General discussion

Locked

Why don't Windows users celebrate innovations in Linux?

By jdclyde ·
Competition is what makes companies try harder.

When there is competition in a market, the products have to be better to compete.

When there is competition in a market, there are more innovation and improvements.

When there is competition in a market, prices have to be competitive.

Bottom line, the better Linux gets, the better Windows will have to get and vise-versa. How is that bad for anyone, regardless of which OS you decide to use?

This conversation is currently closed to new comments.

17 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next
| Thread display: Collapse - | Expand +

All Comments

Collapse -

Trickle down.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to Why don't Windows users c ...

"...the better Linux gets, the better Windows will have to get..."

Until the Windows incorporates the improvements in Linux (or OS X, or any other OS), and until the user upgrades to the version that includes these improvements, there's no reason to celebrate.

Owners of existing sedans don't celebrate when new luxury cars come with factory-installed GPS systems or rear-view cameras. These features aren't in the cars those owners already have, and aren't yet incorporated in the models they would buy (assuming they wanted to buy a new car). What's to celebrate?

Collapse -

Both now and in the future

by jdclyde In reply to Trickle down.

There are always patches and updates to existing software. Both to improve and fix flaws.

Just like American car manufacturers are raising quality to catch up to Toyota and the other imports, the same is true for Windows.

Not to mention, as a windows shop, don't you want the NEXT version to be better than the last? Don't just slap a new GUI on it and end support for the old version to continually make money. Do the job better.

Also, do you think that if wasn't for linux, MS would have made security an issue in both XP and Vista, instead of the "default on" of the NT years?

Collapse -

Okay, try this

by CharlieSpencer In reply to Both now and in the futur ...

Ignorance, either of improvements to Linux or their incorporation into Windows. ****, many users think the only difference between XP and Vista is a new GUI and a nagging security feature. If they aren't aware of improvements to the OS they already use, why would they be aware of changes to one they don't use?

I'm in the trade but the only recent (last 18 months or so) improvements I'm aware of in Linux is that some distributions now play better with Active Directory. I don't anticipate using Linux so I don't follow it's development.

Collapse -

Actually, I meant more of

by jdclyde In reply to Okay, try this

the os religion wars, where zelots from one side or the other feel the NEED to attack the other side any chance they get.

How big of an improvement did you see from win2k to xp? win2k was a stable system and used half the resources. I still have it on a few systems at home because it runs much better on older systems than xp does.

The other side of the coin, when there is a problem with linux or windows, people get defensive about it instead of standing up and saying "hey, you're right. that SHOULD get fixed".

You don't think linux had anything to do with security improvements in Windows over the last few years?

Collapse -

Nope.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to Actually, I meant more of

"You don't think linux had anything to do with security improvements in Windows over the last few years?"

Not really, but I'm not aware of the security improvements in Linux so I don't know which ones have been incorporated into Windows.

I don't know why you raised the original topic. You complain about zealots and then start a topic that just throws more gas on the fire. You may not think so, but reverse your original title and see how it sounds:

"Why don't Linux users celebrate innovations in Windows?"

Either way you phrase it, it's bound to rile up the fan boys.

Collapse -

Nope, also.

by $$$$$$$$$$ In reply to Nope.

Exploits would have been a relevant advertising metric in
Windows v. Mac, with or without an open-source Unix clone
creeping onto desktops. Maybe *nix security models have
helped some Microsoft coders do things better, but the
market demand for better access control comes from the
market, not from one operating system kernel or
corporation.

Collapse -

As I said last week

by jdclyde In reply to Nope.

I WANT people to keep using Windows.

It is the only thing that will keep the linux flavors trying harder and harder to get better.

When you are on top, you get lazy, like MS has been for so long.

MS doing good is good for linux and vice versa.

And I didn't say they used advances done by linux, but the pressure to compete is the only thing that changed their focus.

Collapse -

Okay, you tell us.

by CharlieSpencer In reply to Nope.

You haven't like the answers I've offered to your original question. You didn't like 'Linux improvements aren't readily available to Windows users", or "Windows users aren't aware of Linux improvements." (****, most of them aren't aware of Linux, period.)

I agree Windows benefits from the existence of competition. (Right now MS's biggest competition is it's own product, XP, not Linux.) I'm trying to answer your question of why Windows users don't care about Linux improvements. By 'Windows users' I assume you mean the average corporate or home desktop user, not those of us in the biz. Apparently you're looking for a particular answer and I haven't hit it yet, so you tell us.

Collapse -

You've never seen Gentoo vs. Slackware flame wars?

by $$$$$$$$$$ In reply to Nope.

<i>As I said last week<br>
I WANT people to keep using Windows.

<br><br>It is the only thing that will keep the linux flavors trying harder and harder to get better.
<br><br>
When you are on top, you get lazy, like MS has been for so long.</i>
<br><br>
I thought that when I'm on top, higher performance is expected. No?
<br><br>
<i>MS doing good is good for linux and vice versa.
<br><br>
And I didn't say they used advances done by linux, but the pressure to compete is the only thing that changed their focus.</i>
<br><br>
From what, to what? It could be very interesting to look closely at either side of that: vice, or versa. <b>When</b> has MS "doing good" been good for Linux, or vice versa?

Collapse -

As I said Last Week -- What???

by w2ktechman In reply to Nope.

you expect us to remember what you said last week??

cr@p, I dont remember what you said yesterday in many posts!!

"As I said last week
I WANT people to keep using Windows."

-- Why?? People will, but why would you want people to?

"It is the only thing that will keep the linux flavors trying harder and harder to get better."
-- I disagree, people flock to free SW, especially when money is an issue and there are so many licensing restrictions on other products.

"When you are on top, you get lazy, like MS has been for so long."
-- Whenever a company gets large, they have expensive failures. these failures usually cause a company to put more measures in place to reduce the risk of this happening. However often good ideas get passed by and bad ideas get through.
There also seems to be a mindset thing when a company sees lots of money coming in -- preserve wealth over all....

"MS doing good is good for linux and vice versa."
-- No arguments

"And I didn't say they used advances done by linux, but the pressure to compete is the only thing that changed their focus."
-- I dont think that Linux has threatened them enough to change the way things are done because of it. However, I do think that corporate pressures were a big reason. Linux/Mac were sidenotes to stack on top.
I am not saying that MS isnt scared of Linux, just that it is doubtful that Linux alone changed the way MS does things.

Back to Linux Forum
17 total posts (Page 1 of 2)   01 | 02   Next

Related Discussions

Related Forums