My Windows Collection! For everyone who are Microsofts fans and love operating with the

[qwijibow 0]

A few days ago, someone was telling me about this great software for windows.

It allows you to freeze your hard disk partiton, so you can install any software, even knowing it is full of spyware, or virrii, then when you re-boot, your partiton is restored to before, and all ill efets un-done.

think of it as the system restore, but much better.

In Windows, this sort of thing is called "Great software"

a great addon... somthing you download from the internet, play with a free trial period, then opay for if you like it...



In Linux / UNIX, this functionality is built into the kernel...

its called the chroot system call.

Its a basic part of operating system functionality, that every operating sysdtem has...

but in windows, it is lacking, and you need a whole software suite with loads of bulk to emulate it.

chroot is a basic operating system security feature... windows keps promising security enhancements, but down in the heart of the OS, they lack even the most basic system calls.




SECONDLY.....
I Love the Design of UNIX / Linux.

Its so simple, yet elegant.. For example, you can backup the boot sector, or Master boot record with the copy command !!!!

Yet, this task is impossable in windows, you would need to get on the internet, and download some specialised software.. doing it with a simple copy command is just impossable...




THIRDLY......

I have am AMD64.. the processor runs at scaleable frequancies.. between 1Ghz and 2.4Ghz.

Sometimes i play Silent Hill on my playstation emulator.

Because Games like this always use 100% CPU, even though they dont ned it, my CPU gets hotter, and my cpu fan starts spinning... increaced noise.

In linux... i can use a very simple script that will...

1) change the cpu frequuency govenor from "On Demand" to "User controlled"
2) slow CPU frequancy, and CPU voltage
3) launch the game
4) wait for the game to finish running.
5) Return CPU frequency controll to "On Demand"

This entire script, which changes the processor voltage and frequancy, does everything using very basic commands, like copy, and echo...

Try changing your processor speed / voltage in windows in a script...

you cant, you need special 3rd party downloaded software.

try changing the cpu frequancy in windows with the very simple echo / copy commands...

Un-thinkable.

In windows... if there isnt a button you can click to do somthing,,, then you probably cannot do it.

Its all about design ladies and gebntleman...

Unix / Linux gives us things like the root file system, and mountable disks...

Windows gave you the 'C' drive....

LOL

goooo gentoo

well... thats my opinion anyways...

there will always be people who want high power operating systems...

abnd there will always be people who dont need power, and are happy just being able to do whatever there is a button in a start menu for

both are fine.. its up-to the individual...

I Want a powerfull operating system... i want a high level of access... i want few, small simple programs which can be piped together to complete larger complicated tasks...

i want a compiler

i want Unix / Linux.

My conclusion: Linux needs standardization, until then, it will receive a harsher defeat by Vista. I know people who are dying to get Vista as if it was the Harry Potter 7 release.

Linux Distro's need more standardisation,

but Linux itself is POSIX compliant. as are almost all operating systems.

Windows is no-where near POSIX standards, and doesnt seem to be attempting to work towards compliance.

Try to compile a complicated porgram like ffmpeg on UNIX.... then Linux, then solaris, then FreeBSD...

this is the power of posix compliance...

then try to compile it on windows.... you will see what i mean.

[CaptainRon 0]

qwijibow, you kill the point here.

 

UNIX is by far the master piece of a human brain in designing an operating system. Every person who is into computer science will know it and admire it just like I do.

 

There are lots of things in this world that are superb, yet they fail. This were the difference between a tech guy and a business man lies. OK probably I would like to end this discussion by quoting an interview of Ken Thompson (designer of UNIX, co-creator) on Linux.

 

http://forums.xisto.com/no_longer_exists/

 

"I view Linux as something that's not Microsoft -- a backlash against Microsoft, no more, no less," he said. "I don't think it will be very successful in the long run."

And that is exactly what I have been trying to prove! Considering present pace of Open Source, it will not withstand the MS pressure.

Those who have migrated from Windows to Linux will soon migrate back to Vista and wudn't even look back! Hell they don't care about some quirky chroot() or POSIX standards!

 

"My experience and some of my friends' experience is that Linux is quite unreliable. Microsoft is really unreliable but Linux is worse. In a non-PC environment, it just won't hold up.

When the mastermind says that, I simply don't feel like arguing against it. Whatever advantages of Linux are quoted, is all due to UNIX in the first place.

 

A whole bunch of random people have contributed to this source, and the quality varies drastically

...Linux needs standardization

 

qwijibow, what your friend described about sounds much rather like the disk image tool. back up the hard disk when it is in good state as an image. whenever u see ur system crashing, simply restore the image in a matter of few minutes.

 

I don't know exactly but yes in Linux maybe I could do it with the dd command

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

it is true that Linux needs standardization, that's why we have the new Linux Standards Base 3.1, which also standardizes desktop.This means that Linux is both LSB and POSIX compliant but Windows is only WIN32 compliant and no one knows the whole compliancy ('cept the employees).Actually, distros like Fedora, SuSE and Ubuntu are swappable between each other except the package management system.xboxrulz

Edited May 23, 2006 by xboxrulz (see edit history)

[Omkar™ 0]

Can you beat that?

 

One more thing that I would like to tell is that all my pre-historic versions legal. ( I dont have tech-support for them now!) Every time a new version of the OS realeases my dad is the first one to get it (He is crazy about Windows ). And because of that he does'nt allow me to install Linux, but I still managed to install RedHat Linux 9.

 

And taking about compatibility, every one must agree that Micro$oft Windows is the best, even in user friendly issues. I feel its the best because I still have'nt managed to connect to the internet in Linux using my ethernet card's cable connection.

 

Hey, Ganeshn11, you're the only one who seems to be on my side. As for your ancient collection, three cheers! (and one more from me!).

 

Keep up the Microsoft pride, dude. Thanks a lot!

 

-Omkar Ekbote

[iGuest 3]

Well, Omkar, if your goal from starting this thread is for people to disclose the various versions of Microsoft's Operating Systems they have, I might as well pitch in...

 

DOS 6.2 and 6.22 (on floppy disks)

 

Windows 3.1

 

Windows 3.11

 

Windows 95

 

Windows 98 Second Edition

 

Windows Millennium Edition

 

Windows 2000 Professional Edition

 

Windows XP Corporate Edition (multiuser license)

Of course, all of them are legal, authentic versions. So does that mean I'm a Microsoft fan? Absolutely not. In fact, at times I can be 100% anti-Microsoft. But frankly, my family would never consider using any other OS, and I'm always looking forward to test new software, so I go ahead and purchase Windows Operating Systems. I don't think I'm going to get Vista though, since XP is doing a great job for my family.

 

As for me, I run a dual-boot system between a version of Linux I created from scratch and Mircosoft Windows XP.

 

I'm not going to discuss why I'm not such a raving fan of Microsoft, since this is a subject that's been brutally discussed before, and the guys here have it pretty well covered. But I can understand where you're coming from. Windows gives you what you need, so you have no reason to look for anything more. I suppose there's nothing wrong with that, from a pragmatic, arguably short-sighted view.

 

Anyway, thanks for starting a thread that provoked some members into writing very interesting posts .

 

 

Warm regards,

Mobham

[xboxrulz1405241485 0]

All I can say, right now is that UNIX is the most beautiful piece of operating system you'll ever see. It's highly compliant (within POSIX) and you can swap between them. Windows is NOT compatible with other operating systems.For distro compliancy, most distros are cross compatible. The same binary can work for different Linuxes. Same with FreeBSD, FreeBSD is highly compliant w/ Linux. Even Solaris is comming up w/ a Linux ABI to run Linux software natively.Anyways, the chances of me going to Vista, as in moving in permanently? The chances would be 1:(the distance between centre of the Spiral Galaxy to Sun and back).xboxrulz

Edited August 8, 2006 by xboxrulz (see edit history)