AIn't it? the cubby peguin too... but guess what? They can kick your a** anytime mother****er!! Broken Windows are deadly too...
-FreeBSD, OpenBSD-

I'd like to see Microsoft develop a Linux operating system, then maybe it would go mainstream and stand a chance to get out of obscurity.

If everything was done fairly... what does the vote mean? It means that the people who felt strongly enough to vote..and who just happened to be looking at MSNBC during the vote.. voted on what their opinion of the best operating system was.

I might as well stand outside McDonalds and ask the people coming out of the door what their favourite operating system was. Of the ones that didn't breeze by without answering, I'd get an opinion that meant nothing... and the idiots that were so wrapped up in it to try and fool the vote would just walk back in and out the door again to give a second vote.

Who cares if the ballot was stuffed? It means nothing anyway!

Well, it doesn't mean *nothing* but you're right, it certainly doesn't mean what it is being taken to mean. What it does mean is that there are some die hard Windows fanatics that are willing to stuff the ballot (or some similar situation).

Polls (and online polls, especially) have to be taken in that context. The sample is less than half the population, mostly male, mostly middle/upper class, etc... that doesn't invalidate the poll, it just means the person interpretting the results has to take those demographics into account.

Yes, Linux is great, and no you can't have an economy with everything being free. I agree Microsoft sends out too many products that you really don't need (Windows ME,SE) You can just get a few patches from WindowsUpdate, save ya 100$ or so. "Linux is great because it is open-source" Well, let's see, where do the programmers of these different flavors of Linux get their money, do they just devote their whole lives to "defeating microsoft" while they live in a shack and eat beans all day? Gimme a break, Open Source won't last long if you want some high-quality software from big companies, small programs yes. But do you actually think everything in Linux will be free forever? No. Probably after the "hype" is over people will start to get real and maybe companies will port their programs over and charge money for it, I don't see why a company would do all this for free, it's ridiculous. So let's just stop fighting over this Linux and Windows bulls*** and just use what works for you, who cares if someone calls you "lame" for using Windows, who the **** is the lame one wasting their time to harass? probably some 12-14 yr old. Wait until the hype dies down, Linux will still have a long way to go to defeat Microsoft, and Microsoft will one day realize that overpricing their software, and putting out things people really don't need to pay for is just plain wrong.

Why does a successful economy have to be based on money? Why can't it be based on support (I provide you with x and you provide me with y)? Find the book Beyond Civilization, by Daniel Quinn; it expands on this idea among others.

Why is a command-line bad? When you ask someone for something, you don't choose from a pulldown menu, you say 'Can I have some water' or whatever else you need. People are even talking about voice recognition... So isn't a command line a good existing version of this? It can contain an unlimited amount of functionality in a incredibly tiny amount of screen space (a prompt, end.) Cell phones with the final designed version of WAP (not yet available) work like this; you speak into the phone what it is you're looking for, and it answers you, instead of browsing on a site and choosing whatever.

Yes, Linux is great, and no you can't have an economy with everything being free. I agree Microsoft sends out too many products that you really don't need (Windows ME,SE) You can just get a few patches from WindowsUpdate, save ya 100$ or so. "Linux is great because it is open-source" Well, let's see, where do the programmers of these different flavors of Linux get their money, do they just devote their whole lives to "defeating microsoft" while they live in a shack and eat beans all day? Gimme a break, Open Source won't last long if you want some high-quality software from big companies, small programs yes. But do you actually think everything in Linux will be free forever? No. Probably after the "hype" is over people will start to get real and maybe companies will port their programs over and charge money for it, I don't see why a company would do all this for free, it's ridiculous. So let's just stop fighting over this Linux and Windows bulls*** and just use what works for you, who cares if someone calls you "lame" for using Windows, who the **** is the lame one wasting their time to harass? probably some 12-14 yr old. Wait until the hype dies down, Linux will still have a long way to go to defeat Microsoft, and Microsoft will one day realize that overpricing their software, and putting out things people really don't need to pay for is just plain wrong.

Really, this is getting dumb....Just look at the number of responces from windows users in this forum. its obvious you all are out numbers, and thats with the fact that linux users are suppose to be the tech guru's or whatever and should be jumping all over this. Get a life...you know all you use your linux or ms os' for is surfing the net for porn so you can jerk off.

Linux is for people that love to type and haven't grown out of DOS mode yet. They think they can impress people by going into terminal mode and changing their screen resolution. Pseudo-geeks (wannabees).

Have you even used Linux yet? Do you know why people use Linux? Its not because they love to type. Its becase they like how their computer actually works and doesn't crash every hour. They like how Linux gives them the choice of what they want to run (KDE, Gnome, Icewm, or a dozen others), how they can develop their own programs freely with no license, how they can get Linux freely with no license, and more.

I have used Linux as a matter of fact and have installed it many times. I'm spoiled by windows, I suppose. Excuse my outburst, earlier, I was in one of those 'to heck with Linux users' types of moods.

you are an idiot

Ah yes. But you often find programs that only work in GNOME and not KDE, and vice versa. If you use KDE and want a program designed for the GNOME interface, you find yourself installing half of GNOME (ie. the libraries) even though you're not using it, just to get a single program working that you need and can't find for KDE. Linux needs an agreed standard, not a hundred different standards competing to be the one.

I agree, I think its because they are so used to DOS they don't want to leave it.

As for being stable, it isn't any more stable than Windows is. If anyone doesn't believe me, go to any linux newsgroup and read the problems.

WindowsME runs fine for me.

Your name says it all, Paul587. Like Linux, you're a long way from being Paul1.

Just thought of this after I posted the last one. You won't make it on the numbers list (#1) (like Linux), Paul587, but maybe you can be #1 on the alphabet. You could be A-paul-ing.

PS I am good.

:) your right u r good at what i dont know but i will let you know when i find out.

and any way who wants to be #1 its to close to being #0
lol

PS i am good to

It's as simple as this -- 90% of the people who use computers don't understand linux or even know how to use linux. Windows, while it may not be the most stable OS, certainly is the easiest system to use for non-techies. If a person is not a techie and doesn't want to be a techie, linux is not the best OS and since most people are not techies, for most people, Windows is the best OS. If you use linux and you love it, linux is the best operating system. Ballot stuffing? If linux came up with more that 10 % of the vote, the linux folks are ballot stuffing.

I use both linux and windows and as for you need to be a techie to use linux not true. it all depends on what version you use and it is constantly being developed to be more user friendly every day AND IT WILL TAKE OVER THE WORLD.

I think it was just resently that MSNBC blew the door open on some MSN Misbillings that MSN didn't want to go public. Now, correct me if I'm wrong but if MS Controlled MSNBC like linux users claim that story would have never happened. Remember, MS Is a PARTNER. NBC still have most of the control over the site and cable channel. As for which is better? Depends on what you use it for. Uptime really doesn't mean jack $hit in reality. Who do you think accesses MSNBC the most? Normal home users. Uptime may be good for servers but home use? Most people don't even leave their PCs on at night. Those are the people voting. You want a good server? Fine, get NT or Linux. You want an OS that you can do just about anything a home user needs? Get Windows. When Linux becomes as user friendly and gets the same support Windows gets then we can have a real comparison. Until then PLEASE stop it. Your trying to compare Oil and Water and thats not going to work.

People picking sides in this discussion...you need to get a life - IT DOESN'T MATTER - USE WHAT WORKS FOR YOU

I can easily point out things that SUCK about both OS...and most people...and most TV shows...and most cars....etc, etc, etc..

Anyone with a passion about either OS needs to put down the keyboard and back away from the computer...some exercise would probably help too.

I hear Jumping Jacks work well to get the ANTI-OS mood out of the mind :P

no matter where you use you pc uptime is essential you dont want to be halfway through downloading a 10 mb file frome the net that doesnt support resuming and your dam MS machine crash. you have just wasted 30 mins on a phone call for nothing.

I'm waiting for the first Olympic Windows vs Linux debate. Heck a good ole boxing match would work before I fully comment. Too many users are so self prideful and blinded by their lack of knowledge about either OS so they take baseball bats and their blind swings. To those I say grow up, swallow that "I'm the best what I believe is the best period." attitude or you will get run over like a rabbit under a mack truck in the real world. I really feel sorry for those people.

It's no surprise really - I've used Linux myself and it's absolutely horrible to use. Everything's designed for the command line, and a GUI is just something you stick on the top with 'e-Sellotape'. Half the time you find yourself sat there for hours on end tweaking a .rc file with a text editor, when in Windows you tick a box and be done with it. PC users haven't had to change preferences with a text editor since the days of DOS 6 and Windows 3. Why go back?
Why should I have to scratch my head for 4 days trying to get ISDN running on a manual dial system, when Windows will do it in a flash?

Linux is a server platform. Period. Trying to change it into a desktop is a joke.

Couldn't agree more. Linux makes sense on servers, and only servers.

...all you linux users, stop it already. All you do is complain how windows sucks, my god. Get a life.

Both os's have their +'s and -'s but who really gives a $|-| I T it's just a computer. get a life

I wish the Linux people would actually present data to back their arguments. If they can prove MSNBC stuffed the ballots then fine, I'll agree.

freebsd now!

Let's think about the readers that frequent MSNBC's/MSN's website...they are all primarily Windows users that have no experience with Linux or even know what it is (and probably don't care).
Personally, I'd like to try Linux, but i've got alot of stuff that wont run on it yet. Someday in the future when things become more compatible, and Linux is a viable alternative in the mainstream market as well as Windows, they should do that poll again.
Till then, I would say most consumers will still be using Win9x/Me/NT/2K.

I think the ballot was stuffed, but not by MSNBC... I have a feeling it was a Linux user who did it ... you know, the same Linux users that troll on slashdot saying linux sucks, they love to piss of their own community. That's what I think :)

Not taking either side :
Linux had 28% of the vote, then it dropped to 3% Sunday. If you figure it out, something like 126 or more votes had to come in for Windows and none for Linux. Realistically, would there be everyone voting for Windows and not one vote for Linux? Seems fishy to me.

Being in the technical world of linux and windows. We all know which is a better OS. When Windows has an uptime of 382 days doing around a 100 gigs a month, every month, then I'll vote for Windows.

'Better' is a very subjective word and is definately in th eye of the beholder. Your criteria means nothing to me. Or did you mean 'better server OS'? A safe definition of better would be 'it does what I want it to do best compared to others in its class'. By that definition, Linux isn't even on the radar scope for the vast majority of users.

When linux becomes something that the average joe schmoe can walk up to a computer and start using it, then I'll say its the best OS. In reality there are good os's for different things. For personal computing, Windows is the hands down best. Mac would be close but the fact that there arent as many programs developed for it closes it out of my mind. Windows wins for the person OS world because its easy to learn, simple, organized, very visual, and has a LARGE variety of apps for it. On the other hand linux is complicated to run and is not good for this use. It is good for server use where you need reliability and speed. This is not to say that Windows 2000 is not as good as linux. I think that in the next few years we will see Windows grow into a very good competitor for the networking world on the internet (it already is large within companies).

Uh,
I have Windows NT Servers that have been up for over 3 years with 0 downtime, and have never crashed. Servers are only as good as the software, hardware, and the person who set them up :) My company can't afford downtime, and that's what I provide them with. Windows NT is a GREAT system. Linux is a great OS, as are Microsoft's OSs.

Yeah MS really has tons to gain from doing something like that. Wtf is it with Linux community that they think everyone is trying to oppress them in some form or another?

this is the best point of the year. come on what are the advantages that MS would gained by rigging the poll versus the disadvantage MS would feel to its public relations campaign? i will answer it for you: the disadvantages outweigh the advantages a trillion to one; they dont even come close. MS and NBC are not stupid ****s. they dont make thoughless moves like this. they are giants in their respective industries. they dont make moves like this without the move being well thought out. that's the bottom line. i must take one more jab at WinMe: the damn OS sucks and MS should have held off until whistler to release an upgrage to consumer windows.

It's already been reported elsewhere that it looks like the work of a bot. However, your MS/MSNBC conspiracy theory might play well on X-Files. The black eye that they would get from being exposed would far outweigh the benefit of some cheesy poll.

As for WinME, I'd be interested to hear about your evaluation methods that brought you to the conclusion that it sucks. I don't plan on running it myself, but I wouldn't go as far as to proclaim to the world that it sucks without giving it proper testing and benchmarking because that would be moronic.

Conspiracy theorists UNITE... man... of all the stupid a** crap that the Media reports on. First off if you actually read the MSNBC site they took down the Vote because they believed there was some tampering because of a large influx (which means a lot...) of votes. There was like 126 votes when I voted which wasn't far back before they moved the Article from the main technology menu and Linux was still down there (above BeOS.. but BeOS came back) but NT was first and I think Apple OS was above Windows 98 (or above NT too.. something like that.. Apple was up there). Why would MSNBC take down the vote if they stuffed it because if they did do it, taking it down is admitting that they did do it. Either it was some visitors that did it or a lot of people actually started reading the Article because the article wasn't about what's the best OS it was about Windows Millennium which isn't that interesting to average users.. even Windows' users because we know that version blows.. Here's what MSNBC actually says.

EDITOR’S NOTE:
Sept. 18 — MSNBC has removed the Live Vote originally published with this story due to what appeared to be electronic ballot stuffing. The Live Vote, which asked readers which personal computer operating system they think is the best, received a large influx of votes in the past few days, skewing the results. MSNBC has removed the Vote in light of this. MSNBC Live Votes are not scientifically valid surveys.

So why don't you go back and b**** about how the NSA is spying on us and stop with this quibbling crap about how MSNBC would benefit by stuffing the ballot... Who even read that article.. hmm let me think.. about 126 people I'm guessing.. And g** d***, have you ever seen an MSNBC Live VOTE ??????? Any dumba** can stuff that ballot... Get over yourself already maneufeld. And you know what's funny.. You said they would benefit but you didn't even mention one advantage. All you did was ask a question and then try to exaggerate the benefits (which again you didn't say what it was). My best guess is that it was a glitch (haha much like MSN charging 500 dollars for a month of MSN Service, LMAO)

And for the record Latch, I know it blows (for most people that would upgrade from Windows 9x versions). I love Windows, it gets the work done but we all know that Windows ME was just a version out there to slowly convert people (and their hardware) to Whistler. Whistler is going to require more than a cheesy Pentium 300 with 64 Megs of RAM. But some people want to use Millennium because it does add features to the OS (like protecting system files) and other new Features, like a DVD player and so on. But it does run slower and probably would be better suited for people with a, somewhat, top-of-the-line system.

excuse my most eloquent description of WinMe. i meant to say that microsoft should never have released it. They should have spent the last 12 months concentrating further on merging the consumer and business versions (shipping whistler out faster). It is already old news that the WinX kernel isn’t worth much in light of the more stable technology in windows 2000 (which isn’t really that new). i simply feel that MS should have held off on releasing another windows 98. i do agree that windows Me is much better than windows 98, but this isnt saying much. However, MS apparently knows that releasing Me wont take away from sales of their upcoming release of Whistler. MS knows that if they build it, consumers will come. MS is anticipating deriving most of its Me sales revenue from new computer purchases, anyway. This is one big reason Me was released. Another big reason is MS knew it could milk one last release out of the winX kernel. That’s it; no one can argue with that b/c it is fact!

I agree that they should concentrate more on 2001 than ME, but there was an agenda there. I've read elsewhere that they pushed ME out the door with Media Player 7 and the Movie Maker etc to set a baseline for OS content before the courts tell them to stop bundling (again) applications with the OS in future.

As for WinME, I still wouldn't call it crap. It's not a bad home OS for the masses and it benches faster than W2K for most games that I've seen the numbers on.

Read my comment above about MS getting WinME out with bundled apps before the courts can spank them again for doing it, but by then they've set a baseline for what the OS comes with by default. They're trying to squeeze out RealNetworks and out content-player providers by bundling the player and creator with the OS. Now that's a conspiracy theory!

This is how I know you don't know what you're talking about.

It may not be as good in sterms of stability, or whatever, to Windows2000, but it doesn't by any means "suck." MS released this OS to polish out the Win9x kernel, and also make a bridge across the wide gap between 9x and NT kernels.

CPUguy, you are definitely a user of Me; i can tell by all of your comments i have viewed on "betanews" over the last several weeks. enjoy Me, you win9x kernal lover! cpuguy, please note, however, that i give you props for all of your intellegent and zealous comments(i mean it; you appear to know what you are talking about).

Ive seen it, the only difference Ive noticed, without actually sitting down and playing with it, is that it seems to be just win98 with a cool little ME in the start menu. Am I correct to assume this?

well said about ME it does suck big time yet everyone wants it why it costs a fortune just to make 98 look like 2000 with a video editing tool WOW download one or buy on for a fraction of the price.

like always...life treats linux lovers unfairly....whatever, i've heard enough. linux is wonderful server software, but will never win out to windows in regular users....yeah, even on betanews. so stop your crying over the ballot and accept the fact that linux has a major downfall...(it sucks for almost all practical purposes).

What do you consider pratical purposes? I use linux and unix day in and out. It serves all my purposes. Work, school, enterainment.

Hm a stable network oriented operating system with a full office suite (Koffice by the way is capable of reading MS Office 2000 documents for all who need backward compatibility) has no practical uses at all, of course not. =)

I hate to be one of those "super-critical" mind freaks that leaks intellectual hormones like the Exxon Valdez, but let me make a quick point to you. There is no real end user difference between Linux and Windows any longer. No has there been for a long time. How many have used, or love using, Macs? It's a differenct system. Maybe not better, but not worse. If your used to Windows, try an install of linux for a while. Learn it. Expand you pitiful existance. The most you could lose? Maybe a couple of Advil when you have to compile your own kernel to include drivers for something you have that is "very" non-standard.

Myself? I love using Linux. I love using BeOS. I love using Windows. If I owned a Mac, I would love using MacOS. I mainly stick to Windows Nt 4, simply because I have a life (and job), and like keeping things functional. So don't be part of the ignorant masses (that goes for you Linux freaks out there too, so don't feel so smug), and experience of things. Don't be prejudace.

And my breath smells like your cat!

Cant we all just get along? How aboutyou all just bust out the typewriters and relive the "good ol days" =P

Guys.. it's true Linux is a great system for networking and well the KDE ect.. layout it amazing.. for people who know somewhat more than the average person. But I myself run Windows 2000 and it's AMAZING.. I mean I play games (but I'm not much of a gamer) so it serves my purpose. I installed Win ME on my second PC and well it's good.. does what it's suppost to, but compared to 98 it's really nothing spectacular. The point of this bable.. is that Windows 2000 is a GREAT operating system with one flaw. 3D Gaming other than THAT! whatch out! however I do like linux, mandrake as well so it's simply you're skill and preference.. Oh! forgot to mention whister is pretty sweet too.. but don't have a 3rd PC to play with it.. at the moment and too much trouble to partion the others..

Nvc

Why is it linux users have to b**** about everything on the planet?, i admit i h8 winbloz but for the majority of ppl we have to use it because linux offers no viable alternative.
But why do you have to moan about it all the time, no i refrase that why do you moan about everything all the time, if its not winbloz vs linux its which is best stable kernal, witch is best KDE or Gnome, best C complier,etc,etc,etc
you guyz really need to get out more, get some pigment in ya skinz and meet ppl of the oposite sex to realease this anger lol

I would enjoy killing you and then watching you burn for quite sometime.

On another note - I have had problems with all OS's. Win98, oh sweet lord someone put that OS out of its misery. WinME, oh goodie, a win98 with a different name and twice as fast boot time. WinNT, probably the nicest of them all, this being if u like not having half ur s*** run. Win2000, @#@$@$@!! Un-Crashable my ass! ****er crashed on me as i was half way through this!
LINUX - Interesting OS, involves alotta DOS-like prompts. Now wasn't this the reason i went and bought windows in the first place?
BeOS - Anyone forget about this OS?

Lets see how many people i offended on this reply.

Interesting, after that win2k crash i just had i went to winME, little b**** is giving me a kernel error, terrific. Here comes another reformat!!

Crashes in NT/2000 are a sign of a driver or hardware problem. The OS itself doesn't just decide to crash.