On Sat, 2002-11-30 at 22:19, Richard Jenniss wrote: > Out of the hat yes, thats why I mentioned "think" > <1% I've read it somewhere. A time before I started bookmarking linux > statistics. > > I'll explain some of my reasoning. > > It takes 2 years+ to develop most games, I can guess it takes a similar time > for applications. > Look at the differences from 95 to 98, etc. Sure, apples to oranges... > We are one month away from 2003, 2 years till 2005 > I've used kde 99ish, and the amount it has changed is significant, but its > not enough, imo. > A two year development cycle maybe accurate but you are forgetting that we are on the verge of going up another major kernel revision. (within 6 months). The differences will be a greater advancement than windows 95 to 98 (which in my opinion wasn't that much really just semi working usb and a slicker gui. Oh I guess I forgot about Fat32. oh wait that was released with windows 95 OSR2).
That means that the next major revision is coming in 2003 not 2005. > Things I think that need improvement, that keeps windows users using > windows. > Program installation This is a myth too. What about apt-get and urpmi? Are your telling me that typing a command into a terminal that downloads and installs the app for you is harder than downloading and running the installer yourself? One thing that people seem to forget when they see the fancy windows installer scripts is that these scripts are common source of program bugs. The installer is always the last thing written and often at the last minute to get the app out. They have been know to overwrite DLLs they shouldn't and put software in wrong places. > Drivers! this is a misnomer. USB works better under Linux than Windows. It was way easier to install my USB joystick under linux. Sure some hardware vendors aren't Linux friendly but there are enough alternatives now that are. Just pick your hardware wisely. > XFree86, its ugly to configure. If you pick the right video you won't have a problem here. Man the installation will setup for you. I have had just as much trouble installing video cards under windows 95 at times. > A competitive office suite, MS office is still better. Why because it loads faster? Or because VBA is better known than Java and Open Office's basic? Most Office Administrators don't write there own macros. Now it may not be easy to take your VBA scripts and convert them to Sun basic. The only real problem I have had with OpenOffice is with the ODBC support but ODBC is slow if I were to setup a completely new database the integration with Adabas is excellent. > A fast, light weight, stable web browser. Windows doesn't have an advantage here.MS Internet Explorer is far from stable and Opera though good isn't light weight and runs under linux. Add crossover plugin to Linux and any advantage windows has pretty much disappears. When considering Galeon and Konquerer, you would have to consider Linux having the advantage on light weight.
