> That doesn’t mean you’re free of bias. If anything it means the opposite.
Maybe, but at least i know what i talk about. You observe from the outside and talk about "meme-level bad"? do you believe anything BILD and AZ writes?
> “Limux worked” and “we solved a whole ton of problems and had to implement printing dialogs, QT interfaces and more” feel like statements somewhat at odds with each other. Were all these bug fixes complete on day one or did they have to be done after the Limux switch had been made?
again, damned if you do, damned if you dont:
Linux can do something, which windows cannot || : eh, wo cares
Linux can do what Windows can: oh, they just copy windows, windows is surely better.
Windows can do, what linux cannot do (perhaps it does it in another way): linux is not ready!!!!
Linux implements stuff, features or bugfixes: linux is not ready!
Funny thing is: we often implemented requirements which were dropped, if windows could not fulfill them. NOBODY said windows is not "ready". Ready for which value?
> Obviously I’m an outside observer here but boasting that you had to do a whole ton of work including network management and that no one has done much to it since makes it sound to me like maybe Linux isn’t or wasn’t ready.
This was 5 to 15 years ago. Windows also had a lot to improve in that time. Do you say then, that Windows was also not ready?
And we not only did Bugfixes but also Improvements (the network manager stuff was one such thing).
There was a time, when Linux for public institutions was not ready. But that time is long gone. (conservatively 5 years i would say, some would say more).
I see shortcomings, but there are those also with Windows. But nobody says "Windows is not ready". And that makes me kinda angry, especially if people do not know what they are talking about with "meme-level bad" or "brutally disaster". That's just outright lying and makes people angry who poured their soul into making it work for the users.
Because we also trained users on the plattform, even with libreoffice, so we could get their feedback.
> Linux can do something, which windows cannot || : eh, wo cares
Exactly.
We who have used Linux for a while have had fun a couple of times before asking if Windows is ready for our desktops and the answer was most often a resounding no.
Lately I've made do with just Windows and WSL and to be honest, it still isn't ready for my desktop.
Recently my laptop had overheated in the bag a number of times.
Knowing I would probably have some work to do to work around Microsofts new "bake your laptop feature" (also known as "modern standby") permanently, I dug into power settings.
The reason this has been more problematic recently became very clear immediately: some recent software update has managed to set action on closing lid to "Do nothing".
If this was Linux there would be a major outcry about how it is not ready for ordinary users.
For Windows it is an ordinary Tuesday.
Same goes for a lot of other things: waiting for half a minute before git returns (admittedly on a collection of 500 files, but still), it is just the way it is.
Still can't match apt-get or any other package manager? Deal with it.
30% longer compiles? You are welcome.
Ads on the logon screen of my work PC with Professional license? Of course. Same with ads in my start menu and even in Soltaire like in some cheap Android app. Yep.
Nope. Except maybe growth hacked by some department at Microsoft who doesn't have to answer to the "brand" department.
(If you think about it: which hacker would add bing ads and ads for Microsoft games to the login screen? And the Start menu ads for Candy Crush is so well known you can find it using your preferred search engine.)
> That doesn’t mean you’re free of bias. If anything it means the opposite.
Maybe, but at least i know what i talk about. You observe from the outside and talk about "meme-level bad"? do you believe anything BILD and AZ writes?
> “Limux worked” and “we solved a whole ton of problems and had to implement printing dialogs, QT interfaces and more” feel like statements somewhat at odds with each other. Were all these bug fixes complete on day one or did they have to be done after the Limux switch had been made?
again, damned if you do, damned if you dont:
Linux can do something, which windows cannot || : eh, wo cares
Linux can do what Windows can: oh, they just copy windows, windows is surely better.
Windows can do, what linux cannot do (perhaps it does it in another way): linux is not ready!!!!
Linux implements stuff, features or bugfixes: linux is not ready!
Funny thing is: we often implemented requirements which were dropped, if windows could not fulfill them. NOBODY said windows is not "ready". Ready for which value?
> Obviously I’m an outside observer here but boasting that you had to do a whole ton of work including network management and that no one has done much to it since makes it sound to me like maybe Linux isn’t or wasn’t ready.
This was 5 to 15 years ago. Windows also had a lot to improve in that time. Do you say then, that Windows was also not ready?
And we not only did Bugfixes but also Improvements (the network manager stuff was one such thing).
There was a time, when Linux for public institutions was not ready. But that time is long gone. (conservatively 5 years i would say, some would say more).
I see shortcomings, but there are those also with Windows. But nobody says "Windows is not ready". And that makes me kinda angry, especially if people do not know what they are talking about with "meme-level bad" or "brutally disaster". That's just outright lying and makes people angry who poured their soul into making it work for the users.
Because we also trained users on the plattform, even with libreoffice, so we could get their feedback.