DO NOT buy vista guys

Chainer said:
Be honest here, bud....who's going to write code for viruses for platforms that are in 10% of Computer users' households? It's a waste of time...

exactly. But still, not many viruses (I think there are like 1 or 2 that work) which is an extremely good thing.
 
Apple computers fall in that class. That's why Windows get such a bad rep for viruses because majority of the world use Windows OS while the few stick by Mac OS.
 
Seriously. It's pretty annoying when Apple fans start using the virus card considering the amount of PC users outnumbers the Mac by almost tenfold.
 
alvino said:
Seriously. It's pretty annoying when Apple fans start using the virus card considering the amount of PC users outnumbers the Mac by almost tenfold.

Sure that's the reason for pcs having more viruses, but the fact is that windows has a lot of viruses, other operating systems don't. Feels like you are saying that not having viruses shouldn't be counted as an advantage.. :rolleyes:
 
Sorry to disapoint Jon, but I was talking about all versions of windows, since the original point that brought it up was the changing of technologies,
I was only pointing out that there have been two core technologies developed by microsoft,

which is the same as Mac, (with the exception that they didn't develop their newest one, they just realised their own one was crappy and bought a unix core...


so far as taking a day to install Linux, it really does depend on your harware, and how much of it you're actually installing...

assuming that there are drivers for your hardware then you should be all set, but what if you're using bleeding edge, (or bleeding old), and can't find a driver to work with the kernel?
Also I think that there are perhaps too many installation options with linux, if you fully check out everything that can be installed from the start media then you have quite a package, office apps, drawing apps, multiple browsers etc...
but none of those are really linux...

so yes, it can take a whole day to install Linux, you don't have to be an idiot...

in fact the last time I installed Linux it took me five days (evenings) to get the system working exactly as I wanted it, with all the correct browsers, correct media players, all associations made correctly, all the drivers installed and all the software that I wanted...
even then there were some of my necessary apps missing that I felt I just couldn't live without.
and I also found that there were various problems with Firefox and certain sites, (such as Yahoo mail).

All in all, like I said earlier, I'm happy with XP, I realise it's not perfect, but nothing else is either...
 
^^ we were talking about just the OS.

And kubuntu automatically finds almost every driver you need. I only needed to install vid card drivers by myself. Now that takes maybe 5-10 mins. Comes with good media players, comes with a decent irc client, an exellent messenger client, torrent program etc. The only things I actually had to install after the os was the vid card drivers, (and you really don't need these unless you are gaming, the default drivers provided with kubuntu can use 1600x1200 resolution with a 75hz refresh rate on my monitor. Windows with newest drivers can do the same resolution with 85hz) codec pack and firefox. And when you have the package sources (takes like maybe 3 mins to add the needed ones) it takes about 10 seconds + the downloading & installing time to get a software installed. Then java etc if you need to use them.

But if we are talking about installing stuff you need linux is also going to be faster. With linux I had to install 3 things, with windows I need to install irc client, messenger client (windows one sucks), firefox, firewall, anti-virus, anti-spyware, 2 new media players, codecs. utorrent etc.

Overall, from my own experience, linux is faster to install. Might not seem like that if you are doing it for the 1st time in your life, but I bet that I can install win xp with all the necessary stuff faster than someone who is installing it for the 1st time in his life.
 
mammikoura said:
Sure that's the reason for pcs having more viruses, but the fact is that windows has a lot of viruses, other operating systems don't. Feels like you are saying that not having viruses shouldn't be counted as an advantage.. :rolleyes:

I think you're missing the point...

Windows has a lot of Viruses because of its MILLIONS upon MILLIONS of users that use it. Because of the databases that companies run, are usually ran off of some kind of Windows platform; whether it be Windows 2000, Windows XP, or Windows Server 2003 - fact is, what would you consider writing viruses for? A platform that supports and endless amount of people, or a platform that supports maybe one million? It's a no-brainer.

I do not count Apple as not having viruses as an advantage. Why? Because Microsoft users outnumber Mac users of about 300 to 1. Apple charges a premium for its technologies when in true life, they serve no REAL advantage over a Windows platform. Why else would companies buy into the Windows platform, if Apple was soooo superior? Think about that.

I don't really have time to go over each and every detail, but I for one do not buy into the overly-hyped bullcrap that Apple spews onto the public, especially their 'claimed' advantages over a personal computer. If Apples can dual-boot with Windows....they are PCs. So that is way too contradicting to buy into.
 
Thank you! :) The reason why Windows has more viruses is because the number of PC users far outweigh the number of Mac users. Why create a virus that only harms the minority? It's simply not practical if you think of it from a virus creator's view point.
 
I understand what you are saying.

Chainer said:
I do not count Apple as not having viruses as an advantage. Why? Because Microsoft users outnumber Mac users of about 300 to 1.

but I don't see how that makes any difference at all. Sure, it's the reason why windows has so much viruses and other operating systems don't. If macs or linux or any other os would be as popular as windows, there would be viruses for them also. But atm other operating systems do not have more than a few viruses compared to the millions with windows, therefore making other operating systems safer from virus attacks. If you were to choose from 2 identical operating systems, with one of them you don't have to worry about viruses. With the other you need to install firewall, anti-virus & anti-spyware, and still you can't be sure that you are safe. Which one would you choose?

What I'm trying to say is that it really doesn't matter why the viruses are there, it doesn't change the fact that windows has more viruses than all the other operating systems added together. And viruses are never a good thing. (except for anti-virus companies ;) )
 
I would choose XP because of it's broader compatability with almost everything. Games, apps, you name it. The Mac? Oohh...you can play Doom 3 and Halo. :rolleyes:
 
Back
Top Bottom