0

I read an article on Yahoo Tech yesterday that I have to share with you. The title is "Microsoft says next Windows won't be as annoying". It's funny that Microsoft realizes, and admits, that Windows Vista is a tremendous blunder. They don't say it as strongly as I just did but they should. Like Windows Me, Vista is a terrible mistake.

It isn't just me because as one Gartner analyst, Michael Silver, put it in the article, "The real hurdle is to get Vista's reputation behind them." Funny stuff that.

In the article, a Microsoft VP said that some of Vista's features seemed like a good idea to developers but weren't tested on users. WHAT? Microsoft has developers producing commercial applications with features that are never fully tested on actual users? OMG! Ok, stop laughing and keep reading--it gets even better.

Microsoft is also showing off some lighter versions of its Office Suite--and there's a hint of web-based versions. So now Microsoft is also putting some bank into the Cloud that I've been harping on for some time here and in my Virtualization column at Linux Magazine.

So what?

I'll tell you what: Microsoft realizes that Desktop Operating Systems, especially the annoying bloated types are dying off--rapidly. Windows 7 reportedly works well on less powerful systems where Vista choked and died--or wouldn't start at all.
Microsoft people are not stupid and they realize that we aren't either. They know that we know that we have a choice and they're going to try to capitalize on that choice with their web-based apps. If they're web-based, you can run 'em on Linux or a Mac.

You know what else they know? They know that Linux is less annoying than any version of Windows. They'll never admit it though. I wouldn't be a bit surprised if some Linux code, or the Linux kernel, were part of their new version of Windows. That's the only thing, in my opinion, that would make it less annoying.

4
Contributors
4
Replies
5
Views
9 Years
Discussion Span
Last Post by om1
0

For us Linux is less annoying than windows, but the average user doesn't want to have to go to shell to install programs. With that said, there's plenty of potential to make it work in the mainstream with some minor touches. Just look at OSX, built on a Unix core with some optimizations to make it more user friendly (I have to admit, I personally get annoyed and wind up in shell half the time when I'm playing with my girlfriends macbook).

As far as windows admitting their mistake IT'S ABOUT DAMN TIME.

0

You don't have to use the shell to install programs. Use Synaptic or the KPackage program.
I'm glad Macs have a shell now...less annoying than before. And now more than one button on the mouse...sheesh!

0

quote::but the average user doesn't want to have to go to shell to install programs.

I'm anything but an average user of Linux, and I have never used the shell to install applications, not even back in 2000 when I first started using Linux. I've always done it from the package manager GUI, in my case, because I use Mandriva Linux, mostly, it's accessed via drakconf or "Configure Your Computer" on the menu.

I really don't understand how this misinformation about Linux continues to get believed, these days. All anyone needs to do is boot up Linux on a LiveCD and play around with it for a while, and it soon becomes apparent that Linux does not conform to the misinformed view of it.

0

most top distro's now you don't need the shell unless you are having some kinda issue... with that being said... windows has "safe mode" and other things the average user don't know alot about...

Have something to contribute to this discussion? Please be thoughtful, detailed and courteous, and be sure to adhere to our posting rules.