4 ms·

"I guess you get what you pay for." Let me guess: you just bought Windows 7 and you're trying to persuade yourself that the ridiculous amount of money you put

by Niten 17y ago

"I guess you get what you pay for." Let me guess: you just bought Windows 7 and you're trying to persuade yourself that the ridiculous amount of money you put down for that piece of software was well spent. Not too far off the mark? In any event, this is not a case of "getting what you pay for"; this is almost certainly a bug in Flash, not in the free software stack. In other words, I don't suppose you believe that Flash player works better on Windows because you paid for your copy of Flash player, do you? (On the other hand, I guess someone who would buy Microsoft Windows on the precept that "you get what you pay for" might just be foolish enough to shell out cash for Flash player, too.)

ardit33 17y ago
Yes very far off the mark. I actually have Windows XP at home for which I didn't pay any money (work license), a Macbook at work, and a Linux Machine (Ubuntu 9.04) at work. Used mostly Windows, + Linux (for some server side). Tried to use Ubuntu for day to day work, and it was like death from 1000s cuts. There was not just a major thing not working, most things worked fine, but there were so many little anoyances that at the end it made the whole experience very frustrating. I am actually new to Mac Os, but I find it pretty decent. I switched to it, and just use the Linux machine to get some parts of my project compiling. And I still use XP at home. So, I have used all of three of them with an open minded, and I find that Linux is the worst to use on day to day basis.
- gloob 17y ago
  As with most other things, it depends on the person. I have a suspicion, for instance, that your definition of "day to day basis" is very different than mine. The majority of my time on my computers is spent in a screen session in a terminal. In such a setting, Linux passes both Windows[1] and OS X[2] fairly easily (in my eyes). I'm not going to pretend that this is anything like what most people would do with their computers. But it's what I do with mine, and it's plenty for me. It's also why I don't understand debates about "the year of Linux on the desktop" - I don't really care if it is accessible to or useful for people other than me, so long as it meets my needs, and it meets my needs quite nicely. [1] I know there's Cygwin, but even after that you still don't have a package manager. [2] I know it's a Unix, but even after that you still don't have a package manager. It has, e.g. Macports and Fink, but I've never had much success with either (although I'll concede I haven't made much of an effort).
- bad_user 17y ago
  I also have a Vista at home ... using it as a media station and for experimenting with windows-only stuff. I also used a Mac OS X for a whole year. I still prefer Linux though. Yes, at first it seems like it is "death from a 1000 cuts". But when I'm switching OSes for my day to day work I find that I miss Linux more often than not. I don't have a lot of money so I need free development tools that are decent for the kind of work I do. I also like the support given by some communities. And for that Linux is the best ... Ubuntu/Debian have the best and most properly maintained repository of open-source packages. Everything is one "apt-get install" away. In Windows it's really killing me that I have to manually hunt and even compile my packages. And then make them work within my Cygwin environment, and then find ways for them to inter-operate with Windows-specific utilities. In Mac OS X I've used MacPorts but it's not a properly maintained repository ... the sources can take forever to compile, I've encountered situations were the dependencies where not resolved, and many software packages are just too old. And it's not a default and you end up with two Python interpreters, two Perls, two GCC compilers, etc... Some say perfection is in the details. Mac OS X is certainly an improvement in some areas, but I remember using Tiger ... the default terminal app was not having multiple tabs. And when the wireless wasn't connecting to a router for some reason (when others laptops in the area did), I could find no way to debug the problem. I also did Java programming, and it was really killing me not having Java 6 on Mac OS X. And when it finally came out, it was incompatible with Tiger. The parent is definitely not far off the mark. If you had to shell out the price of windows or for that Macbook from work, you would feel the burden of paying for something that's only marginally better that a Linux distribution, an OS that you can actually own (as opposed to just owning the rights to use it), for free. The only desktop software I would actually pay money for is Photoshop. Too bad that it doesn't work on Linux, but while working for Adobe the people there were actually quite open to Linux, so a Linux port is quite possible in the future.
berntb 17y ago
Hey, I'm an exclusive Linux user (well, I have a Mac too) and I think of getting a Win machine. Or maybe I'll just get a PS3 and be done with it... :-)

by Niten 17y ago

ardit33 17y ago

Yes very far off the mark. I actually have Windows XP at home for which I didn't pay any money (work license), a Macbook at work, and a Linux Machine (Ubuntu 9.04) at work. Used mostly Windows, + Linux (for some server side). Tried to use Ubuntu for day to day work, and it was like death from 1000s cuts. There was not just a major thing not working, most things worked fine, but there were so many little anoyances that at the end it made the whole experience very frustrating. I am actually new to Mac Os, but I find it pretty decent. I switched to it, and just use the Linux machine to get some parts of my project compiling. And I still use XP at home. So, I have used all of three of them with an open minded, and I find that Linux is the worst to use on day to day basis.

gloob 17y ago
As with most other things, it depends on the person. I have a suspicion, for instance, that your definition of "day to day basis" is very different than mine. The majority of my time on my computers is spent in a screen session in a terminal. In such a setting, Linux passes both Windows[1] and OS X[2] fairly easily (in my eyes). I'm not going to pretend that this is anything like what most people would do with their computers. But it's what I do with mine, and it's plenty for me. It's also why I don't understand debates about "the year of Linux on the desktop" - I don't really care if it is accessible to or useful for people other than me, so long as it meets my needs, and it meets my needs quite nicely. [1] I know there's Cygwin, but even after that you still don't have a package manager. [2] I know it's a Unix, but even after that you still don't have a package manager. It has, e.g. Macports and Fink, but I've never had much success with either (although I'll concede I haven't made much of an effort).
bad_user 17y ago
I also have a Vista at home ... using it as a media station and for experimenting with windows-only stuff. I also used a Mac OS X for a whole year. I still prefer Linux though. Yes, at first it seems like it is "death from a 1000 cuts". But when I'm switching OSes for my day to day work I find that I miss Linux more often than not. I don't have a lot of money so I need free development tools that are decent for the kind of work I do. I also like the support given by some communities. And for that Linux is the best ... Ubuntu/Debian have the best and most properly maintained repository of open-source packages. Everything is one "apt-get install" away. In Windows it's really killing me that I have to manually hunt and even compile my packages. And then make them work within my Cygwin environment, and then find ways for them to inter-operate with Windows-specific utilities. In Mac OS X I've used MacPorts but it's not a properly maintained repository ... the sources can take forever to compile, I've encountered situations were the dependencies where not resolved, and many software packages are just too old. And it's not a default and you end up with two Python interpreters, two Perls, two GCC compilers, etc... Some say perfection is in the details. Mac OS X is certainly an improvement in some areas, but I remember using Tiger ... the default terminal app was not having multiple tabs. And when the wireless wasn't connecting to a router for some reason (when others laptops in the area did), I could find no way to debug the problem. I also did Java programming, and it was really killing me not having Java 6 on Mac OS X. And when it finally came out, it was incompatible with Tiger. The parent is definitely not far off the mark. If you had to shell out the price of windows or for that Macbook from work, you would feel the burden of paying for something that's only marginally better that a Linux distribution, an OS that you can actually own (as opposed to just owning the rights to use it), for free. The only desktop software I would actually pay money for is Photoshop. Too bad that it doesn't work on Linux, but while working for Adobe the people there were actually quite open to Linux, so a Linux port is quite possible in the future.

berntb 17y ago

Hey, I'm an exclusive Linux user (well, I have a Mac too) and I think of getting a Win machine. Or maybe I'll just get a PS3 and be done with it... :-)