Posted by: Anonymous Coward
on December 22, 2003 06:59 PM
Wow. Where to begin?
If your definition of "free" does not include access to the _actual_computer_code_ as opposed to an inscrutible binary, it's not future-safe. Not worth my investment.
A glib reply: Iwouldn't call what I get from Microsoft "support"; Also I provide my own support for quite a few machines and I know personally people who spend $40k/year on Red Hat licences -- there are a lot of in-betweens.
Regarding configurability, I think it has to do with the intended purpose of the computer system. I concede that Windows is easier to configure for a home user. I believe from experience that Linux is much easier to configure because frankly, the design is better, even if Windows is more polished for certain uses. Hopefully I managed to say that without sounding insulting?
Again, some things are simpler to understand, and some harder -- sweeping generalization about "simplicity" is not helpful. I personally believe that simplicity is a secondary attribute, things such as consistancy, not crashing, and effective gui design are all parts of this.
I will be blatantly biased here. Linux help is of much higher quality, because (a) those involved are not already defeated by years of gruelling disapointment -- there is much more sense of creative comradarie, and (b) some linux users can program their own kernel: people routinely help newbies install linux, who also spend their day jobs hacking cluster filesystems for the fifth largest computer in the world. This is not to say I don't know knowledgable Windows folks. I do. But the quality of help is incomparable.
My (work) windows machines have been broken into. I simply do not have the time to invest the effort required to work around Microsoft's mistakes, misdesign, and all-around fucking sloppiness. I respect people who administer Windows networks the same way I respect people who cleanup suicides or rescue burning bodies out of passenger train or automobile accidents: commendable, but it sucks the life out of you unless you have a very strong personality. But then again that's just my opinion.
I interpreted trust along the lines of "is this a company I would trust my computer platform and future direction to", or "is this even a company I would trust to not shaft me as a partner by borging me", or "would I let my (fictional) daughter go out with them if Microsoft were a potential boyfriend, or would I polish my shotguns when he arrived?". My answers to these questions are: (1) not particularly, given many less risky options (2) hell no, and (3) I'd probably let my daughter do what she liked, but I wouldn't have to like it.
I suppose that Microsoft's software quality has improved. I would also cynically note that it couldn't have gotten much worse.
Learn about Linux
Download Linux
Get Linux help
Re:Some of my survey answers
Posted by: Anonymous Coward on December 22, 2003 06:59 PMWow. Where to begin?
If your definition of "free" does not include access to the _actual_computer_code_ as opposed to an inscrutible binary, it's not future-safe. Not worth my investment.
A glib reply: Iwouldn't call what I get from Microsoft "support"; Also I provide my own support for quite a few machines and I know personally people who spend $40k/year on Red Hat licences -- there are a lot of in-betweens.
Regarding configurability, I think it has to do with the intended purpose of the computer system. I concede that Windows is easier to configure for a home user. I believe from experience that Linux is much easier to configure because frankly, the design is better, even if Windows is more polished for certain uses. Hopefully I managed to say that without sounding insulting?
Again, some things are simpler to understand, and some harder -- sweeping generalization about "simplicity" is not helpful. I personally believe that simplicity is a secondary attribute, things such as consistancy, not crashing, and effective gui design are all parts of this.
I will be blatantly biased here. Linux help is of much higher quality, because (a) those involved are not already defeated by years of gruelling disapointment -- there is much more sense of creative comradarie, and (b) some linux users can program their own kernel: people routinely help newbies install linux, who also spend their day jobs hacking cluster filesystems for the fifth largest computer in the world. This is not to say I don't know knowledgable Windows folks. I do. But the quality of help is incomparable.
My (work) windows machines have been broken into. I simply do not have the time to invest the effort required to work around Microsoft's mistakes, misdesign, and all-around fucking sloppiness. I respect people who administer Windows networks the same way I respect people who cleanup suicides or rescue burning bodies out of passenger train or automobile accidents: commendable, but it sucks the life out of you unless you have a very strong personality. But then again that's just my opinion.
I interpreted trust along the lines of "is this a company I would trust my computer platform and future direction to", or "is this even a company I would trust to not shaft me as a partner by borging me", or "would I let my (fictional) daughter go out with them if Microsoft were a potential boyfriend, or would I polish my shotguns when he arrived?". My answers to these questions are: (1) not particularly, given many less risky options (2) hell no, and (3) I'd probably let my daughter do what she liked, but I wouldn't have to like it.
I suppose that Microsoft's software quality has improved. I would also cynically note that it couldn't have gotten much worse.
#