Not to add fuel to the "My OS Owns Yours" debate, but its interesting to note how well accepted Windows 2000 has been. I can think of no other MS product (except possibly IE 5) that has actually been praised rather than bashed. I think it proves MS is on their toes now as they see Linux is becoming a viable threat. Fact of the matter is, Linux and NT have their own strengths and weaknesses. In your corporation, you've to decide based on your needs which OS you'll gain the most from. $0.02 -Keith

but Windows2K at 1 million in this short run is a simple testament to it's quality. At $150 for the basic upgrade price on up to the $1k range(or more), Windows 2K still manages more of a distribution point than any of it's closest competitors. Even free linux versions couldn't match Windows 2K in being accepted and implemented.

Not saying Linux is bad or that Windows is superior, but the number of consumers who would rather buy a multi hundred dollar OS than implement a free copy of a linux variant proves the point.

I for one would like to see BeOS take off. Waiting for my copy soon, hopefully this month, hehe.

I have 4 computers now and 2 run windows98 and 1 runs win2k and one Debian Linux and they all work GREAT not one of them has crashed in 4 days of constant use.I think Linux kicks a** but it is not a pesonal or gaming solution for anyone but computer professionals and windows gives the ease of use most people need. When Linux convinces games and app programmers that it's the way to go and maybe makes in as easy to install as windows then we may see linux split or even take the market from M$.Win2k is the way to go FOR NOW but wait until linux starts to cater to computer newbies and gamer freaks we will see a change. thats my opinion feel free to knock it.

Just with regard to the installation part (by and large I completely agree with the rest). The install for RedHat 6.1 is much nicer, easier and quicker, with the possible exception of the disk partitioning segment, than that of Windows. This from an OS that has a much larger amount to copy and with a journaling filesystem is exceptional.
For those who are blind followers of MS (I'm not trying to promote any one OS here) check out http://www.coriolis.com/...microsoft/default_x.asp to see what MS thinks of it's devotees.

Are you saying that Linux has a journaling filesystem?
If you are, then it most certainly does not, when ext3 is out and the kernel programers start using it, then it will have journaling.

NTFS 5.0, however does have journaling capabilities

Would you CHILDREN stop all the crap about "linux is better because we say so" and the same with microsoft. The heading of the article tells about sells, not which OS is better because....
Both OSes have their good AND bad points. I get very tired of the whole pissing contest. GROW UP and get over it! Use what you want. Just because *I* prefere one OS over the other doesn't mean I am ONLY pro that OS. Just means it is best FOR ME. Just like processors. If that is all you people have to fight over, then you need to get a life.

If we were not open to debate then we world would be an even sadder place then it already is. The absolute best thing we can do is to keep an open debate as to what product is better (whether it be OS or CPU or whatever). If we can argue intelligently and clearly, maybe we'll find that everyone has a point, or maybe even (dare I say it) actually convince someone in another camp to cross over. Debate is where fresh ideas come from, and where people are suppose to understand where the person arguing is coming from. I agree that its tiresome hearing people say Linux/Windows/Mac is better because..."its just better". Or that its "more powerful"... What people forget to mention is exactly WHY they think its better or more powerful. This is a critical part of any argument, which is all too often ignored. Its a terrible thing when the only way you can make your prefered OS (or anything else) look better is by belittling the competition. The only person you're convincing is yourself and everyone that already agrees with you, so don't bother.

Of course, we are off topic out here, so maybe its best to take it elsewhere :Þ

siliconsynapse.com

go to the forum
though they might ban you for obscenities, hehe

Shadup :)

we know that the topic is about sells, but we can't help it...we have to b**** about either linux or MS or Mac or whatever...it's our nature

later
OS/2 Warp for life baby! haha

you know how i installed W2K? I just put in the CD and rebooted (on a clean install). It starts automatically. And the amazing part is that i can actually format to NTSC with just the W2K CD! Plus I get to delete and create partitions all from the W2K CD! Plus, I get an automatic multi-boot menu(if I had more of course)!

Of course, don't get me wrong. Cobbling together utilities to get a flavor of Linux installed and running might be superior, but I'm not sure since this Microsoft idea of "ease of use" and "PnP" seems so fantastical, hehe.

I'm a Linux user for one and a half years, a Windows user for seven, a Microsoft Certified Systems Engineer, a Windows Consultant, and Win2K beta tester for three years [since it was NT5].

Have you ever installed Linux before? You just put in the CD and reboot (on a clean install). It starts automatically. The amazing part is that you can format format to Ext2 with just the Redhat 6.1 CD! Plus I get to delete and create partitions all from the CD! Plus, I get an automatic multi-boot menu(if I had more OSs of course)!

Of course, don't get me wrong. Cobbling together utilities to get a flavor of Linux installed and running might be superior,
I don't think it is. That's why the most poular Linux distribution these days install more easily than any version of Windows. Unlike your Wn2K install, I rebooted once, not three times. Unlike your Win2K install, I got into a GUI straight away, rather than going through 50 character DOS screens. Unlike your Win2K install, it took me fifteen minutes rather than half an hour. Unlike Win2K, Linux does not have frequent root/administrator exploits.

RH 6.1 comes with plug and play on boot that works brilliantly, and there are more Linux drivers out there now than Win2K ones [eg, Adaptec, 3DFX, Matrox, Creative, etc]. Unlike your Win2K plug and play, Linux doesn't ahve to reboot for any driver installation.

but I'm not sure since this Microsoft idea of "ease of use" and
"PnP" seems so fantastical, hehe.
That's an MS idea? Gee, I belive Macintosh / Xerox / Atari / Amiga had guis at least a decade before MS did. Win2K doesn't have drag and drop from anywhere to anywhere support yet, Apple does [and yes, Linux [KDE] is a little behind Windows on that one]. PnP was an industry standard developed by a committee which included representatives of Microsoft and a little over seventy other companies.

You can configure very client and server task of RRedhat 6.1 by clicking KPanel - Redhat - System - Linuxconf. None of the changes you make require reboots. None of the software you install requires reboots.

Grow up.

you're free to disagree with someone, but getting person is stupid. "grow up?" Maybe he has a preference. And we're all so glad that you had enough free time on your hands to rack up so many degrees and qualifications. Do you also have a PhD in being an opinionated ****?

A little History Lesson for You:

Xerox created the first GUI called Alto in the 70's and it cost about $30K. Steve Jobs visited Xerox and decided that Apple would make their own GUI computer called Lisa. Lisa flopped badly and Macintosh was born in January 1984. In November 1985, Microsoft responded with Windows 1.0, which was not even in the same class as Macintosh but was to be the great-great-grandfather of Windows 95/98. Windows 2000 of course is a nephew descending from NT 3.1 first released in 1991.

Heh, sorry. I must have explained my opinions wrong. I am FAR from being a Linux nut. I just started messing around with it lately, and I appreciate it for it's level of stability, but I personally prefer Windows much more. Windows 2000 is extremely stable. I even sacrificed my gaming capabilities by deleting my 98 partition and dedicating all my time to 2000. I enjoy it very much, but I think I should also explore other operating systems to broaden my computer expertise, and to really content with myself. I never really said Linux was better (I hope I didn't imply that!). :)

*cough* *cough*

No drag 'n' drop support? You don't even have a clue buddy

Dudes...you have to understand it's like comparing apples and oranges
Linux apeals more towards the advanced users...Most people who complain about linux are people who really don't know the OS inside out. A friend of mine has been using linux for years now, and he never complains...why...well that's because he can do anything that we can do in win9x/2k. If a problem arises, he doesn't spend hours trying to figure it out. It's because he knows the OS inside-out...and he loves it...and why do windows users like windows...cause we know it inside out...and if a problems arise in windows we know exactly how to fix it. I've installed and used Linux before...personally i would love to learn every aspect of it, but i can never use it as my main OS...cause i don't know how to do crap in Linux. Does that mean I prefer Windows to Linux..well yes...and no

what was my point again...bah...just my $0.02(Canadian currency) technically i'm giving you $0.01(US) :) l-8-r

same can be said of MS Windows vs. MacOS. I too thought the Mac was a superior platform from all these nuts I knew, I supported it too without really knowing what I was supporting. Sadly, when it was time for me to work on a Mac, that concept of superiority was quickly destroyed.

3+ years of working on the Mac was torture. A horrible OS with installed limitations and an odd compatibility rate. Being a "closed box" computing platform, I assumed there would be no incompatibilities. I was wrong. Hardware would fairly well, but it's the software that makes productivity. Apps would crash constantly and files corrupting frequently.

All this from 3+ years and multiple PowerMacs, covering Motorola, Umax, and Apple's own branded units. What a nightmare. This is the main reason why I can never take Linux user's seriously, they harken back to the Mac fanatic. nightmare sequence over, hehe

seriously not, it's the other way around. Linux appeals to teen hackers than computer scientists, network admins, IT professionals, and any of the like in that arena of computing technology. Linux appeals to any business that wants to have a company network installed with a single copy of an OS across numerous terminals all having spent about $50-$100 for the single copy.

In other words, a free OS

What exactly does Linux offer that W2k does not?. And don't give me that reliability crap, because I run both OS's in equal measure and reliability is not an issue ( with either OS). I administer NT, W2k and Unix boxes, I even have a couple of Linux boxes to look after and the most important thing I have learnt is that it's NOT about the box, and now with W2k it's ALL good.

it gives you the ability to seem "l33t" which most of those "l33t" don't seem to understand, translates into being "dork". hehe

or... jacka$$

What's Great is the simplicity of windows setup, along with the autodetection of most hardware.

I just spent a few days trying to setup Linux when I found that it passed some 1024 boundry mark and I had to re-partition, then the stupid linux disk druid stole the remaining hard disk space into its extendsed partition! wasn't it enough that I mounted 6gig as /usr? it Had to take the 20gig I was going to partition for my appz and games?

But ok I made it through, setup some accounts, but I can't get linuxconf to run, It doesnt ask for a password when i login as root, and it give me some abnormally shutdown error (I forgot the exact words) not to mentinion most stuff wont open ie) the control panel (I dont remember its exact name is it that?) doesnt open umong other things, and when I run linuxconf (not it "startx") it gives me some sort of visual menu with text errors running through the middle of it.

ok, so you linux buff's, come on out I know your there. what do you have to say? btw you can email me Jim@Warwick.net

Maybe you should try NOT using Disk Druid. Nobody who *knows* Linux would ever recommend using Disk Druid to make your Linux partition. Also, it doesn't really matter if the partition is past the 1024 barrier. The Linux CD comes with DOS utilities that can enable you to use the MS-DOS bootloader to select which partition to boot. To make my Linux partitions, I use Partition Magic, but Linux's FDISK is an excellent program to use if you know what you are doing. Read books and online help forums. That's how I learned what I know now.

Also, if you are having problems starting X, try running "Xconfigurator" or "xf86config" (case sensitive). Also, you should try reading books on how to install Linux properly before you start complaining.

if we wanted to have to deal with weird utilities and crap that takes forever to learn, we'd all be using DOS still.

I read through the over an inch thick book and followed the instructions, I even gave it info below my computers capibilities so that x windows would even start, i tryed reinstalling acouple times, same each time. for now im gona go out and get a newer version (I was using "the complete guide to Linux 5.2" and I believe theres one for 6.1 out that has a better install.

microsoft actually made a good piece of software... maybe you linux guys ought to try it before you knock it

Win2k is still far from the capabilities that linux has....

I hate to agree with you, but it's downright stable. I've been running this software since Beta 2 and the final is much better than I expected from M$. I've recommended it to several customers and friends. It's amazing to not have BSOD at least once a day.

Now, if that were true, everyone including myself would be using Linux silly. =)

YEAH! Like the plug&play! the intuitive interface! The MOUNTAINS of applications which run with it. The user base, the ease of use, the familiarity, the practical application, etc etc. Oh, wait....my bad - that's Win2k!

it's obvious you are being sarcastic to Linux, of course if you weren't, man are you ever deluded, hehe

I enjoy watching people from Microsoft post comments about how reliable and high quality microsoft products are. A good laugh is needed every day.

-Juan

some of us LIKE microsoft's product, and in the case of win2k, have decided to give them some much-deserved kudos. What's laughable is that people sit on some open source OS and feign superiority, when it reeks of complete ignorance. Maybe if linux tried to accomodate the public a little better, and linux nuts spent less time acting like a clique of uptight techno-geeks, they'd have a sunstantial share of the market. For now, I'll take a computer that works, and does what I want it to do.

I saw this movie before: OS/2 I don't want brush bytes

Whats even funnier, is how they do the math... This not retails sales but sales to OEM's Distributors, the few web-based sales they made, the hot-kits... so on and so on... retail sales are probably less than 100K

I wonder how many pirated copies were sold? :)

no comment =)

Since when do they SELL pirated copies? haha.

Um, think for a second.... of course MS doesn't sell pirated copies, but PIRATES --do-- =)

I always thought that the pirates give their stuff away? or trade it for more stuff?

he who dies with the most toys wins, right?

Thank God for piracy. I've been using Win2k since Beta3. It's fun to see how much the OS changes before it's released (even with Windows98). I've been using Windows 2000 beta3 or better since the Summer and encountered one blue screen. And ya, i got the OEM now ;)) In my opinion if you don't play games, you should install and use Windows2k. You don't have to worry about explorer errors and if a program does freeze 'end task' will work just about every time now. hehe, but I still won't shell out all that money for home use.