Ubuntu aims at healing Linux's 'paper cuts'

TalkBack 23 of 136:: Next »; « Previous

Thread View
Flat View

Touche (long response): I appreciate what you are saying and I agree that quoting loverocks blanket statement does not add any weight to my own statement.

Do keep in mind the context of the comment particularly that it was Loverock that raised an accusation without support yet never provides any verifiable facts. Furthermore, he has consistently done so.

My point, though obviously not clear, was that Windows has had its share of problems which by Loverocks own definition would fit his lipstick-pig statement. Yes there are many articles that say so, with a brief search. With respect to usability, consider SP1 of Vista causing enough users computers to start rebooting to force MS to stop forcing updates while they reworked it. Or consider that communications their own marketing confused internal leaders to MS to be uncertain as to what Vista Capable and Vista Ready meant. This was clear by a quote from NYT Mar 9 2008 which states "For example, his laptop's lack of an appropriate graphics chip so hobbled Vista features that vice president Mike Nash (Corporate Vice President, Windows Product Management) commented 'I now have a $2,100 e-mail machine.'" Another executive had to recant a statement given in court as he originally

ChangeWave conducted a survey in March 2008 showed that the percentage of corporate users who are "very satisfied" with Vista was dramatically lower than other operating systems, with Vista at 8%, compared to the 40% with Windows XP. A much prettier interface that failed to meet corporate users requirements, would you not agree?

My understanding from reports using 7 is that usability has increased sufficiently and I look forward to using it as I am one that went back to XP after problems with Vista. Is that not your experience in your comment below? I'm sure not everyone had problems with Vista as gamers love the DirectX10. But then it is not my contention that Windows is an all round lousy product as Loverock accuses Linux of being.

So, with a little bit of verifiable facts or evidence above, back to the "Facts" of linux according to Loverock. Are the problems he raises verifiable? Yes, for older versions of Linux predating XP or Win2000. Yet he states in other boards as if these continue to be problem with new versions. This is the evidence I am looking for as it is not easily verifiable if verifiable at all on a google search. If a google search would turn up Linux green screening as any other than technology related to video editing or using linux on old terminals, I would not ask for evidence. Or if I could find evidence online indicating that Linux will always (or even 5 or 10%) require common packages to be compiled in our modern day, I would not ask for evidence.

You are right, I should have avoided the blanket statement (I never liked that statement anyways) and it would be nice if some on both sides would at least provide evidence if they make a statement of "fact".; Posted by: Viva la crank dodo Posted on: 06/17/09 You are currently: a Guest | Members login | Terms of Use