MS-DOS < DR-DOS
I can't comment on this, but who cares about DOS now anyway? It's a dead OS, and is better left that way.
MSIE < Mozilla | Opera
True.
AD < NDS | eDirectory
I don't know what any of those are.
MS server < Samba | Netware | AFS IIS < Apache | Zeus
Apache is better. No doubt.
MSO < OOo
Not for big business. Not by a long shot. OOo is good, don't get me wrong, but the corporate level functions and third party support for MSO are light-years beyond OOo, and no, 2.0 won't change that. It's largely due to "tentacling" or vendor lock in, but regardless of the reason, MSO is the best office suite for big business.
When it comes to personal use, I always suggest OOo. Freedom, openness, cost, open format, neat features like PDF and Flash export, the inclusion of a vector graphics program, being able to share it with friends and neighbors, put it on as many machines as possible, free support, etc. etc. etc... These all make it great for personal use, educational use, government use, and SMB.
MS-Frontpage < XMetal | Dreamweaver
Don't forget Nvu and Mozilla's composer!
MS-SQL < Postresql | MySQL | Oracle
No doubt!
NT4,NT4, NT5.5 kernel < Linux | BSD | QNX | Darwin
Tons more stuff runs on the Windows kernel, that's their sole advantage there. But, it's also the only one that matters to most people.
MS-Windows < Fluxbox | KDE
No way. windows looks way cooler. But Aqua beats it.
etc.
There's more to using computers than having a check list of functions, those functions actually have to work. That's why Hotmail still has to run on BSD.
That's very funny! I didn't know that!
I don't think anyone can deny that Windows XP is a far better OS in a number of ways than Windows 98
Yes, but it's still neither modular nor multi-user nor designed for a networked environment.
It *is* multi-user and designed for a networked environment.
It also won't run on an older computer.
Depends on what you mean by "older". XP came out in 2001 - it, therefore, has to be able to run on a 2001 computer. And since this is 2005 - and 4 years is an ice age in computer terms - XP can, and does, run on older computers. The PC I have was built in 2001, and it runs XP Pro SP2 just fine.
It's still got the NT kernel, which lags behind the Linux and BSD kernels in about every aspect. The graphical shell is only tied with KDE as far as usability, and lags decades behind in functionality and flexibility. OS X has both beaten by a long shot on usability, functionality, and flexibility.
Absolutely, OS X kills everything else I've tried. Not even close. KDE, GNOME, Windows, DOS, ICEWM, Palm, whatever... OS X is the *BEST* operating system and GUI combo ever designed. This coming from a life-long Windows user.
There are many home users and businesses still on MS-Windows 98 though NT4 who would have the least difficulty to pick up OOo and gain a few useful years out of their hardware.
Very true. I hope that most people in that situation will, when they have to ditch their old system, will buy a Mac Mini and be done with it. Complete with a quick download of NeoOffice/J, of course. :-)
I'm not sure why I'm so verbose today.
It's all good. I've enjoyed reading your verbosity!
-Chad Smith
--------------------------------------------------------------------- To unsubscribe, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED] For additional commands, e-mail: [EMAIL PROTECTED]
