Don Bedsole wrote:
Hi to all,
Just something to think about. If MS Windows came with the software included
with a typical Linux distribution, how much would it cost? If your computer
comes preloaded with Windows XP, you probably save some money over buying the
boxed version (I guess, haven't really investigated). With Windows you end of
having to buy a lot of add on products (Unless you just want to browse the
net, send e-mail, play Solitare, and use Microsoft Works... if Works came
with your computerr). Once you add a more capable firewall, Office software,
Cd burning software, etc., how much have the cost of a Windows computer gone
up? If you just want to do something as simple as take a screenshot, you
have to download something else. But to be fair to Microsoft, if they were
to include everything you need, they probably would never quit being
investigated for antitrust violations :)
My machine came with WinXP pre-installed. I cut back the size, and
made it dual boot to Linux. What I write here is in reference to
what the machine can do when booted under WinXP.
Don't need a "more capable firewall", I got that with my router, which
Linux also needed IMO.
Mine came with MsOffice.
The CD burning software came with the machine.
My machine is capable of doing a screen shot.
So, then answer is: Nothing more.
Another issue. What are people using Windows 98 doing for security updates
right now? It is no longer supported...right? Do people using older Windows
version realize that they will probably end up having to buy a new computer
soon if they want to keep using Windows? I'm pretty sure Windows Vista won't
run very well on a Windows 98 box.
This same argument works for Linux, I'm afraid. Try to get a security
update for Red Hat Linux 6.0. Just try.
And I don't *need* any security updates for either of my Win98 machines.
They aren't connected to anything external to the box but
power
display
keyboard
mouse
Nope, not even speakers.
I don't put CDROMS or floppies in those machines to load any software,
as they have what they need on them already.
In my opinion, Windows XP is a pretty good OS. I've never really had any
Yes, it is a nice OS, just being NT in disguise.
problems with it. But then again, money is a consideration for me. I really
want to be able to make my present computer last for a while. True, it only
has a 1.5 gig processor, but I can only type and think so fast anyway (that's
a joke :) I can see me using this computer much longer with Linux than
Windows.
Eh? I have four machines that still run MSDOS 6.0, andother with Win95,
and two that run Win98. None of them is inadequate to do what I use
them for.
But, Linux won't run on three of the MSDOS machines for sure (one is
an 8088 10MHz, another is a 80286 laptop, and one is a 80386DX with 1MB
of RAM), and it likely won't run on the other one (16MB of RAM, and only
about 20MB of free disc, but it's remotely possible it could run, I
suppose). I once booted Knoppix on one of the Win98 machines, but it
took 30 minutes to boot. It barely runs on the other Win98 machine,
only taking about 10 mins to boot. (The former is a 90MHz Pentium
with 32MB of RAM, the latter is a 400MHz Pentium, possibly a II,
with 256MB of RAM.)
It looks to me like MicroSoft products are much better able to keep
older hardware going than Linux.
Mike
--
p="p=%c%s%c;main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}";main(){printf(p,34,p,34);}
This message made from 100% recycled bits.
You have found the bank of Larn.
I can explain it for you, but I can't understand it for you.
I speak only for myself, and I am unanimous in that!
