On 21/09/14 20:06, Arfa Daily wrote:
I wouldn't dispute that Linux has its uses, but to be fair, it does have
a bit of a reputation as being an 'enthusiasts' operating system, which
is how it came into being in the first place, really.

And so it *was*. But it isn't now.

I stuck to Windows until the pain of windows exceeded the pain of Linux.

I think Mint 13 changed things entirely the other way for me. It was
EASIER to install and set up than Windows XP was. And came with far more
goodies as standard. Its also very like Windows XP in 'look and feel'

The point is that you get a pretty 'XP' look and feel straight out of
the box in about half an hour of installation, given a machine with
Ethernet and an internet connection.

a 64 bit processor and 4MB RAM - which many XP machines are - is an
ideal starting point.


Laptops are a little more problematic, as is wifi. There you may need to
install a few extra drivers to get things going.

But if its an older desktop machine, chances are its 100% instantly
compatible.

This particular machine is 8 years old, and is a dual core pentium that
had 2MB RAM, and now sports 6, and the only other change I made was to
upgrade to a better graphix card than the intel onboard, which wouldn't
play my live 3D game.

It worked in under an hours install. All the time I have spent on it
since was to find the nicest appearance, get backups going in my own
arcane setup, and do the hardware/Bios upgrades.

And install a few extra programs that are 'essentials' for me.

It cost me nothing as a bare machine. Just the ram and video cost money

It was scrap.

It is the best computer I have ever owned.

And I still have XP in a virtual machine for a few programs.

Really, I dont see any point in installing a paid for copy of new
windows on a machine ever again.

The only two things I have found that are still substandard are scanner
and wifi drivers.

If you are lucky, they work. If not, you then do need to spend time
finding out the magic spells.




To some extent, I
think that for what it is, Windows gets a bit of a 'bad press' in
discussions like this. For most people doing just fairly ordinary things
on their computer, Windows, left to its own devices (no pun intended !)
is just fine. It pretty much does what it says on the tin, and in a way
that Joe Average User can get along with.

As does Linux, for less money, faster, and with almost no chance of
getting virusused.

Yes, for sure, it can be a
pain when things go wrong, and sometimes, it doesn't do "computer-y"
things very well, but then that's where things like Linux come into
their own.

For me, the odd Windows problem, and coping with its foibles in some
areas, is far outweighed by it's ability to load and run pretty much
anything written in the world of 'commercial' software, and for most
average computer users, I would suspect that this is the case. Were it
not for Windows, in all its iterations throughout the years, I don't
think that 'home' computing would have come anything like as far as it has.


So how many 'commercial' programs do you actually use?

I use precisely two, in a virtual XP machine. Which with 6MB or RAM runs
as fast as I need.

A


--
Everything you read in newspapers is absolutely true, except for the
rare story of which you happen to have first-hand knowledge. €“ Erwin Knoll