FRIHOST FORUMS SEARCH FAQ TOS BLOGS COMPETITIONS
You are invited to Log in or Register a free Frihost Account!


Will Windows last forvever?





alalex
Windows, expensive OS, with lots of applications (also exensive) has many similar OS with free software: Linux, for example is the most popular.
Why anyone uses Linux normaly? Is free, it has all the things that windows has, and is more usefull if you program...
darknez3
Windows is an easy-to-use application. Linux is for advanced users, and does not have all the necessary features to accomodate an average user. You need to get emulators for windows based applications on Linux..etc.. And linux is bit more vulnerable than windows. I seen some prety screwed up viral tools for Linux.
class146
darknez3 wrote:
Windows is an easy-to-use application. Linux is for advanced users, and does not have all the necessary features to accomodate an average user. You need to get emulators for windows based applications on Linux..etc.. And linux is bit more vulnerable than windows. I seen some prety screwed up viral tools for Linux.


For sure nothing lasts forever, but if you look at the lastest product from Microsoft - Origami, a new moible portable tablet. Microsoft is evolving... It will last long enough together with pc.

see http://gear.ign.com/articles/691/691935p1.html for the details. There is an interesting video as well.
maclui
In the near future different OSs will coexist in a fully integrated technologycal enviroment, windows will be there forever because as long as computers exist microsoft will be the leader and innovative enough to keep the bigest slice of the cake.
Vrythramax
Bill Gates' marketing strategy has pretty much ensured that Windows will be around for [possibly] generations to come. When he first started out (before Windows 3.1), he gave DOS away for free and it quickly overtook the market as the OS of choice. After the advent of Windows 3.1 (which was originally an interface to DOS, not a stand-alone OS) it made PC's much easier to use. That combined with the dropping cost of [reasonably] good quality hardware, makes using a PC much easier for newbies (not to be confused with n0obie4life) to use.

Yeah...I think we are stuck with Windows, even if sometime in the future they don't call it Windows anymore.
manumiglani
alalex wrote:
Windows, expensive OS, with lots of applications (also exensive) has many similar OS with free software: Linux, for example is the most popular.
Why anyone uses Linux normaly? Is free, it has all the things that windows has, and is more usefull if you program...


Well windows will last for a very very long time if not forever. The thing that gives windows a edge over linux is that its easy to use and layman friendly. Thats where Micorsoft is better of all its competition.
alalex
I think that people is not trying to make Linux known. How many learned that linux exisyed on your own? Usually people tell other about linux, while with windows, it's just everywhere... Crying or Very sad
Vrythramax
Most people don't want to have to think about configuring an OS, they just want to plug-n-play (no reference to M$ intended). Many end users would never had sat down in front of a computer for the first time if they had to deal with UNIX/Linux, and lets be honest, it's not one of the easiet OS's to keep running...even for alot of [alleged] Gurus. Just configuring a modem on (some flavors) of Linux can be a real challenge...that in itself would turn alot of [potential] users away.
nopaniers
IMHO Windows is only surviving because it has a monopoly. Both Linux and OS-X are better operating systems. I used Linux to write my thesis and do the calculations for my PhD thesis, and also during my time at uni. To buy the software which I used would cost many thousands of dollars on Windows. To use it Linux was standard. Linux also has better security, a better look-and-feel, and is simply a better designed operating system.

I learnt that Linux existed on my own. But I guess that is the point of open-source software: you do help each other. Some of the best products are free, like Firefox (which I'm using now), Apache, MySQL, Eclipse and Linux.

Having worked in the IT industry though, there is a saying "Nobody ever got fired for choosing Microsoft." Which basically means you can choose a Microsoft product when it is not the best (and with the exception of Word -- and even then it's annoying with Word's many bugs -- it rarely is). It's a sad fact of our system that they essentially use their size to force out their competitors. Look what happened to Netscape. Look what they're trying to do with .NET. Markets don't work well when there is a monopoly (as there is in IT), but thankfully monopolies don't last forever.
nopaniers
Vrythramax wrote:
Just configuring a modem on (some flavors) of Linux can be a real challenge...


That is sad really. It's because some "Win-modems" rely on the computer's processing power to do most of the work, rather than doing it in hardware. That means your computer slows down when the modem is on, and also that the manufacturers have to release the drivers for the modems.... and and some companies only release them for Windows. It's a problem of Window's essential monopoly and not designing to open standards.

As I was saying monopolies stifle competition...
alalex
That was really a good discussion!!! I didn't think that it was a really good point when I asked... But, what is the difference between the different 'displays' of Linux (Mandriva...)
I don't know very much about Linux, and I want to change my computer OS into it so... Question
Gieter
I don't think that Microsoft will continue to have a that high marketshare of OS'... IBM had once the monopoly of OS' and no-one back in those days thought that they would lose their marketshare. But still, it happened. It doesn't has to be necessarily Linux that will replace Window, maybe the importance of Windows will decrease and different OS' will co-exist.

About configuring a modem on Linux: I have had (still have actually) configuring my wireless network adapter on Fedora Core 4. This because the producers of wireless network adapters don't want to release a Linux-version of the drivers or they don't want to release the source code. Making it almost impossible for Linux enthusiastics to make a native Linux driver.

But I find that Linux is becoming more and more useful and easier for the average computer-user.
nopaniers
I'm sorry if this is a little off topic:

alalex wrote:
But, what is the difference between the different 'displays' of Linux (Mandriva...)


Mandriva is a particular distribution of Linux. Because Linux is free, and many programs which run on Linux also free, anybody is allowed to put together a set of these programs which run well together. These are called "distributions".

There are many different distributions of Linux. You should be able to run any given piece of Linux software on any of the distributions. What differs most is the way you update those pieces of software. So, for example, if you are running Red Hat you install .rpm files, and if you are running Debian you use a program called apt. Some of the administration also changes (for example how the system starts up), as does the layout of the file-system (although they all follow the same basic idea).

Some of the major distributions are: Debian (which I use, and is fantastic, particularly the way it can update software straight from the web so you always have the latest copies of everything), Ubuntu (will send you a free CD, based on Debian), Red Hat and Fedora (now comercial), Suse (good for European languages, and good support), Mandriva (which you know about).

I'd suggest you start out with a dual boot computer, download and burn a copy of Linux onto a CD (or two), install Linux and play around until you are comfortable. There's a lot to learn at the start, but don't get discouraged because there are always people to help you along.
Greeny
alalex wrote:
Windows, expensive OS, with lots of applications (also exensive) has many similar OS with free software: Linux, for example is the most popular.
Why anyone uses Linux normaly? Is free, it has all the things that windows has, and is more usefull if you program...


Maybe windows it will, maybe windows won't.

With the New windows OS out later this year, which takes up alot of you RAM, and will cost you quite a bit to buy. So its going to cost you more for RAM and OS by the end of the year.
Srs2388
I think that OS X will be more popular than the like 6 versions of vista... i've seen vista already it looks cool
but i've ran OS X and it was way better than any windows i have used..
I dont think it will be main stream much longer... MAC will take over
smartbei
There is absolutely no chance that mac will jump from roughly 6 percent of the market to over 50 percent, hence take over. No chance. I think that windows will be here for a long time yet, because, as has been said above, it is a very easy OS to set up and use. It has a lot of programs that work on it, and there is no need to use emulators etc. What I wouldn't be surprised is if Windows will base one of its future operating systems on linux, but keep the existing gooey (sp?) so that performance is increased while users stay happy. There was talk of a Google OS as well. Google might be able to succeed there, but I think they need more experiance in the premium software field before going for an OS.
pefaja
imho windows will rule for long time. Such OS like Unix (bsd, red hat etc.) r too complicated and too complex for a normal user.
But what about MAC? I remember those times, when I was younger and learning how to fag with a MAC OS... it was soooo fun : ).
ocalhoun
Linux and Macintosh will stedily eat up more marketshare from windows. Last time I checked, they only had 5% of the market combined. Windows will fall approximately five years after it runs less than 50% of the world's computers. (allowing time for computers already running windows to go obsolete.) Look for microsoft to go more and more towards applications, not OS's. I would not be at all suprised to find a MS Office 2014 rpm for SuSE 17.2 for sale someday.
chizeled
Quote:
Windows, expensive OS, with lots of applications (also exensive) has many similar OS with free software: Linux, for example is the most popular.
Why anyone uses Linux normaly? Is free, it has all the things that windows has, and is more usefull if you program...


Since I have used Macintosh, Windows and Linux, I have to say I am pleased with all of them. Eventhough Windows is a sales pitch platform, I think it will serve as one of components in a hybrid patform consisting of Mac, Windows and Linux. It seems that one will engulf the others to use there interface item to host others. As we all know, or maybe not, all three platform inventors were once trying to invent a new platform, barrowing ideas from xerox and other well know programming companies. I always say what comes around goes around. I see the future of the computer or its predisessors to only comply with one OS.
Scorpio
Linux is probably the best free OS available. Its security is far better than windows.
But the fact is that It doesnt support too many applications, windows having an advantage there,

Also windows is simple to use.
But i must say Im impressed by Mac OSx though you need to buy a separate Imac for it.

Securitywise windows is too damn vulnerable .
If they manage to improve it, they certainly will be ruling the OS market

But Hopefully Apple comes up with MAC for even PCs using other OSs
Bazza_Ballistic
Maybe OS X will compete with Windows now that it's gone to Intel. Although it is not currently available in the beige box edition perhaps this will happen in the foreseeable future.

A problem with Linux is that it's not sleek visually and it's confusing for non-computer minded people (maybe Windows is too Wink ). Also, alot of software is most readily available, or only available, for Windows. Hopefully this will change and the OS market will be more diverse at least.
ashok
Microsoft will contiue to be top vendor.. and so will be the windows. We cant deny that microsoft is innovative enuf to catchup with the current as well as future requirements of users...
Vrythramax
My problem with M$ and windows is not so much about the inherent security flaws but with the way M$ tries (and succeeds) to slave developers to thier own versions of established programming languages and M$ specific langauges. For example, the Javascript manual in it's original form, is less than 100 pages, M$'s version (Jscript) is over 400 pages and works only in IE. Let's not even go into M$ specific tags in HTML design, or the MFC's and Visual Basic. M$ does not recognize other browsers or OS's, nor do they even believe in backwards compatabilty...if they release something new you (usually) have to pay for the upgrade and reinstall the entire product.

M$ will continue to dominate the market as long as programmers and developers continue to write M$ specific software, and that show no signs of stopping because if you don't write something that is M$ compliant chances are your product won't sell very well.
chizeled
I just think microsoft has made a mistake in not lauching it's Vista OS during the holidays. This could be a strategy or not maybe they will January for realease and then recant and move the launch dat in December. That would boost their stocks quite a bit if they did that. Lauch dates are usually not set in stone. Microsoft always has a strategy for some kind of success.
daniel_l_135
chizeled wrote:
I just think microsoft has made a mistake in not lauching it's Vista OS during the holidays.


Maybe, but whatever has delayed their launch(e.g errors or incomplete features), would possibly effect the speed with which people upgrade from XP. The better the OS is at launch, the faster people will upgrade.

As for the OP. The Mac OS is far more likely to fold than Windows. Even if the former is better, the latter is far too ingrained IMO.
gunnarr
The windows vs. Linux discussion could go on forever without reaching any special conclution. Windows is easier for newbies, about 80% of computer users use windows, my father, my little sister, my grandmother etc...Windows is more newbie friendly than Linux is.

But Linux is more powerful once you can master it. If you are a programmer, if you are running a webserver or a game server for games such as counter strike source, your choice is Linux.

Because 80% of people use Windows, Hackers and spammers target windows users. Windows users also don't generally know much about computer, they know how to get on MSN and how to use Internet Explorer. Therefor they make faaarr better targets than advanced Linux users.

Big companies like IBM are developing linux though and some corporations are giving away computers with the free linux OS to the developing countries. I am a part-time programmer and i only prefer windows while i play games.

There are many features in development though, like VINE that enables you to run windows programs on linux machines. Linux is the feuture for the advanced computer user Smile Very Happy
DeFwh
Probably because of its large foothold on the Worlds OS behaviors so until we all learn unix to customize our linux PC's i hardly doubt that windows would ever be replaced with any OS. Just like majorities and minorities in society WINDOWS is the majority and minorities such as Linux, Mac OS, and anything else are shut out by the majority thought and ppl just accept things and go on with waht they got. Windows is good i just needs more freedom to change it and less dependence on its microsoft software bretherin to complete it. I believe that window should learn something from linux and equally said linux should learn something from windows. Tux may be my home boy but Microsoft is my Banker(i trust windows). Linux seems to be unreliable at securties because of lack of knowledge and appliction use that are suffcient to stop hacks or spyware. Its like know u have to take care of it on your own which isnt a bad way at all to learn unix. But if u got an older computer that u dont use get linux on it and learn unix.
Nyizsa
Almost everyone said that Windows is more user-friendly and easier for newbies. But there is one thing to think about:
Assume that you want to put an OS on your grandma's computer. Which one will you choose? Windows, for the above reason? Ok, you install it, and after a few weeks you will start to get daily phone calls, like "My dear, this program doesn't start" or "It wrote that I need to contact Microsoft, what should I tell them" etc.
Or Linux? You spend your weekend making the system up and running (eating Granny's delicious applepie), then you can forget about being her sysadmin for a year, when you spend 30 minutes with updating the neccesary stuff.
I was trying to say that "newbie-friendliness" goes for the entire lifetime of the product - not only the installation, which is done by experienced people in case of Windows also...
Helios
I'll agree with Nyizsa.
If you want a free OS for your grandmother, choose Linux.

I'd go with Mac OS X.
I got it for free(cracked it) and running it on my PC.
What can I say? Mac > Windows.

Top 4 IMO:

1. Cracked Mac Twisted Evil
2. Linux(debian) Very Happy
3. FreeBSD Smile
4. empty space. waiting for a new good os to pop up.
{name here}
alalex wrote:
Windows, expensive OS, with lots of applications (also exensive) has many similar OS with free software: Linux, for example is the most popular.
Why anyone uses Linux normaly? Is free, it has all the things that windows has, and is more usefull if you program...

1. Most things you do in linux involve a console. No normal end user(think computer illiterates) wants to go back to the console.
2. Partitioning scares the computer and linux newbies
3. Directory structure is confusing: computer illiterates will find drive letters much easier to understand than /dev/fd0.
4. Windows groups most programs and supporting files in a single folder that expands from there, making uninstallations without the Add/Remove programs much easier.
5. In most Linux GUIs, installed programs may not show on thier version of the start menu, making them dig for the command line
6. Filesystem is case sensitive, one capitalization error will disallow you execution(example: Sheep Shaver must be executed SheepShaver, not sheepshaver) possibly confusing the computer newb.
7. No add/remove programs manager making it very difficult for any uninstallation.

Unless linux fixes these 7 factors, it will never be popular at home. The only three OSes that can possibly get a grip on the home market are Windows, OS/2, and Mac OS. They offer solutions to Linux shortcomings by:
1. Lowering the significance of the console by installers, "start menus", and putting a heavier importance on the GUI.
2. They barely ever have to go through partitioning in the installation process. Mac OS has none and Windows has a simple one to the install disk/drive
3. Mac OS auto mounts filesystems an put them onto the desktop. Windows and OS/2 uses drive letters.
4. Most apps have their own personal folder that you may delete in OS/2 and eComStation. I never use OS X long enough to see if there is an uninstall program...
5. Most installations auto add to the Programs folder on the desktop/eCenter/Taskbar on eCS and Windows. Same should go with OS X.
6. eCS and Windows have a case insensitive console and filesystem. Mac OS has a case sensitive FS but ensures you will never need to see it.
7. eCS stores the entire program in a single folder you may simply delete when needed. Windows has an Add/Remove program manager.
nopaniers
I don't agree with all your points {name here}.

1. You are right. Still, when I use Windows I miss the console, and wish that I had a decent one...

2. Windows installation is only "easier" because it splats the computer. That's a nightmare, not an advantage. Not partitioning a harddrive is obviously a risky business if you value your data. And what is all this constant rebooting?

4. Installing/Removing programs in Windows is much worse than in Linux. DLL hell or a registry corruption will kill the entire machine... and Internet Explorer seems to somehow weedle its way into everything.

5. I find that I have the opposite problem with Windows: I install a printer... it gives me five programs on the start menu... the computer ends up completely bloated. With Linux, the printer works without all this fluffing.

7. There is. It's easier and cheaper to keep a Linux machine up to date with the latest versions and patches.

You're right that making things more graphical will help newbies. Linux and OS-X made the correct design choice to separate the window manager from the operating system, which is a definite flaw in Windows.


Vrythramax:

I agree with the comments about Microsoft specific programs and Javascript. I do like that you can compile JScript and call it from any .NET language. But yes. I don't like Microsoft's basic hijacking of Java's ideas, their custom tags, non-standard behaviour, ect. Why can't they just stick to standards instead of having to make their own (expensive) version of everything? The world would be so much easier.
thermaltake
windows software is much more expensive however windows is much better known than linux. Linux is more for advanced users. More things are compatible with Windows becasue it is more popular. This is the opposite with Linux.
Nyizsa
{name here} wrote:
3. Directory structure is confusing: computer illiterates will find drive letters much easier to understand than /dev/fd0.

Why to worry about it if they automount or can be mounted with a single click?
{name here} wrote:
4. Windows groups most programs and supporting files in a single folder that expands from there, making uninstallations without the Add/Remove programs much easier.

I prefer adding to the Start menu only things I want. And I HATE when the Start menu has to be scrolled - I think also newbies would...
{name here} wrote:
5. In most Linux GUIs, installed programs may not show on thier version of the start menu, making them dig for the command line

...or choosing Help - About.
{name here} wrote:
6. Filesystem is case sensitive, one capitalization error will disallow you execution(example: Sheep Shaver must be executed SheepShaver, not sheepshaver) possibly confusing the computer newb.

Yes. That's why most of the programs use dialogs. The newbie will not type anything neither in terminal nor in Command prompt.
{name here} wrote:
7. No add/remove programs manager making it very difficult for any uninstallation.

Take a look at synaptic...

Your first two questions are about installation, and I am sure no newbie will install neither Windows nor Unix.
{name here}
nopaniers:

1. Good for advanced users, useless to the newbie
2. The rebooting is rediculous, but splatting would be more accessible to idiots. BeOS has the best and simplest installation program I've seen. It make s installing very easy.
4. I've never had to wade through any crap when uninstalling a program.
5. I had the opposite. I found linux(especially debian) had a more or less lack of drivers, but my point was with apps like Sheepshaver that don't show themselves in the desktop or the start menu. This would confuse the user and force them to dig in the depths of a command line.
7. I didn't say anything about keeping it up to date. What do you do to uninstall open watcom in eCS or Windows? Delete the directory. What do you do when you need to uninstall wine?
delete the files in /usr/bin
delete the files in /usr/lib
delete the files in /usr/lib/wine
delete the files in /usr/man/man(x)
...you get my point...
alkady
Windows. Forever! Thats outrageous to say. I doubt Windows will last forever. One day or the other, Someone will beat windows for sure, I dont know who but one thing I do know is that it doesnt take a genius to take down something. Let me get it straight. It only takes one simple idea to take down an industry. For example, (This is obviously absurd) but say if teleportation was indeed possible, It will instantly cripple the airline, postal and transporation industey. Why? because its cheap and and gets you anywhere in mere second. Obviously this idea is crazy but its only an example.
nopaniers
I don't use Wine or Sheepshaver, but I do take your point.

For some reason I always find printers easier on Linux. I agree that Windows in general, is better, but it can be a complete nightmare to get certain printers working... a newbie couldn't get either of them going.

Just deleting the directories in Windows is dangerous. If you have a .dll registered and you just delete it, Windows will get confused. You have to unregister it first.

Let me describe one situation I had at work (it is a few years ago now). The new version of Internet Explorer came out. It installed itself just fine and wrote over the top of a whole stack of dlls. Unfortunately this meant that half of the programs on each of the 200 computers stopped working because despite supposedly being backwards compatable, the new dll's weren't. We had to manually unistall. To make matter's worse, the unistall process didn't work properly. That was a fun day!

One program (from a financial company that I won't name) replaced DLL's with older versions without checking the age. So as people installed it other programs on their computers just stopped working...

I have spent many, many hours trying to find incorrectly registered DLLs. Microsoft's system for installing and uninstalling software is not very good. A lot of the information is stored in the registry, and if (for what-ever reason) the registry gets out of sync with the computer then you have real problems.

When a similar thing happened to my dad at home (he's not exactly a newbie) his computer got all screwed up and he lost a lot of his work... which led to his (and mum's) move to Apple.

My mum is a complete newbie... or she was. She had a lot of trouble with Windows, but seems to like OS-X much better. She's even ringing me using Skype now which is a step forward!
{name here}
Luckily OS/2 is forgiving enough to where you may delete an installed app's directory and nothing will happen except it warns you that a bunch of lines will be ignored in the CONFIG.SYS file vcreated by the program. But this is about windows so moving on...

The problem with Linux is its not as newb friendly as Windows or Mac OS. This is why Linux can't succeed yet. They need to wrap around Microsoft's business model which is based upon this quote:
Peter Griffith wrote:
A boat's(good operating system's) a boat(good operating system), but the mystery box(windows) can be anything, even a boat!

Which real gullable non techy people will fall for, not realizing there is something better out there. Because of this, microsoft doesn't need to improve anymore, they just need to repackage the same thing and make it look different(i.e. Windows XP) and the masses will flock to it like a sheep to a shepard. Of course, one day they'll screw up. I'll bet it'll be with Windows Blackcomb...
zorindart
There seems to be a general software's problem: programs grow more and more overcharged with features, most of them not very useful. It make them all-consuming system resources, user interfaces become unclear and all this makes users start searching for anything newer and fresher.

The reason of all this is the need of release new softare versions every year, even if this software runs OK.
Examples: Nero 7, Pinacle studio 10, Band-in-a Box 06, Omni page 10...

Windows is going the same way. The next Vista will include a lot of non-desired features that will become it huge in size and slow in average machines. As a fast food eater, it's going to be fat and clumsy.

I think it's time for something fresh. something able to run windows progs on it but without all this fatness.
{name here}
The simple solution is ReactOS.
Zuwiki
darknez3 wrote:
And linux is bit more vulnerable than windows.


What distro are you using??? That is the stupidest thing I have ever heard! No offense or anything. I just can't believe anyone would think that. Please read this.
zorindart
{name here} wrote:
The simple solution is ReactOS.


I have visited their site, and it seems to be a very good option.
Unfortunately it's an pre-alpha version yet.

Have you gave it a try?
Sebaci
MS has started new project - Singularity. It will be something totally different than Windows, it won't be based on Windows core. Bad software like viruses won't work on Singularity. If MS realises this project, it will be the best and the only operating system in the world
Related topics
Cheaper to patch--Windows or open source?
IRam Boosts Windows Boot
751 Useful Windows XP Files
Windows Vista Official Thread
CD Ripping Problem
Windows File System Explained
16-bit Windows Programs is not Running
[OFFICIAL] MSN Messenger 8.0 or Windows Live Messenger
New Windows Vista Test Build Expected Next Week
installing apache,mysql and php on windows
Windows update problem..
Windows compatible Os help....
modifiying the windows registry with the windows API - run
The last man without Windows 95
Reply to topic    Frihost Forum Index -> Computers -> Operating Systems

FRIHOST HOME | FAQ | TOS | ABOUT US | CONTACT US | SITE MAP
© 2005-2011 Frihost, forums powered by phpBB.