What do you Linux fanatics think of Windows 7?

Post Reply New Topic

Let me be clear on that. If my favorite band signed with sony, after sony pulled their root kit nonsense, no, I wouldnt buy any more of their albums. Would they suck for signing? In my mind, hell yeah.

I vote with my dollars.

Now what if I wished to enjoy a new band but couldnt play their CD after hearing them on the radio? Would they suck? No. But I couldnt exactly call them awesome, could I? Could I say "thanks for taking my money and giving me nothing?" Yeah, I could say that.

Now that isnt true of a beta or release candidate of windows, but when it wont install on a dual core intel using a asus motherboard, both brand new, using a microsoft brand keyboard and mouse, and a samsung monitor, should I say, "well, I'll wait for the final release and pay for it, then try it sight unseen"?

No.

Cause you know what a release candidate is? Its a sales pitch. And microsofts windows 7 sales pitch to me? It sucked. They didnt even get to the door to ring the door bell.

Further, if we are such fanatics, what are we doing trying windows 7? We are fanatics in one way only: We love computers.

Refine your reading comprehension skills. You're taking random words out of context and twisting them to whatever you want them to mean. I said "Windows 7 is basically just a refinement of Vista." So, whatever Vista is, 7 builds on that. This is true. Windows 7 is based on the same underlying core as Vista. It's not some completely new thing. It's Vista with a number of improvements. I don't understand how you can take offense at a basic statement of fact. I didn't claim that Windows 7 was crap (though I personally have no need for it). I just pointed out that there was little fundamental difference between it and Microsoft's previous offerings. Which, for the record, are woefully inadequate, at least for my uses.

And if you're going to try to [sic] my quotes, avoid introducing typos and misspellings. Few things are more annoying than an incompetent grammar nazi.


I wonder what response you expect to get after insulting half the thread participants.


As I type this, I am running Mac OS X Leopard. After my Snow Leopard disc comes in tomorrow, I plan to BootCamp XP (still the best MS has come up with yet) and then get Debian back running. They finally upgraded to a new kernel, so it should work better on my laptop now.

Yep, you don't get any more intolerant of opposing views than that.

What an odd response. I'm not sure what relationship Sony have with Windows 7, but clearly there is a link in your mind somewhere.

You completely failed to understand the point I was making. You mentioned the disc wouldn't read, which suggests the most likely fault is with the disc itself. However, you then turn that onto the product contained on the disk and somehow use it as justification that it "sucks". I seriously don't understand the particular leap of logic that you took there.




So which was it, a disc fault, or a problem with the installation?



It sucked because of a *disc fault*? You really do have a narrow view of the world. Let me re-iterate my previous example question. If you purchased a CD from your favourite music retailer, got it home, listened to it once, then the next time you went to play the CD it wouldn't read, would the band and their music "suck" because of it?

That's what you're trying to claim here with Windows 7. You said originally that the disc wouldn't read. How, in anybody's version of reality, is that a fault of the operating system itself?

And for what it's worth, a release candidate isn't a "sales pitch" at all. Perhaps a bit of self-education on the whole alpha/beta/RC process would do you a world of good. I hear there's this website called Google that will answer all sorts of questions like that if you ask it nicely.



You're a fanatic because you clearly have decided that Windows 7 "sucks" and then you have to scrabble around to try and find a reason or a justification. You managed to latch on to "oh no! the disk wouldn't read! Windows 7 sucks!"



Well, if someone thinks the above statement applies to them and they feel insulted, perhaps it'll cause them to re-evaluate why I said it in the first place...

A quote from someone who asks "what kind of hollier-than-thouh nonsense.......", I don't know but there seems to be some bit of irony on this.


Does that mean a somehow biased position? I really doubt you are being completely unbiased as you may claim or believe to be, given your ad-hominems responses, that seems questionable. Heck! if that was the case, why actually care about what is being discussed in this thread anyway? I mean this thread was aimed at "linux fanatics" (linux lovers) who would have tried Windows 7, and given that you are not a linux fan, what are you doing here in the first place?

Heck! I would say that I may be more unbiased than you are, to be honest, given that I am not a linux user and I have no knowledge of it, I must admit that, initially, the refusal of trying linux is to avoid learning a different OS and different applications, that pretty much seems to be the case with many, so I don't see the need to take offense on that because it would be partly true.



I seem to enjoy when people feel insulted by meaningless stuff, so go ahead, get offended for nothing!! It is a thrill.


Heck! why should they care of what you do in your job and profession in the first place? There are several people who are Windows admins, yes, many people rely on Windows in their jobs, etc. yes, it isn't like they don't know that already, so that pretty much seems pointless.


They already know that.
They already made a choice towards linux because they liked it better, so they are already exercising that


well, according to whom? to you? is that enough justification? I mean, let's say you lack "comprehension skills" and stating that your "comprehension skills are in tip-top" wouldn't actually prove it, because anyone can claim anything and anyone can negate anything, and that isn't a counterargument at all. I'm not saying you lack comprehension skills, but if it happens that you miss the point then you miss the point, regardless of negating that fact.

Insult me, get insulted back.


Not really accurate as far as the history of Windows goes... they moved from being a DOS-based system with Windows just being a graphical shell around it to being an NT kernel. They changed the fundamental underpinnings of the OS. And the move from XP to Vista made some fairly significant changes. Windows 7 is not nearly as substantial a change- as I said, it is a refinement of Vista. It takes Vista, cleans up some parts of it, adds some new stuff, but it's nothing radically new. That's all I claimed in my initial post, and I don't know where you're taking issue with that claim. Why is this bad? Well, it isn't necessarily bad, but when I never found much use for Vista, and Microsoft's next offering is very similar to Vista in the fundamentals, it seems unlikely that I'll have a need for 7 either. In many ways it's like Snow Leopard- yeah, it's an improvement on the old version, but it's not really anything to get too terribly excited about.


When did I claim that they had?


"At least for my uses." Other people are happy using Windows, good for them. It doesn't work well for me, so I use something else.

Understand now?


No, I'm just annoyed that you would stoop to such pettiness. You're the one who started trying to correct grammar, and I called you out on it. Don't try to turn it around, "not if you'd like to retain even a shred of credibility."


I don't hate Windows 7. I might be giving the 64-bit version of it another shot soon, since I just got a new version of Boot Camp in Snow Leopard which supposedly supports it much better. If it works, great. I still probably won't use it much just because I'm used to other things, but that doesn't mean I hate it. I don't use Fedora, but I don't hate it either. I'm just more used to Ubuntu/Debian.

Odd that a self-proclaimed computer expert would not have heard of the Sony-BMG rootkit.


I think Fuzzy is taking a pragmatic "does it work for me?" look at it. It's a rather efficient way to judge things, although it isn't particularly objective.


Fuzzy is neither stupid nor a noob. I'm sure he understands what alpha, beta, and RC are for. What he was trying to say is that, among the other functions of an RC, it is a sales pitch.


Well, at least now we know you aren't a paid-by-Microsoft astroturfer. They would never say that.


And almost every post you make in this section somehow takes snide and petty shots at anything that opposes Microsoft.

Don't call people out for doing something that you are doing yourself.


Making a typo is one thing, making a typo in a quote from somebody else, and debunking them based on the typo you introduced is another.


Actually, the subject of the thread is what the Linux Fanatic Brigade thinks of Windows 7.

As a proud member of the Linux Fanatic Brigade, I pointed out that I could care less about Windows 7, and did not plan on trying it. That hardly qualifies as "determined to hate it no matter what".

Its called a comparison of business practices. They are not the same thing. If you need help with knowing what a comparison is, google may help. However late in life it is for you, knowing what a comparison is will benefit you greatly.

You also might as well have a look at the effects that the sony root kit had on peoples cdrom firmware. You seem a bit short on personal knowledge.



If I made a mistake, it was one of omission. Had I finished my statement as I should have, it would have been "the disk wouldnt read a particular file". Truly I am a reprehensible character.

Literally, the disk was lifted from the cd platter(from the first install), and placed on the second, where it failed. Identical hardware. Looking at it right now(the second time), no scratches or dirt are evident, so there must be a change to the data on the optical disk. Which wouldnt surprise me from the company that brought the great idea of 'per CPU licensing'. Which is similar to sonys rootkit only allowing three copies from a cd. See the comparison now?



Hope I am clear now. Its was a problem with the installation.



But it is. Even if you dont know it. It is the foot-in-the-door technique. The same thing happens with Microsoft producing a OSX version of office, the abortive attempt at internet explorer for the apple operating systems, and apple happily provides quicktime for windows as well. Same technique. Do you think that apple provides windows binaries for the ipod product as a gesture of good will, or do you think they want people to convert to apple by degrees?

You seem to like google. I do too. Well, googles little browser is the forerunner for a google operating system. Notice it is free? Perhaps you have a costco store near you, with the little samples of burritos and various other things? Do you think that they provide those because shoppers are hungry, or because they know that if you like the taste, you are much more likely to buy?

Maybe you take the cynical look at microsoft. Its something like this: "beta test our software so we can save a bunch of money, since we dont have to buy all the hardware, then later pay us for it? We'll call it a privilege, 'kay?"

Maybe you can do some product testing of Ford automobiles, then later purchase one for no discount. Hint: product testing isnt as much fun as it sounds. Wipe out any thoughts of smashing brand new cars.



You're a fanatic because you clearly have decided that Windows 7 "sucks" and then you have to scrabble around to try and find a reason or a justification. You managed to latch on to "oh no! the disk wouldn't read! Windows 7 sucks!"

No Sir. I am a fanatic because of the quote at the end of my post. I am a fanatic because my operating system of choice gives me the wherewithal to do whatever the hell I want. I am a fanatic because my operating system of choice is forcing yours to innovate. Not the other way around.

Remember the windows manager options for windows xp? XP or classic. Vista? Aero or... classic. Anything else was a hack and against the EULA. Now I hear windows 7 offers a little more.. true? Tell me its true. It wont take magical monkeys flying out of my nose to impress me with win 7. Can I pay Microsoft for MOAR freedom?

well to install it I had a choice 1. keep my case open and plug unplug various hard drives 2. remove Linux and then allow 7 to go first. I chose 2, then I found the partitioner is completely bloody useless and I needed to format the drive from scratch, then once I had the OS installed it crashed.

What do I think, well I cannot comment upon how well it works cos it crashed!! !!!after which I got the s**ts and removed all MS programs from my comp for at least a month.

SO to sum up, like all Dose it will not recognise any other format than its own, (in fact it could not even deal with fat 32 during partitioning). It crashed upon first use. So to the dedicated who can be bothered persisting with it I am sure it is a little more user friendly, for me however the only reason windows (XP) is back on my comp .... I could not get Fallout 3 working with Playonlinux

Yet.

I'll go buy it tomorrow and see if I can get it to work. I know some people have, and you and I have very similar hardware.

*puts on his flame-retardant suit and tinfoil hat*

I'm a Slackware guy generally. I've run Slackware since (IIRC) 3.2. I know my way around a Linux system, mostly. However, I do like Windows 7. Windows 7 is what Vista should have been. Vista and Windows 7 share core components, share a somewhat similar style and feel, but 7 is very nice.

Interesting. Slackware 13 just came out, with 64-bit support finally added. How have you found Slackware? What advantages does it give over other distros?

I suppose you could compare Windows 200 and XP. XP being more popular because of it's long life and other reasons people know for it.
Yes, some people will call Vista "the ME of all Windows" But it seems evident that a later advancement seem successful
Windows 95,98,ME. People don't think 95 was stable. (It was fine for me) 98 had some great improvements and was very popular.
Windows for workgroups 3.0 to 3.12 (3.12 being Chinese only) 3.11 being more popular out of it. Anyone seeing a pattern here?

I managed to partition my hard drive successfully with a partition editor. I just hate the way Microsoft refuse to accept any Linux partitions as a partition. But renders it non-DOS, or whatever else it comes up with. Linux will accept it and even configure it automatically for dual booting for a Windows OS. Why doesn't Microsoft do the same for Linux? I'd like to see what the RTM version will be like.

I see there is a Windows XP on WinSeven. I would prefer Windows 98 really as some of my games do NOT like the NT platform and will not work under Wine or XP compatibility mode. If it does, it's for a few minutes

Ok so reading through some of this post there seems to be an accusation that people like myself are fanatical about linux, this fanaticism apparently has no just explanation??

So I thought I would sum up why I (in general) no longer use MS products.

1. Windows has always been lagging behind the opposing OS's. Back when '95 came out I was using a Mac, at that time OS 7.5 was out, it ran on less than 12 meg HD and 1 meg of ram, '95 needed at least 40 meg HD space and a minimum 4 meg of ram. What's worse 95 was nowhere near as user friendly as 7.5. No wonder we all called it Mac 88.
This trend continues, whilst everyone was bleating about how wonderful Vista Areo was, over in the land of free software a far better and massively less resources hungry choice had been in full release since the alpha 1 of aero. I could go on and on about the ways in which windows is always playing catch up

2. Virus's and Malware. the plague of windows, virtually unheard of in linux. If they do start to spread to linux the open source nature of the software and the massive programming community will mean the fix will appear almost as soon as the problem

3. Price - Linux all free,

4. Crashes - I have yet to see my install crash, unless it is something that I have been screwing with. Where as the BSOD is all pervasive in Windows

5. Software - apart from being free, excellent, and covering all possible needs. It is also available from within the desktop environment. In Ubuntu for example two mouse clicks, type what I am looking for into the search then click on the sotfware I want and it downloads and installs

6. Ease of use. This used to be the big argument from Windows users, Linux was too confusing and required knowledge of code. Sorry folks until October last year I really had very little knowledge of Linux. less than a year later it is my OS of choice. The only real difficulty I had was in letting go of my Windows conceived ideas on how an OS should work and the names of the folders. To the average user distros such as Ubuntu are pretty much drag and drop, one click installs and no hassles

So to sum up, I switched to Linux because I was sick and tired of all the hassles of running windows machine. For pities sake I had three anti malware programs running and still could run into problems. I must admit that I do miss defrag, watching all those little bits of data being shuffled was kind of hypnotic, stupid linux programmers inventing a file system that does not require defragging, what were they thinking!

To those that would call me a fanatic well to you I would say that i have bothered to look at what else is available, found a much better alternative and unlike you I am not wilfully obtuse

It's a large improvement over Vista, but it has a lot to catch up on before Linux becomes a major threat to Microsoft. I am not a Linux fanboy. I'm definitely upgrading when it is released. I use Vista and Ubuntu on my computers for different purposes. I use Vista for all my gaming, but for productivity, I use Ubuntu.

Not really a Linux fan, but I do prefer unix and I do use mostly Mac OS X, FreeBSD and Linux. I've never found a X server and window manager that I liked.

I'm writing this in Windows 7 Ultimate (beta) so I have first hand experience. It runs on a MSI U100 with 2 GB RAM and a 10" screen.

From what I see this could be said to be the first Windows that is kind-of usable? I still hate having to use installers, that applications are not moveable, the way in which windows handles devices in a very hardware centric view, how each and every window has to have a menu bar, etc, etc. But it wouldn't be Windows other wise.

Windows 7 Ultimate is, by far, the best version of Windows that I've ever had to use.

Still, I would not buy it. I would miss the unix bits.

Maybe Microsoft should considering copying Apple again and take FreeBSD and build a Windows framework or Windows VM inside it. Make a clean cut with the past and start without the headache of backward compatibility?