer machines using a VNC connection, from inside the home, or when I'm working remotely. With XP, I feel that there's too much
gilding on it that gets in the way of function.
Cheers,
Neil.
p.s. I've been running Firefox on an Athlon 1.4 for ages and have yet to experience any instability, either under XP or Linux.
p.p.s. My wife accidentally booted into Linux the other day and hadn't noticed that she was surfing on Mozilla. She thought I'd been
p*ssing around with the icons and stuff. I expect to see much larger public Linux-usage on the desktop in the near future.
Your sort make me sick
|
|
|
craig1410
|
| posted on 6/10/04 at 12:04 PM |
|
|
Blueshift,
Free BSD is okay I suppose, I remember that it held the record (and probably still does) for longest uptimes on www.netcraft.com
I actually have FreeBSD running on my Monowall firewall at home.
Noodle,
Glad to see that I'm not the only "pioneer" of Linux on this site. I agree, the reasons not to use Linux on the desktop have largely
been addressed in the last year or two and there should be no reason for the average punter to feel locked in to the Microsoft "vision"
any more. Linux is chipping away at MS's marketshare (as is Firefox) and long may that continue!!
I used to be an OS/2 user and actually bought a copy of Warp 3.0 back in 1996. This was a classis VHS versus Betamax situation where the technically
inferior Windows 3.1/95 beat OS/2 purely on marketing know how. The difference with Linux is that no one person or company owns it so they can't
pull the plug like IBM did with OS/2.
Cheers,
Craig.
|
|
|
zenarcher
|
| posted on 6/10/04 at 04:10 PM |
|
|
I've been using Opera browser (now at version 7.54 and free) for a few years, faster than IE, built in pop up blocker ,e-mail, skins,themes
etc.
Works well with ME (if you have to),since I only recently changed up to XP.
|
|
|
