Growled Member Posted March 25, 2012 Member Share Posted March 25, 2012 I believe the future is mobile and the cloud. We are obviously only at the beginning of this transition. It will be many years before we reach the tipping point. When that day comes it won't matter what OS you are running. Still, there is so much I can do today just using web apps. I've gotten to the point where I only run a bare bones Linux distro and do everything else online. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_K Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 'I believe the future is mobile and the cloud' Probably, until people finally relise that storing data online is stupid and very insecure, which will probably only happen after some very high-level stuff is hacked and leaked all over the net. Then it'll all go back round in a circle from the cloud 'mainframes' and 'dumb' PCs back to powerful PCs and offline data. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Southern Patriot Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Apparently lindows (did?) look like windows... It really didn't look that much like Windows. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Growled Member Posted March 25, 2012 Member Share Posted March 25, 2012 'I believe the future is mobile and the cloud' Probably, until people finally relise that storing data online is stupid and very insecure, which will probably only happen after some very high-level stuff is hacked and leaked all over the net. Then it'll all go back round in a circle from the cloud 'mainframes' and 'dumb' PCs back to powerful PCs and offline data. Things are already hacked all the time. Important stuff. So what would be the difference? Things are going to get hacked. Also, in what way is "storing data online is stupid and very insecure?" Can you prove that it is? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFH Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Whoever said that this looks like Window 7, needs to have his eyes checked immediately? +virtorio 1 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrea Borman Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 One advantage of Linux is that it is open source and it is free to use. Where as Windows is not free and you can only install one copy of Windows on one computer only. Because if you use the same product key to activate Windows on a second computer. It won't activate and your Windows will go into restricted mode after 30 days.So if you have already activated Windows on one computer and then you buy a new computer,you have had it.As your product key won't activate on the new computer.So you have to buy another Windows CD. But Linux costs nothing to use and once you have burned the ISO file onto a CD.You can install the same copy of Linux on as may computers as you want. And it will work.That is an important point. Andrea Borman Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
KomaWei Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 I still prefer Gentoo over any Linux distro. Debian based distros suck hard ones. Rarely any good. I don't know why everyone keeps basing it on that crap. While 7 is a decent improvement over XP. I still wouldn't copy the OS looks or anything. I'm happy with the default KDE look. I personally find it much better and cleaner than Windows 7. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerowen Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Why would you use an OS that looks like another OS? If I wanted to use something that looked like Windows 7, I would just buy Windows 7. I've used Debian Linux for a while now, but if I ever get unhappy with Debian, I'll remember to keep Zorin off my list of things to try. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam14160 Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 One advantage of Linux is that it is open source and it is free to use. Where as Windows is not free and you can only install one copy of Windows on one computer only. Because if you use the same product key to activate Windows on a second computer. It won't activate and your Windows will go into restricted mode after 30 days.So if you have already activated Windows on one computer and then you buy a new computer,you have had it.As your product key won't activate on the new computer.So you have to buy another Windows CD. But Linux costs nothing to use and once you have burned the ISO file onto a CD.You can install the same copy of Linux on as may computers as you want. And it will work.That is an important point. Andrea Borman Please. . . Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Gerowen Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 One advantage of Linux is that it is open source and it is free to use. Where as Windows is not free and you can only install one copy of Windows on one computer only. Because if you use the same product key to activate Windows on a second computer. It won't activate and your Windows will go into restricted mode after 30 days.So if you have already activated Windows on one computer and then you buy a new computer,you have had it.As your product key won't activate on the new computer.So you have to buy another Windows CD. But Linux costs nothing to use and once you have burned the ISO file onto a CD.You can install the same copy of Linux on as may computers as you want. And it will work.That is an important point. Andrea Borman As a Linux user I can tell you that you're giving generalized advantages for Linux based operating systems. Making one product look like a competing product is usually a bad approach, because instead of focusing on the strengths of your product and allowing it to stand on its own two feet, you will constantly invite the criticism of articles like this that will point out how it is "not" like Windows 7. An operating system should be able to stand on its own, not try to be successful by bragging about how much it's like its competitor. Edit: I mean how would it sound, as a consumer, to hear somebody say, "The Zune, almost as good as the iPod!(hypothetical example)"? What motivation would you have to buy a Zune when the standard by which they measure themselves is a product you can buy yourself? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
n_K Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Things are already hacked all the time. Important stuff. So what would be the difference? Things are going to get hacked. Also, in what way is "storing data online is stupid and very insecure?" Can you prove that it is? Well, people think 'oh X people got hacked because of insecure password' whereas in the future it will be a single mainframe system of a cloud provider to get hacked and EVERYTHING on ALL the systems will be leaked, which amounts to a HUGE amount of stuff. Can I prove it? Yes, some idiotic moron that owns an online backup solution was giving a talk, let's compare offline backup to online backup: -> Online backup requires you to have a very large upload connection and a lot of 'system downtime'. -> Online backup gives you no idea what-so-ever of what backups they have, do they have multiple backup clusters? What happens if a read error occurs in an encrypted online backup? Oh that's right, the ENTIRE BACKUP is USELESS -> Online backup is vulnerable to viruses (changing a single bit of an encrypted backup, like above, causes the entire backup to be useless, and with online backups you NEED them to be encrypted) -> Online backup company could be here today, gone tomorrow, and take your data with them -> Online backup does not guarantee availability, internet downtime or ISP problems or data centre problems, anything like that and you've got no backup what-so-ever! -> Online backup is done on the cheap (as in how much the owner pays for things, but expensive in how much you pay to use their service) so generally they'll have one backup location, if there's a fire, kiss your data bye bye where-as offline data can be done on tape and kept in multiple locations -> Offline backup supports many different types of backup, full/differential/etc. whereas online usually doesn't. -> Online backup encryption is of one kind: whatever the host supports and nothing else, usually using their client software -> Online backup requires the host's software, and they're not going to give you the source to it. So basically you'll be limited to running it on a windows server or a generic (probably outdated) red hat server. Offline can run whatever software you want on whatever OS you want that supports your backup device's hardware. -> Offline backup on tape or h/d can become corrupted, as can online backup, but with offline backups you can get it recovered by taking the hardware to a specialist, it might not all be there but if there's something you desperately need... Online backup, like they'd give you their hardware, HAH! Any problems with their hardware and you've got nothing. So there you have it, a quick comparison between high availabilty and reliability offline backup, and online backup which should be avoided at all costs MFH and Site Lab 2 Share Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrea Borman Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 As a Linux user I can tell you that you're giving generalized advantages for Linux based operating systems. Making one product look like a competing product is usually a bad approach, because instead of focusing on the strengths of your product and allowing it to stand on its own two feet, you will constantly invite the criticism of articles like this that will point out how it is "not" like Windows 7. An operating system should be able to stand on its own, not try to be successful by bragging about how much it's like its competitor. Edit: I mean how would it sound, as a consumer, to hear somebody say, "The Zune, almost as good as the iPod!(hypothetical example)"? What motivation would you have to buy a Zune when the standard by which they measure themselves is a product you can buy yourself? No Linux is not the same as Windows. It is a different operating system and the two,Windows and Linux are not connected with each other. Yes some versions of Linux like Linux Mint and several others have the taskbar which is called a panel on Linux. And they have a start button and start menu on the left hand side. But Linux is not the same as Windows as it runs differently. Andrea Borman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MFH Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 No Linux is not the same as Windows. Now, where did he say it was? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
.Neo Posted March 25, 2012 Share Posted March 25, 2012 Now, where did he say it was? You're right. Nowhere. Well with the threat of Windows 8 the next version of Windows being made without a start menu and the Metro theme. And knowing that often when Microsoft make a new version of Windows,they stop selling the old version. So if one day that happens and you can no longer buy Windows 7. How does that relate to today's situation? Not to mention the fact it's not like a Windows 7 license will self-destruct once Windows 8 is released. But that's not the only reason why I installed Linux on one of my many netbooks. It is also good to try something different.Andrea Borman. That's the first valid reason you gave so far. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Pam14160 Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 . . .let see, Mac OS system has no start button (yes I know you can use the Apple logo to bring up "Recent," however not the same. And, yes the Mac people have no problem with using the dock or the new "Lanchpad" which in a way the new "Start "screen in Win 8 is designed. Linux is a good toy, however, I cannot say it is a good all around eveyday OS for the general public. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Andrea Borman Posted March 26, 2012 Share Posted March 26, 2012 Well I would have kept Zorin OS if it was not for the problem with the task bar or panel. After I shut down or restarted my computer,the panel would disappear. And I had to reinstall the whole OS because of this. Because I did not know how to fix it. What could be causing this problem? Is it a bug in the OS? Andrea Borman. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts