Best version of XP for Comcast

The first time an

Yeah but it won't be formatted or reinstalled by the that user. He'll need to pay someone to do it.

Therein is a problem: there are two groups of people... those who are technically savvy and those who aren't.

So this problem isn't new. Of the males who read this group, how many have spouse who can program a VCR? Or explain how a microwave oven cooks? Or any other of a thousand events of every day life? My wife is a college graduate (honors no less) from a major university and can't do ANY of the things I've mentioned. But she manages to click the mouse on her Red Hat box just fine (I installed it).

}Yes, all of this is true...but, for the rest of us (non-Linux types) that }REALLY use a computer for then just going "ga-ga" over the best OC speed, or }new "self-written" Liuux driver, Windows is a Godsend! I cut my teeth on a }DEC PDP-11/44 running RSTS-E, lost my virginity on a IBM System 36/W running }a sub-set of AT&T Unix - System IV, and had my head bashed in on a Micro-VAX }running VMS! Most of you that tink Linux is soooooo cool were even aware of }what REAL system code looks like until recently. I know some Fortran hackers }that would put most of you to shame! So, while I'm not a Win-Tel fan and }Gates fanatic, just acknowledge the contribution that Windows had made for }the rest of us. }

}> > 91% of windows sofware runs on Linux using Codeweavers. :) }> >

}>

}>

}> And 83.27% of statistics are made up. }>

}> -- }> Warren H. }>

}> ========== }> Disclaimer: My views reflect those of myself, and not my }> employer, my friends, nor (as she often tells me) my wife. }> Any resemblance to the views of anybody living or dead is }> coincidental. No animals were hurt in the writing of this }> response -- unless you count my dog who desperately wants }> to go outside now. }> Blatant Plug: "The Simpsons" 2005 Calendars and Books: }>

}>

}>

I'm with you - just because Windoze is prolific - doesn't make it a godsend.

I had a MicroVax and we ran Ultrix-32 on it - nice little machine. I even wrote a driver for a telemetry frame-sync'ing piece of hardware for it. Real nice package when done for realtime telemtry.

While I don't find everything wrong with Windoze, there is enough wrong with it not to cause me to praise it. If the same effort had been put into UNIX, we'd be farther ahead.

Yes, all of this is true...but, for the rest of us (non-Linux types) that REALLY use a computer for then just going "ga-ga" over the best OC speed, or new "self-written" Liuux driver, Windows is a Godsend! I cut my teeth on a DEC PDP-11/44 running RSTS-E, lost my virginity on a IBM System 36/W running a sub-set of AT&T Unix - System IV, and had my head bashed in on a Micro-VAX running VMS! Most of you that tink Linux is soooooo cool were even aware of what REAL system code looks like until recently. I know some Fortran hackers that would put most of you to shame! So, while I'm not a Win-Tel fan and Gates fanatic, just acknowledge the contribution that Windows had made for the rest of us.

^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^ ROTFLMFAO! Please warn me before you make such hilarious statements. I spreayed my Guinness all over my keyboard and screen with that one! You should look into a career in comedy!

What model Micro-VAX was used to bash in your head? I'd tend to think that if your head was truly bashed in with a MicroVAX, you wouldn't be here typ- ing your praises of that s**te from Redmond. Apparently, however, the model was large enough to cause you permanent brain-damage since you seem to view the dirge of computing advancement (a la Weendoze) as some godsend . I'm still ROTF with that... you're too funny!

And what impressive achievement has Unix produced in the last 30 years?

It's called "Mac OS X"...

If only it would run on a real computer. -Dave

But that's my point. If it's so great, let Apple release a version for IBM-compatible clones. Then we'll really see if it can cut the mustard. People like to bash windows and claim that Mac OS's are better. We'll never know, because you can't run OS X on anything that MOST computer users would want to buy. -Dave

Hey, at least it doesn't run on the s**te with intel inside. What more do you want?

Well the latest figure I can find (07/04) shows Apple market share at 3.7%. Other figures I found range from 1% to just over 2%. Apple is aiming for

Most computer users want a cheap machine that will run all of their favorite applications and games, and allow them to connect to the Internet. Roughly

I don't doubt people covet your Powerbook G4. Heck, *I* covet it, as my own two laptops are real pieces of s*it (but that has nothing to do with the OS they are running). And I'd be quite happy with a Powerbook, as it would do everything I need it to do while I'm travelling. I wouldn't consider using an Apple computer at home, though. There are just too many limitations, as far as hardware upgrades and available software goes.

Apple needs to license it's OS for clone use. Until then, Apple will only have a very small minority of market share, which is even more than Apple deserves. -Dave

Oh? What would MOST computer users want to buy? Every computer user that has seen my Powerbook G4 17" laptop covets it for {him/her}self.

I now have a dual processor Itanium box in my possession. This is the very first (intel inside) box for me and damn is its console brainfucked. OSX may not run on it but VMS does and far better than any Billy$hite Weendoze.

Who would outlay in excess of $10K for a box to run wintendo anyway.

Here in comp.dcom.modems.cable, "Dave C." spake unto us, saying:

The above is probably true in most cases. However...

I suspect the large majority of those users have no clear understanding (or even basic knowledge in many cases) about existing alternatives.

That's a judgement call you have to make for yourself. :-)

Then again, the fact that Windows currently requires some knowledge to use in a secure manner seems to suggest that it might be a relatively poor platform choice for users who are not computer literate.

Have I ever used an OS? Many years ago, my primary workstations were microvax boxes. I've also run various flavors of linux for years. And I'm an IT professional from the early days of DOS. I'm not much of a gamer though. And I'm no fan of Microsoft. So ironically, I'm one of the few computer users who might be better off with a MAC. But I prefer my own home-built PCs, currently running Windows XP Pro.

Oh, I got my statistics straight from Apple press releases. So if anything, the statistics I quoted might be a bit optimistic. Bottom line, very few people who own computers choose to run MAC OS anything. That's probably due to the lack of hardware upgrades and limited selection of software.

A Mac is like some wicked expensive futuristic automobile that runs on fuel that is not widely available. It could be argued that the best PCs hope to be as reliable as Macs someday. It could also be argued that nobody gives a damn, as hardly anybody wants to buy Macs anyway. Just like a used SUV is more appropriate for a large family than a brand new sports car, IT DOESN'T MATTER how good a MAC is. You can drive your sports car, just don't be surprised that most people are buying systems that are a bit more useful . . .. even if some of them cost more than a MAC.

Again, OS X needs to be released in a form that will run on non-proprietary hardware. Unless that happens, it would be better if MACs would fade into non-existence. MACs aren't needed for competition to keep PC prices down, as MACs don't compete in the same league, even. For the price of a MAC, you can build a heckuva nice wintel machine. Most people would probably never miss their MAC, either. Windows XP is good. It's not perfect, but it's good enough that there is no real need for a commercial alternative like OS X. If you had to, you could learn to live with a wintel machine. Really, it's not that terrible. -Dave

....and this market share means what? Please show me:

1. the source of these statistics you publish
2. the correlation between them and anything that has been discussed

Let me see, I think I've got it...

McDonald's has a bigger market share than Ruth's Chris or Morton's. Gotta be that McD's has the better food, right?

Bandwagoneering is no way to justify the quality of anything. 50E+9 flies eat s*it -- that doesn't dictate that you or I should consider it as a din- ing alternative.

There you go quoting statistics again... Please see request for information #1 above.

Reliable... Cheap... Quality... pick any two!

Games... sheesh! How old are you? Have you ever used an OS?

Please cite said limitations.

Why?

No, but they have cheaper and faster food.

To allow for competition thus reducing the prices and gaining market share.

You can make money like Ruth Chris selling $30 steaks or like MacD's selling 30 $1 burgers. When you need a quick bit of nourishment (well at least something to eat), you don't drive 40 miles to Ruth Chris (if there even is one in 40 miles) when there is a MacD accross the street.

Don't jump on my ass, I use Windoze and even though it sucks it has its uses. I just don't think it deserves all the glory some try to place on it. If they had hired the UNIX programmers out there and told them what they wanted instead of trying to create a cheap VMS for the masses, they would have had a much more robust product that used half the resources.

Well, roughly 97% of computer users would disagree with you on that point. But it's possible to be a minority of 1 and still be right. So you could be right. I'll go back to work using my good for nothing OS now. :) -Dave

Here in comp.dcom.modems.cable, "Carl C. Jackson" spake unto us, saying:

Knowledge is not intelligence, and it is usually accumulated through actual experience, not via any sort of inherent talent or ability.

If you would actually quote my message *in context*, I might have some general idea which statement of mine you're referring to.

(This is why I dislike top posting -- it makes it damn near impossible to engage in a point-by-point debate).

For the record, I said the following:

Do you disagree?

To clarify: I'm not faulting users for not having knowledge, I'm simply stating that many users do not possess a significant amount of computer knowhow, and that this lack of compupter knowledge can be harmful.

Perhaps I should spell things out more clearly:

(1) Windows XP and its bundled applictions (mainly Internet Explorer and Outlook), as preloaded and configured by most computer makers and vendors, provide a relatively insecure computing environment without a certain amount of additional tweaking.

(2) Most casual computer users have no interest in learning any more about their computers than they have to, so they are often not in a position to update/adjust their otherwise insecure systems to make them secure enough to interact safely on the internet.

(3) The end result of #1 and #2 is often a compromised machine.

Item #3 is usually directly detrimental to the original user of that machine, since it can adversely affect that user's ability to make any effective use of that machine.

Item #3 can also be detrimental to other machines on the internet if the compromised machine is used as a base for launching remove attacks against those other machines.

Windows is familiar, not user-friendly. User-friendly systems don't fail their users because of system exploits within hours (or minutes) of being connected to the internet in their default state...