M
marty
I know that this is a MS owned newgroup but I'm wondering if a comparisions
between Vista and Linux are appearing. For example, with apologies to Bob
for sending the following direct.
Every OS has it's fanatics - usually called fan boys. I have Windows XP x64
and Vista 64 installed in seperate partitions so they don't see each other
(both think they are drive C
. I also have installed Fedora, SuSE, Ubuntu
and Slackware. Fedora and Suse use SOFTWARE RAID 1 - and you don't have to
dedicat an entire disk like
windows "dynamic" volumes. Actually, I think its impossible for dynamic
disks to setup RAID1 (mirroring).
Frankly, I find Windoze both primitive and arrogrant. It essential kills
any non Windows OS on a disk. The reliance on Drive letters rather than
/dev volumes which can be mounted dates back to DOS - therefore one aspect
of backwards compatibity in all Windows OS's. I mainly use Windows because
of all the shareware I've paid for over the years and virtualization using
MS Virtual PC and VMware. It's not suprising that the MS product does not
virtualize non- Windows OS while VMware does both Linux (including Vista)
and Linux OS.
No doubt I'll get flamed for this but I would like to see the intelligent
defense of Microsoft OS vs. Linux.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: The problem with Linux vs Windows.
between Vista and Linux are appearing. For example, with apologies to Bob
for sending the following direct.
Every OS has it's fanatics - usually called fan boys. I have Windows XP x64
and Vista 64 installed in seperate partitions so they don't see each other
(both think they are drive C

and Slackware. Fedora and Suse use SOFTWARE RAID 1 - and you don't have to
dedicat an entire disk like
windows "dynamic" volumes. Actually, I think its impossible for dynamic
disks to setup RAID1 (mirroring).
Frankly, I find Windoze both primitive and arrogrant. It essential kills
any non Windows OS on a disk. The reliance on Drive letters rather than
/dev volumes which can be mounted dates back to DOS - therefore one aspect
of backwards compatibity in all Windows OS's. I mainly use Windows because
of all the shareware I've paid for over the years and virtualization using
MS Virtual PC and VMware. It's not suprising that the MS product does not
virtualize non- Windows OS while VMware does both Linux (including Vista)
and Linux OS.
No doubt I'll get flamed for this but I would like to see the intelligent
defense of Microsoft OS vs. Linux.
----- Original Message -----
From: "Bob" <[email protected]>
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy,microsoft.public.windows.vista.general
Sent: Saturday, February 24, 2007 6:46 PM
Subject: Re: The problem with Linux vs Windows.