alishan Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 ;) The very best change that mikrosoft made from moving from WIN 3.X series to windoes 9X series was the introduction of windows Start Menu panel. So linuks being a failed O.S has only tried to copy that trned while ignoring all the fact of "TASK ORIENTATION". :x All linux flavors use same look in the form of KDE, GNOME & X Window System. :angry: People move to linux after serious troublesome frequent crashes.But on the other hand Linux does,nt co-operates at all. :whistle: I am seriously dissapointed from this behaviour adopted by almost all linuks distros including Mandrake ,Redhat, Suse. People do love the way u get the Task oriented XP but would hate serious crashes. But who would like same bored hard to use linuks. ;) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 I am seriously dissapointed from this behaviour adopted by almost all linuks distros including Mandrake ,Redhat, Suse.People do love the way u get the Task oriented XP but would hate serious crashes. But who would like same bored hard to use linuks. Ummm. Yea, sure. I guess? This post :argh:, calls for a :trout: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
insanekiwi Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Ummm. Yea, sure. I guess?This post :argh:, calls for a :trout: https://www.neowin.net/forum/fun/noidea.jpg :rofl: hahahaha damm fred. this post made my day! Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
mstx Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 :huh: :dontgetit: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rezza Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 Well said, Fred. And Alishan: I'm not quite sure what your point is. You say that the biggest advance made from win3.x to win9x was the start button, but then you complain when you notice that some linux DEs have similar functionality. Either your logic is flawed, or I am getting the wrong end of the stick. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
chacho Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 your post was not legible. But who would like same bored hard to use linuks. :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 Either your logic is flawed, or I am getting the wrong end of the stick. Actually, it's the wrong end of the trout. :trout: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
+John Teacake MVC Posted August 10, 2004 MVC Share Posted August 10, 2004 Yeah you talk ****. So linuks being a failed O.SHow has it exactly failed ? If you mean in terms of sales then I dont think it was competing for sales in the first place. Its free. So I'm afraid you talk complete and utter bollocks. This is another one of those threads why Neowin is going down hill at the moment. Edit : mikrosoft Just looking at that makes me laugh :laugh: [CARCASM]Yeah sure you know exactly what your talking about.[/CARCASM] Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 Yeah you talk ****. How has it exactly failed ? If you mean in terms of sales then I dont think it was competing for sales in the first place. Its free. So I'm afraid you talk complete and utter bollocks. This is another one of those threads why Neowin is going down hill at the moment. Don't get me wrong, I like, er, "linuks" but "Mikrosoft" Windows has over 90% of the desktop market. That doesn't leave much room for Linux or the Macintosh. One could argue that Linux as a desktop OS has failed (so far). ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows I, myself, am only interested in Linux as a server OS (although I do run it as a desktop for learning purposes). p.s. I apologize in advance for making this topic somewhat serious but don't worry I won't hesitate to use the trout in future posts... p.p.s. Is a "carcasm" a big pit that your car could fall into? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threetonesun Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Don't get me wrong, I like, er, "linuks" but "Mikrosoft" Windows has over 90% of the desktop market. That doesn't leave much room for Linux or the Macintosh.One could argue that Linux as a desktop OS has failed (so far). ref: http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Microsoft_Windows I, myself, am only interested in Linux as a server OS (although I do run it as a desktop for learning purposes). p.s. I apologize in advance for making this topic somewhat serious but don't worry I won't hesitate to use the trout in future posts... p.p.s. Is a "carcasm" a big pit that your car could fall into? I would say it's succeding as a desktop OS considering that's never what it was intended for, yet it's doing a half decent job. Conversely, I would say OSX being unable to get more than a small % of the desktop market would be a failure. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Daylene Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 .... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 .... Thanks for playing! We have a lovely parting gift for you. :trout: (okay it made more sense than the first post in this thread...) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
MR_Candyman Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 umm...the original post was ineligible... Start menu wasn't a new invention. Amiga's workbench had an option to add your programs in a menu. How was Microsoft not doing exactly what Linux GUI programmers are doing? The reason linux GUI's have panels at the bottom is FOR windows users to get accustomed to linux easier. How is linux a failed OS? It's doing great in the server market, and everybody's at least HEARD of it, most of those people have at least TRIED it. MANY USE it. Personally, all I turn on my windows drive for anymore is to play ragnarok online and bf1942, which isn't that often. I do everything else in linux. I know I'm not nearly the only one either... Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
krmathis Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Ummm. Yea, sure. I guess?This post :argh:, calls for a :trout: https://www.neowin.net/forum/fun/noidea.jpg LOL! :laugh: I have no clue what he talks about either... :no: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Zerosleep Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 This is insane. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
matt74441 Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Dictionary.com (Y) And its too early to say that Linux has failed as a desktop OS, its still in it's infancy. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
markwolfe Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 I have to agree that the original post seems to be self-conflicting. The title puts Linux at the Windows95 level. The so-called "supporting arguments" make a claim that features which exist do NOT exist?!?! :blink: My wife, my 9 year old, my 7 year old, and my 4 year old can all manage to open up a browser window and surf to their favorite sites (usually nickjr.com and cartoonnetwork.com, but they are kids). My wife can check my email if I call her and ask her to forward something I received at home to my work email address. All of this without any training. To me, that clearly demonstrates a basic intuitive nature. It would be nice if the people who have legitimate complaints would spell out what they didn't like, and what they thought was missing. These points can be addressed. I am not sure if the original poster was trying to troll the forum, or was just frustrated and venting. Either way, the post contradicts itself. :ermm: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
NeoXY Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 :blink: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Colin-uk Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 i think he was ranting that linux copied the idea of the "start menu" from windows 95 because it wasnt as popular as windows when it came out... ... or somthing :huh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
threetonesun Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 I think he said, Windows 3.1 sucked, Linux should be better, Gnome and KDE copied Windows, now XP is great, so Linux must suck. Did someone edit the title though? How the heck did he go from Linux to linucks? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuka_t Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 contraction of linux and sucks? linucks. we also have contradictions in the post. so this would make this a contractiodiction. :wacko: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Fred Derf Veteran Posted August 10, 2004 Veteran Share Posted August 10, 2004 Did someone edit the title though? How the heck did he go from Linux to linucks? He switched to Linucks half way through the 1st post. Maybe it sounds like an insult in his reality. :alien: contraction of linux and sucks? linucks. Yea probably but as insults go, it doesn't really flow. It sounds like more of an English as a Second Language problem than an insult. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
IvIoyner Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 He's trolling, or he was born that way. Move along, nothing to see here. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
polo69 Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 Linux is miles behind as a workstation/Desktop OS. I run several machines with linux. All only server roles (no gui). And only as a desktop to learn. The TCO of linux as a desktop is far higher than a Windows Enviroment, its ok at home if something wont work with linux, not in a business or a normal home enviroment. Linux as a desktop = ugly, slow and user unfriendly. The general software is pretty ordinary. Yes, it is free and is open source, hopefully they will take some notes from MS and get Linux up to a reasonable normal user standard. Give me XP as a desktop anyday. Yep, Linux does = Win95 At this point of time. :rolleyes: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
nuka_t Posted August 10, 2004 Share Posted August 10, 2004 oh look, another troll. anyway, linux is infinitly more customizable than xp. its a lot faster than it too. i dont know how you came up with that load of crap.linux is only unfriendly to stupid users, as we all should be. and hte OS community taking notes about standars :laugh: Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts