🚀 go-pugleaf

Rev Turd Fredericks wrote:
> Shenan Stanley wrote:
>> Bluuuue Rajah wrote:
>>> Everybody rightly criticizes Micro$tiff for selling a crappy OS, and
>>> Linux is obviuosly better, if you have the time and the expertise
>>> to use in it, but until this week I didn't understand exaclty why
>>> Windows is such a POS.
>>>
>>> When I had to uninstall the Google toolbar because Google installed
>>> an update tht I didn't ask for, which overrode IE5's ctrl-f
>>> command, the reason beame clear.  Windows' install/uninstall method
>>> causes bugs to accumulate, if programs are not ununstalled in
>>> precise the reverse order of which they were installed.
>>>
>>> The problem is that terrible method of saving old copies of system
>>> files, like .ini files, as backups, to be restored when software is
>>> uninstalled.  So the more apps you uninstall, out of order, the
>>> buggier your system becomes, until you finally have to reinstall
>>> the OS.
>>>
>>> Linux apparently doesn't have anything resembling this problem,
>>> which makes me wonder, how did the Linux designers (Torvald?)
>>> handle this problem, and can we learn anything from their solution
>>> to help minimize the problem with Windows?
>>>
>>> Your thoughts?
>>
>> I think you have made gross generalizations based off personal 
>> experience - which are usually proven inaccurate (at best.)
>>
>> I utilize many different operating systems (and flavors/versions of 
>> said operating systems) and if there is a single OS that is not 
>> lacking in one or more (mostly more after years of use on any given 
>> OS) ways, I have yet to come across it.  Many times - some of the 
>> 'problems' found could have been avoided with experience and know-how 
>> on the part of the user - which is acceptable in most cases because I 
>> don't believe someone whould 'hold my hand' in everything I do.  Also 
>> - many times - it is a 'personal' issue with the OS - meaning it won't 
>> do something the end-user believes it *should* do.
>>
>> As far as your gross generalizations - I have a system I have been 
>> running since Windows XP was released.  It has been through two 
>> different sets of hardware, several hardware failures, many *MANY* 
>> installations and software removals and is now finally running as a 
>> VirtualBox machine on top of my Windows Vista and Windows Vista x64 
>> Ultimate machines.  I have *not* had to 'reinstall my OS' (assuming 
>> you mean a clean installation) nor did it ever slow down in any way I 
>> did not expect (when you upgrade applications, seldom do they actually 
>> utilize less resources than their prior versions...)
>>
>> In my specific experience - Windows (XP, Vista and some prior versions 
>> to a certain extent) are fairly stable operating systems that have 
>> given me personally little trouble.  I've thrown a lot at them - and 
>> my experience is not limited to just the applications I utilize on a 
>> daily basis nor is my experience limited to just one or two hardware 
>> configurations (I would put myself in the thousands (possibly tens of 
>> thousands), easily, as far as how many different hardware 
>> configurations I have had to deal with in the years since Windows XP 
>> was first released alone.)  I also pull from the experience of those 
>> whose systems I have cleaned up from a mess or setup initially - in 
>> that they seldom have the same trouble after a little configuration 
>> and a little tutoring on how to properly utilize their system.
>>
>> YMMV.
>>
> After your assertion that personal experience is "inaccurate (at best)", 
> your whole post has become a meaningless diatribe.

actually he has eloquently described why every major o/s has the same 
fundamental flaw: feature creep and bug-fix/ patches.....in other words, 
bloatware.
I can only hope that his follow- up post will be an announcement of a 
new o/s he and/or some friends built from the ground up.