Let's face it. Windows does do some thing better.

[Yuki Cuss]

Billy Verreynne (JW) wrote:

>"Senectus ." <senectus at gmail.com> wrote:
>
>  
>
>>I'd have to disagree with you.
>>_Windows_ does nothing better than Linux.
>>    
>>
>
>New to the list, but you must be local Linux zealot I take?
>
>Windows does things _differently_. And that is why it does certain
>things better than what Linux does. And vice versa. E.g. do you call
>the hack what X has become better than the MS GDI?
>
>  
>
>>It's the fact that there is _so_ much written for Windows, and the
>>    
>>
>fact that the
>  
>
>>standard is a Windows standard that keeps people from swapping over.
>>    
>>
>
>End-users do not care about IEEE and other standards.. Or  about Open
>Source. Or whether one o/s has a "better" memory model/threading
>model/file system/whatever than the other o/s. They want something
>that works for them. And Windows is getting better and better at
>working for dumb users.
>
But these things impact the performance of the system. They *do* care 
about that. If Open Source ends up producing more secure systems, which 
perform better and are hacked less, end-users *do* care.

(and the Windows GDI is horrible, come on!)

 - Yuki.