This is nonsense. The Windows interface itself is quite limited and not
very powerful.

as KDE and Gnome and others.


when Win/95 came out being an OS/2 user at that time. From what I have
read even the user interface of Mac OS X is much better that Windows
although they have a much smaller market share.

so why it have a much smaller market share?


Anyhow, of course you
can fully replace Windows with a unix(-like) system and a suitable
desktop enviroment (e.g. KDE, Gnome, XFCE). It depends on your specific
requirements and if applications exist which do what you need. But
saying that GUI's under Unix are per se inferior is just spreading FUD.
Leave that to MS. ;-)

after being one of sponsors of "easy" linux distributions and desktop environment (RedHat), microsoft now can say the truth that it's crap.


Just a small example, how limited Windows really is: Even today it is

you don't have to tell me this. as all unix "desktop environments" are.
because this style of computing is limited by general.


In technical university nearest me there was (or is) a guy that when teaching students unix he said:

---
Don't use windows. Not because it crashes, not because it's buggy and not because it's damn slow. But because it learns bad habits, that are then almost impossible to get rid of.
----

For me the best sentence about it.
_______________________________________________
freebsd-questions@freebsd.org mailing list
http://lists.freebsd.org/mailman/listinfo/freebsd-questions
To unsubscribe, send any mail to "[EMAIL PROTECTED]"

Reply via email to