March 17, 2007

O brave new world, That has such people in't!"

You are kidding arent you ?
Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?

That sounds preposterous to me.

If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.

Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.

Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.

I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.



  1. Ok, so - whilst it is an interesting piece of writing to chortle about - it is important to get your facts straight before even continuing to post stilly things.

    1) Apple OS is a linux based O/S that has been optimised for Apple by Apple computers software writers. It is in no way, associated with Microsoft.

    2) Linux does not use any part of Windows code or drivers - it is a completely separate O/S. All Drivers, software and the kernel are written independently.

    3) A high percentage of web servers in the world run on Linux web servers and not on Microsoft.

    4) Linux is a massive effort, there are many code writers and many applications that totally unique to Linux.

    5) Linux is not Freeware. Linux is Open Source. Many applications on linux cost to purchase - free software in linux terms is to have the source code.

    6) last and most important point ... Microsoft windows does not provide any part of the code or service for Linux.

    Perhaps if you installed Linux and used it for a while, you would probably understand better.

    All the best

  2. I am confused james, you do realise I did not write that yes? Why you are posting a response here baffles me.

    Also, OS X is /not/ based on linux. It is in fact based on freebsd.


  3. 1) No. It's based off Mach/FreeBSD.

    2) No. Ever heard of NDIS? Also, Linux is a kernel, not an Operating System.

    3) No. Define high percentage? IIS is still fairly widely used. Linux may have a little bit of a market when it comes to webservers, but let's not forget Solaris, BSD, etc.

    4) Yes, because sometimes the only way to get people to try your software is to make it free. This is a sign. More code doesn't mean better code. It just means more crap to wade through to find what it is that you're looking for.

    5) No. Read the GPL. It's a 'free software license'. Being of the BSDL mindset, I could say that you're almost right, that the GPL isn't a free-as-in-free-beer license. But that's not what you're trying to say, and I'm playing the daemon's advocate.

    6) Isn't this a repeat of 2?

  4. Everyone gets so serious when people post crap like that...

    1) Steve didn't write it

    2) The person who did write it (follow the link) was doing it on purpose to annoy people (and it obviously worked)

    5) Lobbeth thou thy Holy Hand-Grenade of Antioch towards thy foe, who being naughty in my sight, shall snuff it...