On Monday 17 October 2005 05:27 pm, Roel Schroeven wrote:
> John Bokma wrote:
> > Or do you really consider the Linux desktop (any of them) quality?
>
> Actually yes. Are they better than MS's desktop? Depends on one's needs.
> If I didn't need MS for my job, there's a very big chance I would only
> use Linux. Or MacOS X.
Duh. Yeah of course they're better than Windows' desktop. Trying
to get anything done with an XP box is somewhere between the
frustration level of dealing with the IRS and trying to work your
way out of a well while hanging upside down from the bucket by
your feet with your arms tied behind your back.
For example, on Linux I don't have:
* pop-up ads
* applications that only do half the job, then offer to sell
me the other half
* the "zero click" interface -- there is NOTHING more frustrating
than having the desktop constantly second guessing you, and
pushing buttons because it thinks you waited too long (i.e.
you actually stopped to read the dialog text).
but I do have:
* multiple virtual desktops
* one click pasting between windows
Now, I'm sure, that under some theoretical, fully-tricked-out
Windows platform, with all the possible bells and whistles
installed, and all the stupid OEM modifications removed (including
all that adware), this might not be so. But frankly, I've never
SEEN a Windows box like that, much less used one.
What I have seen is a factory-direct Dell laptop with a
pre-installed Windows XP which had all of the problems I
described above.
OTOH, the Linux environment I describe is run-of-the-mill
Debian Sarge with KDE.
--
Terry Hancock ( hancock at anansispaceworks.com )
Anansi Spaceworks http://www.anansispaceworks.com
--
http://mail.python.org/mailman/listinfo/python-list
