I think this is the clever little game M$ has been playing. Frankly,
when Windoze95 was first announced I wsn't even using a PC, but as my
nkack for trivia usually does I noted that one of the experts commented
that Win95 was more about hardware upgrading than software. I did not
fully understand, but it caught my attention.
I don't know much about benchmarks, but a real test of any OS is going
to be done on the same hardware. Running OS/2 Warp 3.0 on a 486/33 I saw
"more speed" IMHO than with Win95 on my NEC P166.
So long as the guys and gals, who sign the checks to buy the OSs know
little about what goes under the hood, so to speak, money will be poared
down a hole.
FYI I saw an interesting white paper comparing OS/2 and NT last year.
IBM was looking at continued compatibilty of applications as
users/businesses upgraded their OSs; downward not upward as M$ does.
Also, for those, who did not see the Public Broadcasting System program
that was shown here in the States(January, '99, I think) called "Nerds
101," which looked at the web and pc there was an interesting comment. I
can not quote it verbatim, so I will not claim to do so, but I think I
keep with the spirit of the thought when I recount that one of the Sun
people, who was interviewed stated that a top programmer in the industry
made the observation, after being hired by M$, that he saw some of the
worst programmers he had ever seen after going to M$. If this is true is
there any wonder M$ OSs continue to grow larger and larger. Add to that
that as with BEos M$ does not have the luxury to be able to devorce
itself from old apps, or does it?
Regards,
Bob
Samy Elashmawy wrote:
>
> >Great article.
> >IDG.NET also published a article by Frank Hayes that parroted the
> >Microsoft party line about NT being as cheap as Linux to install.
> >I did a cost summary of the upgrade to Win95 and NT on the workstations
> >and servers where I work, not counting replacing 3rd party software that
> >the "upgrades" to the M$ OS requires because it broke them.
> >When the upgrade from WFW 3.11 was completed we had replaced all of our
> >386 and 486 machines with 586 P75's and higher. It took three years.
> >We didn't include CDROMs or SOUND cards and the boxes averaged $1,500.
> >Now, M$ is asking us to begin cycle of "upgrading" to machines that have
> >128MB of RAM and 10GB of HD and a fast video. Assuming the same avg
> >cost of $1,500 the NT 2000 "solution" will cost about $510,000 including
> >hardware and license costs.
>
> I keep wondering when enough corps will just say enogh is enough. No
> upgrades , well stick with what we have.
> the only option we have as a consumer is to vote with our dollers. If a
> signiificant No. say no , they will have to listen. I mean upgrades used to
> be 30.00 , now your looking at $90.00 for "beta" versions , which break
> every thing , and dont run as "advertized" . Have you tried win98 with 16
> meg of ram..
>
> Its not only Mickysoft , but Intell as well. There is a constant "push in
> the new , push out the old every six months. The more hardware they push
> the more bloated the software comes out. Give me a break.
>
> To telll the truth , I have been running linux for 8 mos or so , fist tried
> it on a 486 , and as a simple samba server w no x , it ran circles around
> windows as far as sharing. Now I have it loaded on my desktoop , and on my
> old desktop (p166 runing samba) and it has NEVER EVER CRASHED OR HAD A
> HICUP ONCE THE HARDWARE AN SOFTWARE WAS CONFIGURED/SETUP. My only gripe has
> been with the sis6326 suppoer , and Lenz was on the ball and ststed upfront
> that there were problems on it and that xfree was working on it. Try that
> with Micky soft.
>
> >Because Linux can use our P266 machines with 32 and 64MB of RAM just
> >fine, and the 4.3 Bigfoots are also more than enough, ONE SuSE will do
> >the whole thing for $50.
>
> Hmm , think where you can spens the other 400,000 or so ???
> Last six months have been amazing , witha all the software and hardware
> manf jumping onto the fray. Its scary , immagine software and drivers for
> ever thing that work ,Billy will be in hot !@$#
>
> The majotr roadblock is application on the desktop. We need more apps. Give
> the apps , and some one will fix/deal with the install isues. Open source
> will allow this to happen.
>
> >According to Frank, $510,000 is about the same as $50. And my 95 yr old
> >mother-in-law is as beautiful as Cindy Lawford.
> >Even if we give each workstation a complete distro so they can have the
> >manual, which is well worth the cost, the total cost is only $10,000
> >which is still WAY BELOW the NT "solution".
> >--
> >To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> >this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
> >Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
> >archive at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
> >
> >
> --
> To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
> this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
> Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
> archive at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
--
To get out of this list, please send email to [EMAIL PROTECTED] with
this text in its body: unsubscribe suse-linux-e
Check out the SuSE-FAQ at http://www.suse.com/Support/Doku/FAQ/ and the
archive at http://www.suse.com/Mailinglists/suse-linux-e/index.html
