Pepping Up Windows 428
PhairOh writes "Toms Hardware has an article about improving Windows with free and Open Source Software. It features everything from the obvious like Gimp and OpenOffice and also some interesting choices like Virtuawin. From the article: 'The average Windows user tends to be less than satisfied with Windows. And that's no surprise, either, given the rather woeful state of its default applications.'"
WinDir (Score:5, Informative)
It's really a fun little thing to look at and use.
IS this an on topic first post?
Re:WinDir (Score:5, Informative)
Re:WinDir (Score:4, Informative)
I dunno guys... I still prefer JDiskReport [jgoodies.com]. Admittedly it's not open source but it is freeware.
Either way this form of application is a lifesaver. I couldn't even begin to count how many times it's helped me find some weird temp file that got dumped somewhere and is now taking up a few hundred meg...
Re:WinDir (Score:3, Informative)
On an offtopic note, does anyone have any decent tools for removing the latest wave of homepage hijackers? Not CWS varients. I have about 3-4 calls for next week, and none of them are a CWS varient, and I don't feel like manually removing anything.
Linux Version (Score:4, Informative)
Dlugar
Re:Linux Version (Score:4, Interesting)
Re:WinDir (Score:3, Informative)
I hope it's on topic. I rely heavily on folks like you to tell me what software they find indespensible so I don't have to wade through as much crap to find the gems. I think that's what this article is all about.
Before this, my best source of open source on Windows was TheOpenCD. [theopencd.org] There's quite a bit of overlap with the Tom's Hardware article and I highly recommend it as a way to get many of these gems all in one place.
TW
Re:WinDir (Score:2)
I also use Duplic8 which is a program that searches for duplicate files by their size or name, and lets you delete the duplicate to free up disk space.
Re:WinDir (Score:5, Interesting)
Mac Equivalent: WhatSize (Score:3, Insightful)
Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:5, Insightful)
It's one thing to point out some nifty FOSS apps to people that may not have heard of them. It's an entirely another thing to jump on the anti-MS bandwagon and claim that this functionality should have been included in the OS.
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:5, Funny)
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:2)
In addition, Linux has a significant amount of software that's available for free to the user, due to its diverse community of developers. Windows has somewhat of a shareware community, but those are more leeches than anything. The best solidly-built freeware on Windows comes from Linux.
Microsoft doesn't have to write all the programs, or filter all the programs to do that. They j
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:2)
Firefox and OpenOffice are both competitive applications that are designed in a cross-platform fashion, but both projects admit that their focus is on Windows because that's the competitive environment that matters. Neithe
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:3, Informative)
But yeah, on the wider Windows stuff, it comes from the wider open source community, and isn't Linux only (eg. things like Inkscape [inkscape.org], Ethereal [ethereal.com], Orbiter [ucl.ac.uk], Celestia [shatters.net], Blender [blender3d.org], ...). They're all stand-outs, and they'll all either still be here with us in 20 years, or some better open-source software will have surpassed them.
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:3, Insightful)
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:2)
-everphilski-
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:5, Insightful)
Maybe they could make everyone happy by dropping their half-assed small apps and supporting some FOSS apps in Windows by default. It would be awesome to install Windows 2000 or XP and have the option to install GIMP, VLC, Crimson Editor, a better console, and a decent FTP client preloaded. OpenOffice would be nice too, but since MS-Office is big business, I could understand that being left out.
Actually, some of those small apps still do have roles... for instance, Paint vs. Gimp. Paint is perhaps 1% of Gimp, but Paint also opens almost instantly, and is perfect for dumping printscreens or copied bit of graphics (if only it had better save options). Notepad is similarly useful for dropping bits of text for later use, without firing up a larger, slower, ram-eating word processor. I don't really use either as an application to do work in, but I use them incessantly as buffers between other applications or documents.
They're sort of like pockets. My pockets don't get any work done for me, but if I'm out in the shed to find some bolts I need for the car, I can cram the bolts in my pockets, walk out front to the car, and proceed to completely mangle the car since I'm an awful mechanic. The pockets got the bolts there so I wouldn't need to take the car directly to them.
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:5, Insightful)
You know, if they did that, everyone would hate Microsoft for cashing in on the voluntary work of OSS guys..
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:2)
Integration versus Bundling, Choice (Score:5, Insightful)
Bingo. But the topic becomes integration versus bundling. There is nothing wrong with providing a tool, such as including a web browser, chat program, mail program, graphics program, word processor or so on.
The link is not between the operating system and the applications, but the act of choice.
The key to Linux is that inserting a CD doesn't give you every tool you could want, but rather you need to tell it what you want by selecting "hey- I need productivity tools" and clicking it. You need to go "hey I need to dialup to the Internet" and install modem and PPP tools.
Contrast that to windows XP that offers _NO_ choice to software installed. If you think there is choice, you're thinking of Windows 2000 or 98 where they let you check off whether you wanted media player and outlook express (be it that it may only hide them, it still does the same end effect for the user). Windows XP installs do not prompt for software inclusion (maybe if you start tweaking INF files...).
Media player just shows up as the default media player and takes over associations from time to time. IE pops up for a Web URL and has an icon on the desktop by default. An install of XP doesn't give the user a choice to say "you know what- FireFox is the browser for me. no thank you " and then install FireFox. It doesn't give you the option to decline installing media player. Sure you could go through a nest of confusing (to a new user) menus for Start | Settings | Control Panel | Add/remove components | system components | media tools followed by a very full dialog of information.
Given that, there is a degree of tools that are necessary and don't really compete with their counterparts. Notepad is a good example, as well as calculator. These are handy tools that don't mean a lot, and if you do need a powerful solution, you'll get UltraEdit or similar. These are arguably a part of the O/S that may or may not need removing.
So where am I getting at? The key reason why Microsoft got in trouble was it's INTEGRATION (IE as a part of the OS) and LACK OF CHOICE (media player installed by default) and not the fact that it was bundled on the CD. It's that no matter what a user thinks, IE is installed. That no matter what you say, you're getting a copy of media player that will always come up from time to time. That the user is not INFORMED that "hey- I have the option to install media player... maybe there are better/other players out there I should research and find something that is faster".
-M
Re:Integration versus Bundling, Choice (Score:3)
Re:Integration versus Bundling, Choice (Score:4, Insightful)
Not to mention that your comparisons are completely invalid. Including a bunch of physical things when you buy something is quite different than throwing a few extra things on a CD. As in the former costs a lot of money and the latter costs no money, unless you have to pay licensing fees. Damn, try to make a *little* sense at least.
Re:Integration versus Bundling, Choice (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:2)
I don't know how anyone can go "Microsoft can't include any good applications by default, so that's ok, we understand". It is not ok! Microsoft's monopoly means it has to play by different rules - and in this case, the rules are making its products worse.
It is true that MS Paint isn't powerful enough, and neither are any of the other utilities. And yes, better functionality s
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:3, Insightful)
1. They don't need to include all the programs that they do
2. The programs they do include are crap
The only real solution MS could move to is a plug-in model. Have a base OS that can be added to, as a user needs, with programs that not only integrate with the OS, but with other "plug-ins." But for that they'd either have to spend 5 years de-tangling their spaghetti code or just start over from scratch. In other words, it will never happen.
Re:Talking out both sides of out mouths. (Score:3, Interesting)
My Brother, The Windows Fanboy (Score:5, Interesting)
I guess there are still some ways that *NIX can influence Microsoft, but at this point everyone is using and recycling each other ideas. Few companies are actually building new and interesting interfaces.
Re:My Brother, The Windows Fanboy (Score:2)
how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:5, Interesting)
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:4, Insightful)
I know there is yum and apt, but my brother (and I assume this is true for people like him as well) has been using Windows for so many years that moving to another platform is equivalent to losing a pet animal: It is something he is just unprepared to consider.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:4, Interesting)
At least with most X11 toolkits you can go with a fairly standard Motif theme, if you really want consistency.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:4, Interesting)
It is funny that you had that observation because I was thinking the same thing when I was writing my post. I noticed that my brother and his circle of friends will often *avoid* apps that do not have the same theme/look as other Windows apps. They are completely locked in to the way Microsoft presents options to them.
If Vista breaks too much with the original thematic concept from the Win9X desktop (by brother and his friends opt for the Windows "Classic" theme), then he might refuse to upgrade.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
My brother likes Windows because he can always count on an app looking somewhat like all the other Windows apps. That may or may not be true, but the impression is what counts for him. He also likes how everything installs relatively easily.
How amusing, that is very close to some of the reasons I don't like Windows. On Windows programs are not standardized enough; not all programs have the same keyboard shortcuts for very standard functions, not all programs have preferences, version information, etc. i
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
Now, I know you said you know about Yum and Apt and don't think your brother would like them, but
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2, Insightful)
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2, Insightful)
As much as I like Unix-style systems, they aren't for everybody. I think we all need to be less of a [platform-x] advocate and more of a [platform-thats-really-best-for-the-particular-us e r] advocate.
To a lot of people, not having to even think about compatibility issues. They aren't "computer people", they just need to use this computer as a tool. They might not even like computers. For those people, as long as Windows is dominant, Windows may be their best choice. They don't want to use
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
Thank you, sir, for your excellent analogy. Not that it'll be helpful to the tons of
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:5, Funny)
Nine out of ten Slashdotters surveyed answered "a second mouse button."
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
And now that we are at it, please allow me this rant: I hate the way Ms Windows changed the presentation of the folders so when you open "my documents" you can not see the tree view, fortunately there is A BIG BUTTON called "FOLDERS" that lets you do that.
On Fedora Core (using Gnome's Nautius I think) when you open your documents you get a ne
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
"always open in browser windows"
is in some way similar to
"show the file system tree" or something?
It is like the MS Office "Configure Page" option under the "File" Menu (instead of the Format/Page that in this case OpenOffice got right
Who the heck design those menues anyway?
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
- hibernate works.
- sleep works.
- laptop undock works.
- wireless automatic network connection/disconnection/hunting works.
- windows automatically searches for new network parameters when waking up on a foreign network.
- changing display resolution doesn't require a logout/login.
- my iPod works.
- I can read the unfixated CDRs that my Sony camera produces.
- I can use IE to view those few sites/use those web apps that require it and use firefox for everything else.
The only thing that really bothers
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:4, Informative)
Why Windows?
Note that I'm not trying to convince you to use Linux, but I do want to correct some things:
- hibernate works.
Works fine on most laptops running Linux as well, though if you want to use the BIOS-driven hibernation, you may have to create the hibernate file from Windows. Personally, I really like the new Linux software suspend, in which the Linux kernel does the hibernation. It's faster and more flexible (including working on machines that don't have hibernation support). It's not, at present, easy to set up, though.
- sleep works.
Interestingly, in my experience, this actually works *better* with Linux than with Windows. My colleagues running Windows don't use sleep mode much, because our machines (various Thinkpad T40 series laptops) sometimes don't wake up. So they all shut down their OS. With Linux, I just close the lid, and have done so with several generations of laptops.
- laptop undock works.
Having never seen the point of docking stations, I can't comment here.
- wireless automatic network connection/disconnection/hunting works.
I think there are tools that solve this, but I can't really comment because I just use the command-line tools and script things to work the way I want them to. You may have a point here, I'm not sure.
- windows automatically searches for new network parameters when waking up on a foreign network.
You mean like DCHP? So does Linux. Actually, there are some nifty tools on Linux that will attempt to guess how to configure the network interface even when DHCP doesn't work.
- changing display resolution doesn't require a logout/login.
Doesn't on Linux any more, either. Changing color depth still does, though.
- my iPod works.
I don't have an iPod, but this [gtkpod.org] claims to work on Linux.
- I can read the unfixated CDRs that my Sony camera produces.
I don't have a camera that does that, so I can't really comment. That said, I would be very, very surprised if Linux couldn't deal with that as well.
- I can use IE to view those few sites/use those web apps that require it and use firefox for everything else.
Yeah, those sites suck. I run IE under WINE on my Linux box to deal with that. Works fine, even though I mutter through my teeth every time I'm forced to do it.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:4, Informative)
Are you high? A caveman can see the point of a docking station. It's a simple concept: when in the office, dock the laptop and use a traditional monitor, keyboard, mouse, usb, network, speakers -- anything. No hooking up a hundred different cables each time you come into work: just drop it in the dock. When it's time to go on-site, pop off the dock and go.
Linux: It Just Isn't Where Windows Is. (Score:4, Insightful)
The problem is that I spent a long time on hibernation, and while I could sometimes get it to stop properly, it almost never restarted properly.
For sleep mode, Linux would usually work; but again, not always. I have far fewer problems with Windows than I did with Linux.
For the network: I know that Linux will do DHCP. That's how mine was configured. My complaint was that if I managed to make the laptop go to sleep on network A, and it woke up on network B, I would have to manually do the ifdown/ifup dance. Windows seems to assume that if it has gone to sleep it needs to renegotiate the network config when it is woken up, which is a safe assumption much of time, and a harmless one the vast majority of the time.
I'll admit that I don't mess around with changing my display resolution much; except that when I am docked at the office, it seems silly to be stuck in a 1400x1280 60Hz display if I have a 1600x1400 85Hz capable monitor sitting right in front of me. And that, plus the real, full-sized keyboard, is the only necessary justification for docking; anything else is just gravy.
Regarding the CDRs: the unfixated disks require something called DirectCD (part of the Roxio suite of products) in order to read; nothing else has been able to read them on any platform I've tried. I was stunned too.
And I've tried WINE. I even paid for CrossOver. And there are still some things that don't work under it (the Cisco switch management applet thing is the current gate).
The point of all this is that yes, I could do much (perhaps all) of my list on Linux; however, I'm not an 18-year-old living in my mom's basement anymore. I have a life, a wife, and a child; I no longer have hours and hours on end to fiddle with this and tweak that or whatever. If I can get things done without the fiddling and fussing it works much better for me, and for my employer.
But keep hacking on this stuff. Once it all "just works", I'm sure I'll come back to it because I really hate Windows. I just need it right now.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2, Interesting)
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:3, Interesting)
I like the third party software, last time I was on a Mac there was absolutely no way to use videoconferencing with the three major IM platforms (Thats changed since iChat A/V came out, but is there anything availa
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
At work I use SuSE 9.2, and while it certaily offers some benefits, I would not consider running Linux on my Thinkpad anytime soon.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:5, Interesting)
It runs software (from Photoshop to World of Warcraft) that I want to run and does it on generic hardware.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
(Actually that's not totally true, because Apple at least has a base of "ambivalent regular users" that are on Mac because that's What People Use For Graphic Design.)
Like Linux, the Windows lovers tend to be programmers
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2, Insightful)
this lasted until i got a dvd drive/burner. dvd functionality in winxp is null -- then i put os X on my mac and now the win XP box gathers dust while the other 3 os x machines are the ones that get used. the bundled apps with os x are very cool (without trying to "dominate" the market). (for an extra bonus, dig through the applications directory in the osx10.4 dev folder. some r
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:5, Insightful)
I like windows. There.. I said it. Will anyone on /. actually continue to read my comment? Only time will tell....
And it's not just because I'm an MS fanboy either. It's a good operating system.
It's stable. It has gone BSOD on me a few times, and that was because I had a bad HP print driver that was bringing it down. I never feel a need to reboot it because its "getting sluggish". The programs that crash on my PC most frequently are Mozilla Firefox followed by Microsoft Outlook. In fact, I prefer when Outlook Crashes. It just restarts and repairs itself and I pick up where I left off. When FF crashes, I usually lose 10-20 tabs that I was looking at and will never recover.
The software is good. Despite /. popular opinion, MS Office is good software. I tried using OpenOffice once, and it was just as good. But the Mail Merge interface sucked, and that was an important feature for me.
It's faster. My 1.8ghz Celeron laptop with 192MB of ram runs Windows 100x better than Linux. Fedora Core takes significantly longer to start up and feels more sluggish when running applications (I use gnome, the FC default environment).
Easier to install applications. I think that's a given. Linux needs a better package installation system, period. Yum and apt are good, but they don't hold a candle. Windows' automatic updates are far superior to RHN
Configuration Utilities. They're just better in Windows. Period. The closest that I've ever had to get to a command line for Windows Administration is the "ipconfig" utility. Windows doesn't have nasty configuration files. I've only HAD to enter the registry to fix something (which is nasty) once.
Even when there is a GUI configuration tool in Linux, I have a hard time finding it in FC. There are at least two different interfaces to configure network adapters, but only one of those two interfaces can start/stop the network card. It just doesn't make sense.
As a disclaimer, I am not a sheltered Windows fanboy who has only ever tried Linux out for 5 minutes. I do all my my development for CS classes in Linux, and I am no stranger to the command line. I *do* run Linux on my laptop, but the most common way for me to interact with it is by running an X server on my windows machine and an ssh connection to the laptop.
I am convinced that Open Source development is a superior model, but I am not convinced that Linux is a superior system simply because it is an open source OS. At least not on the desktop.
What did you have problems with? (Score:2)
I mean, we can't do anything to help improve your Linux experience if you never tell us what exactly was wrong!
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:4, Insightful)
Windows itself isn't actually better in this regard (the operating system isn't necessarily better for gaming), but the net effect of its popularity is that more games are written for it.
I myself am not an avid gamer; I still play my Sega Genesis every now and then, and some freeware arcade games on my Mac. I spend most of my home computer time working with digital photography, writing, web browsing, and programming, all of which work great on a Mac. If I were an avid gamer, then a Mac probably wouldn't cut it for me.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? I DO! (Score:2)
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
Ok, it sounds like you're being sarcastic and trying to knock Windows for taking control from users.. but in Linux you have to switch to root to modify anything in \, so Linux takes a lot more control from the average user. Or were you trying to make fun of the fact that they don't take enough control from the average user? Because if so, you did a very poor job of it.
Re:how many people actually _like_ windows? (Score:2)
It only seems odd to you because you've gotten so used to not liking your OS that you've been forced to stop worrying about it.
But to those of using computers that actually help us do what we need, rather than getting in the way, "liking" an OS doesn't seem odd at all.
Virtuawin not necessary (Score:5, Informative)
I've been using it for awhile, it works pretty well.
http://www.microsoft.com/windowsxp/downloads/powe
Re:Virtuawin not necessary (Score:2)
Seemed to me like it was written by someone who had heard a description of a VDM but never actually used one.
Nevertheless I think both cygwin and a VDM are essential to make Windows useable. I've been using a shareware one for a while, which sort of works.
Re:Virtuawin not necessary (Score:3, Informative)
Re:Virtuawin not necessary (Score:2)
Re:Virtuawin not necessary (Score:2)
I use the windows power toys on my XP box at home. But the Windows app provides for exactly four desktops.
As someone who has 9 desktops hooked up to dual monitors at work, four is simply inadequate. I've got the screen real-estate equivelant to 18 screens, and most of the time, they're all full.
To those of us who have been using virtual desktops for 12+ years, they are a requirement to be able to use the
Microsoft's Virtual Desktop Manager is a bad app (Score:3, Informative)
Most of us looking for multiple desktops probably come from the Linux desktop world, and want many of those features: Keyboard navigation, edge flipping, an easy way to move application windows between virtual desktops and sticky windows.
Microsoft's Virtual Desktop Manager does none of this. In addition, it's pretty buggy-- switching between virtual desktops can leave many artificts on the screen, the toolbar for each virtual desktop may actu
Re:Virtuawin not necessary (Score:2)
There's a "light" freeware version available.
Oh and the website is terrible. Be warned.
Cygwin and Emacs (Score:3, Interesting)
Re:Cygwin in general... (Score:3, Insightful)
If you want a dedicated terminal emulator replacemet for the truly sorry Windows telnet and HyperTerminal programs, Simon Tatham's PuTTY [greenend.org.uk] is an excellent choice. It also includes a solid scp (secure copy/ftp) client.
Cygwin in particular is what keeps me from chucking the whole thing and running Linux. I get all the comm
Transformation through OSS (Score:5, Insightful)
This is a bitter-sweet pill. It's great that OSS is making the Windows platform so rich, it bad that it's creating inertia to change platform entirely.
I'd have switched to Linux a long time ago if the application stack for Windows hadn't been so greatly improved
by the army of budding OSS developers. Progress is being made though. I'll never use Microsoft Office again now that
I've fallen in love with Open Office 2.0.
It's no so much Open Office that made my mind up, it's the fact that we've got OpenDocument. OpenDocument is far more important that anyone really realises right now.
Why is it important? Well, I used to work for a company that wanted a web based way of doing sales quotes. The problem is that you need a nice document at the end where they can enter a bunch of text so that it feels tailored to that particular contract.
With Word this involved a bunch of mailmerging with the horrible Telemagic database with a bunch of Macros to create the document. With OpenDocument I can generate the base document itself from the database using any language of my choice. I can even add my own XML namespace so I can denote sections of the document that
were generated automatically and those that were added by the user.
The power of OpenDocument is not just in the ability to switch Office suites although that is obviously nice. It's in the ability for application developers to author and manipulate documents in powerful ways that simply aren't possible with macros or mail-merges.
OSS, through it's openness, is threatening to transform computing just like the PC transformed business. It's fucking awesome.
Simon.
Re:Transformation through OSS (Score:3, Insightful)
Then the platform is not worth changing. I use Windows at work an Linux on most of my home machines (minus the wife's computer and the TV box). I've got to say that from a stability perspective, there's not much different between the two anymore. (I'd still LOVE to have a kill -9 for Windows.) I prefer Linux. I use it at home. It just doesn't run all the apps I need it to for wor
Re:Transformation through OSS (Score:2)
kill -f using kill.exe from the resource kit?
Re:Transformation through OSS (Score:2)
Then the platform is not worth changing.
Isn't it odd, though, that another platform has to better enough that a user must choose to change it to something else? If you buy a machine, with very few exceptions, it comes with Windows on it. This is because of probably illegal, predatory business practices. If the user was always given a choice at time of purchase to pick their OS, and then charged the full price for it and MS was not allowed to subsidize that cost with money they made by pre-installing th
Re:Transformation through OSS (Score:2)
1: Those very same applications that you're used to are most likely available on Linux. (or *bsd)
2: Do you really want to take your money and use it to make Bill G, Steve B, et al richer and you poorer, next time Microsoft decides it's time for an upgrade?
My suggestions: (Score:5, Interesting)
IrfanView [irfanview.com] (freeware) for image browsing and very basic manipulation, like gamma correction or applying photoshop filters
Re:My suggestions: (Score:5, Insightful)
I'm fine... (Score:2, Interesting)
Windows gives alot of room for 3rd party developers to make money off of the lack of default applications. There's room for improvement and so people make those improvements and then are able to earn a living off of it. If the OS were to come with 4 copies of every imaginable type of software it would come on too many discs, be bloated, and leave no room for a developer to make money from their work. Yay linux! Reducing the softwar
Re:I'm fine... (Score:2)
Re:I'm fine... (Score:2)
Or maybe a commercial game? I don't think tuxracer made other games obsolete.
With Linux, you are only limited by YOUR creativity, which can be frightening.
Speed reading (Score:3, Funny)
Re:Speed reading (Score:2)
You can't have it both ways (Score:4, Insightful)
They're less statisfied because of the woeful default applications, unlike Linux you have to buy/download all your additional tools.
However when Microsoft tries to bundle things with the OS to solve this problem (think IE), they're demonized for being a monopoly and trying to leverage their OS to cut out the competition.
So which is it? Do we want an all-in-one OS and application suite or do we want a distinct separation of the OS from it's applications to prevent abuse.
I am NOT defending MS. I'm personally on the side that they're exploiting a monopoly. However this means you can't expect everything to "be there" when you're finished installing Windows.
Just a random ponder.... I wonder when M$ or others will accuse SuSE or RH of trying to stiffle the competition by bundling apps with the OS.
</devil's advocate>
Re:You can't have it both ways (Score:5, Insightful)
However when Microsoft tries to bundle things with the OS to solve this problem (think IE), they're demonized for being a monopoly and trying to leverage their OS to cut out the competition.
This is true, to an extent. There are people who think Microsoft shouldn't bundle apps, and there are people who think that they should. However, bundling applications is just one of the issues that cause people to claim Microsoft is abusing a monopoly.
It's not just the fact that they bundle their own applications. It's that they:
- refuse to bundle anyone else's application under any circumstances. The fact that IE comes pre-installed, and Firefox doesn't, provides a big advantage for IE.
- make it impossible for you to remove their applications (at least in any supported way).
- refuse to document the APIs that their own apps use, thereby allowing their own applications greater integration with the OS than other developers are capable of doing.
- are suspected of purposefully sabotaging other applications by making changes to their undocumented APIs, file formats, and protocols.
Perhaps there are other concerns too.There are some that believe Microsoft should either cease bundling their own applications or start bundling alternatives as well, providing an option for users. I can see why people would want this, but I can also see a valid objection from Microsoft that if they bundle 3rd party applications, Microsoft would then have to provide support for products that they don't control. I don't think it would kill them, though, to throw a copy of Firefox on and put a disclaimer that it won't be supported by Microsoft.Either way, I suspect that if Microsoft provided a means of uninstalling their applications (or not installing them in the first place), just like any other program, and documented all their APIs, protocols, and file formats, then a lot of the criticism would go away.
One word (Score:3, Informative)
I know an even easier way to pep up windows... (Score:2)
Anyone else use sDesk? (Score:2, Informative)
It works amazingly fast and supports sticky windows, draging windows from one desktop to another, dekstop names, any number of virtual windows, short cut keys for any window. Lots of features than I have not seen in any other pager for Windows.
Paint.NET (Score:5, Interesting)
Are you sure? (Score:5, Insightful)
At the very least I'd like to see compelling evidence supporting the statement. "The average user" is probably frustrated with computing in general, "the average user" hasn't tried any other operating system, and in my experience, when "the average user" tries another platform, the initial frustration spike caused by evertyhing being slightly different, is enough to see them run back to suckle at the Microsoft's corporate teat.
I sometimes feel I'm in a silent majority here, who actually acknowledges that all their average user friends except the arty kid, not only user windows, but haven't even considered anything else.
I am (Score:3, Interesting)
I tried Linux for half a year, really tried to like it. Ended up with a Mac, and now I like using a computer again.
Heh, and Windows is even worse once you've used OS X.
One word (Score:2)
Couple programs I like (Score:3, Informative)
TClockEx [rcis.co.za] - A nice little desktop utility that lets you configure the format of the system tray clock any way you want. (Note: Does not look good in XP unless you use the classic theme)
TheOpenCD (Score:2, Informative)
Virtual Desktop options (Score:2, Interesting)
Can't say enough good things about GIMP (Score:2)
I use GIMP to create "faux" movie posters for my website (http://sunandfun.blogspot.com/ [blogspot.com]).
GNUWINII & The Open CD (Score:2, Informative)
In addition to all the lovely foss for windows, the only closed source program I ever recommend is nLiteXP .
And that, my friends (Score:2)
...is what you should really compare the GIMP to. MSPaint, -not Photoshop-.
I've seen so many people who say things like "I normally use $X-thousand paint program, but I thought I'd try out GIMP. It sucks because X, Y, Z."
Sure, critisism is needed to keep the project moving forward, but the comparison isn't very fair.
Meanwhile, the many people who migrate from MSPaint and similar featurless "free" paint programs are generally quietly happy which makes the prior type of opinions overrepresented.
PuTTY (Score:3, Informative)
It also includes an scp implementation so you can securely transfer files between your Windows system and Unix boxes.
(Perhaps a niche market, but XKeymacs [hi-ho.ne.jp] is useful for Emacs junkies stuck with Windows applications... there's also the Windows ports of GNU Emacs and XEmacs of course.)
Re:No Kidding (Score:2)
I guess they get some sort of incentives to put commercial (and, in my computer, some trial versions of commercial) software on PCs they sell. Maybe they'd get some marginal profit if I converted my trials from my PC. Every businessman and their mom loves getting a piece of profit from someone else's sales.
Then again, I don't work for Dell et al., so consider this a POMA* thought.
*Pulled-Out-My-Ass
Re:Another delusional zealiot (Score:4, Funny)
The majority of Windows users don't know any better.
Hell, that's Microsoft's business model.
Re:Recommend me a good, free, text editor! (Score:2)
Re:Recommend me a good, free, text editor! (Score:2)
Re:Recommend me a good, free, text editor! (Score:2)
Re:Windows is an OS. Applications are applications (Score:2)
One doesn't "pep up" Windows with applications. Windows is an "Operating System". OpenOffice and Gimp are "Applications".
That is only one perspective. Windows is an OS, but it is also a platform. It is an environment within which users experience computer interaction. Adding applications that change that user experience can be said to be "pepping up" the Windows environment.