Date: Tue, 18 Jul 2000 10:24:06 -0700 (PDT) From: Linh Pham <lplist@q.closedsrc.org> To: Rahul Siddharthan <rsidd@physics.iisc.ernet.in> Cc: Tim Ryder <jawse@yahoo.com>, Greg Lehey <grog@lemis.com>, FreeBSD Chat <chat@FreeBSD.ORG> Subject: Re: The joys of Windows Message-ID: <Pine.BSF.4.21.0007181014120.11050-100000@q.closedsrc.org> In-Reply-To: <20000718224237.E19428@physics.iisc.ernet.in>
next in thread | previous in thread | raw e-mail | index | archive | help
Windows 9x is a facelift to a 16-bit Windows 3.1 which is a facade to DOS :) // Linh Pham // // Proud supporter of FreeBSD and OpenBSD // FreeBSD - http://www.freebsd.org // OpenBSD - http://www.openbsd.org /* "Oregon, n.: Eighty billion gallons of water with no place to go on Saturday night." */ On Tue, 18 Jul 2000, Rahul Siddharthan wrote: > Tim Ryder said on Jul 18, 2000 at 09:56:00: > > I dont see why everyone here hates windows. > > I have no idea about Windows NT, but I'd hesitate to call Windows 9x > an operating system at all. > > > linux/bsd/windows user at home and windows user at > > work. When I am home i use linux because it is > > interesting, not because it is better, because it > > really isnt better. When I go to work I use window > > because its time to get some real work done. > > > > All this talk about bsd and linux being better than > > windows is bullshit. I have windows 2000 and when I > > do anything on FreeBSD or Linux, it is always slower > > then when I do it on windows and now with win 2000 > > out, windows even has better memory management. > > If you're saying windows "felt" faster even before w2000 came out, > well that may be your experience: I can't agree. Moreover, I've > amazed many people by showing them how fast their old Pentium 200 with > 32 MB RAM really is, simply by running linux on it rather than > windows. This is despite X being a known resource hog. Windows 2000, > from all accounts, will barely run at all on such a machine. On a > newer machine, linux and freebsd are both so blindingly fast that > "gut feeling" comparisons are just meaningless. > > Memory management -- I don't know: I only know from experience that > opening three bulky applications at the same time is a near-guaranteed > way of crashing windows, while 5-6 different users doing heavy-duty > things at the same time on a fairly low end freebsd or linux machine > will barely notice one anothers' presence. If you really stress it > out, freebsd seems better than linux, but windows isn't even on the > radar. > > > I like linux and freebsd, but I also know that right > > now for the desktop and home use, windows 2000 is by > > far the better option. > > Depends on what the application needs are. And that has nothing to do > with memory management or other technical issues. If the needs are > simple internet surfing, basic word processing, etc, linux and freebsd > are fine options and miles better than windows (provided they're > pre-installed and pre-configured, as windows usually is) and I've > successfully convinced a few people of that. > > R. > > > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org > with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message > To Unsubscribe: send mail to majordomo@FreeBSD.org with "unsubscribe freebsd-chat" in the body of the message
Want to link to this message? Use this URL: <https://mail-archive.FreeBSD.org/cgi/mid.cgi?Pine.BSF.4.21.0007181014120.11050-100000>