# Windows vs Linux [It's own thread]

Discussion in 'Computer Science & Culture' started by Vkothii, Jul 31, 2008.

Not open for further replies.
1. ### VkothiiBannedBanned

Messages:
3,674
Yes, well seeing how Japan invented the transistor, and were the first to use radio, that would explain it?

Messages:
10,342
It's a big market place, and there are several niches. MS have theirs, OS and Applications, and it makes them $44Bn a year. IBM have several, Hardware, OS's, Applications, consulting, etc etc, and it makes them about twice as much. HP similar money, but do you notice, to make more money, you need to have fingers in ever more markets? IBM's future was not guaranteed, and they were one of the largest companies in IT, but have had to restructure and diversify, and latterly streamline again. Same for HP. I'm not saying MS will last for ever, but as their revenue is$44 BILLION, vs Red Hat's $238 million, I don't think they have a whole lot to worry about just yet from that corner. If they did think that, they'd have bought them already. You also seem to forget that one of the first OS's MS delivered was Xenix! They already played the Unix on the PC architecture game, and if they wanted, could easily do so again, but why bother, when I can install 'Services or Unix' on my MS OS and have scripting and NFS file sharing capability! Of course, there's a wider picture, and companies need a niche, and some long term plan, and some diversity to weather the marketplace. Many companies have sunk, or been swallowed, I have never denied that. YOU seem to be making that your fight, but it's fallacious. The argument was MS revenue, and Linux being the most prevalent OS. Two claims you have made, and twice you've been wrong. 4. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement to hide all adverts. 5. ### CharonZRegistered Senior Member Messages: 786 Oh wow. Which year are we stuck right now? 6. ### Google AdSenseGuest Advertisement to hide all adverts. 7. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 I've been wrong, twice, according to someone who looks through the smallest pair of blinkers they can find; who then admits linux has a much greater spread overall, given how many actual systems there are (that aren't PCs or servers or laptops, like every other blinkered CS type here keeps insisting is the only thing a computer can be), given how many manufacturers have adopted linux and the idea of a small robust kernel, or redesigned it, rebuilt the monolithic design to include realtime features; have no idea what sort of influence that paradigm has had and how popular the linux paradigm is in the industrial world - that's the one MS doesn't control; goes on about linux having to conform to a GPL, which I don't give a rat's ass about. In short, decides from the outset what I'm saying, when I'm not saying any such thing. But I'll say it again: I think MS OS will not survive, the NT paradigm has been shoehorned by them into a design that is way too inefficient, the graphics level takes far too much processing and the way MS designed it was essentially the "just get it to work" approach. They have the large games market and their messy systems sw, that is required to get all those expensive apps going. IOW, they may have to abandon NT and start again (they may well be planning something like this, I'd say they aren't as blinkered as the people at this forum are about computers and software, what it is and how it works). 8. ### BlindmanValued Senior Member Messages: 1,425 My poor friend you must never had the chance to write software. MS's IDE's are state of the art, C# a masterpiece and DX9/DX10 technological excellence. Many try but MS has learnt to keep us programmers happy, and with that have provided the most extensive range of software for any OS. Ha Ha its more like "make it work better then anything else". Do you know how many people MS employs, Do you know the standards that are required. Don't you know that well paid motivated employs always produce superior products.. Have fun on your OS as I really enjoy the one I use. We are not worthy Microsoft... LOL Please Register or Log in to view the hidden image! 9. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 i just bet u do. the one with all the really good design features; with no added on bits to make it work with games; or essentially a product that started out as a well-designed VM OS, and ended up like Vista. You think you've got stuff to chuckle about. Name more than one product that MS ever invented...? Do you want to know what designing and software means? Do you know what a finite-state grammar is? An ATN one? Could you design a compiler that was able to assemble code for a range of 8-16 bit architectures, with varied instruction sets and extensions, like the 6502, or the 8086, and any generic Intel 8-bit cpu? How about an extendable, extensible one (you just have to write a new state-table) to add new chips or instruction sets? That works in essentially one pass? No? "toot", "toot"... Last edited: Aug 15, 2008 10. ### phlogisticianBannedBanned Messages: 10,342 I hope you aren't referring to me, because you would be telling lies again. The most pervasive OS is ITRON. Stop telling lies about Linux. LIAR! YOU never qualified the debate, YOU assumed you were right and knew some hidden truth, that you could play as a trump card, but didn't see ITRON blew your bullshit away. I called you on your bullshit in post #47; "I never said that either. I have a PDA, there are smartphones. Hell there's even a microprocessor in my washing machine. You are saying people say that, but it's a lie." NOT as popular as ITRON. Counter to your claims and attempted redefinition of the debate. 'Linux' conforms to the GPL. 'Linux derivatives', ...well, as Linux took tools from GNU, how much of what do you need to qualify a distro as 'Linux'? The linux kernel? But you have mentioned that the kernel has been redesigned, so it's not the same open source Kernel! All you really have, is an assertion that open source software is quite popular. WELL DUH! How many times no? MS lost money replacing dead X-Box consoles. Halo-3 was the first game to turn a decent profit for them. So, MS make money from folks buying PC's to run games on. To infer this means they have a 'large' share of the 'games market' is like saying that TV manufacturers do, because you need to attach a TV to a games console! Having written software on MS platforms, it's far from 'messy'. The API's are a breeze to use, and I created a nice simple app that suited my purpose in weeks, with a web front end, database back end, and all transactions being queued nicely. It was like building with LEGO. Abandon? Maybe. What would that prove? None of your other assertions. I rather think they will redesign, but they need to keep backward compatability to retain market share. Anyway, do you have a point you can prove, or are you just going to spout more rhetoric? 11. ### BlindmanValued Senior Member Messages: 1,425 Ha ha ha.. Mate I cut my teeth on those cpu's at 13 when I was writing assemble for them. I currently do a few embedded systems for robot toys. No OS but then I would never conider the code for a custom robot toy as an OS. From the initial interrupt to the final shut down the robot is under only my code. 8086 is a Intel pile of shit compared to the 6502 which I first used on a OZ computer called the VZ200 4K RAM 4K ROM .97MHZ. CPU's did not become fun until the 68000 in the late 80's. Dang Intel for thier still shit CPU's 12. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 Ok, but you seem to have no idea what I'm talking about: designing, and building, a compiler using all that stuff I mentioned before -- this was so some engineers could develop control systems code on a mini, and keep all their work on it - I built them this thing called a state-table compiler, then I used that to build another compiler that worked with all their designs, all their cpus, and could be extended - that was why I did it that way. So do you know what an ATN grammar is, or why it's any good for setting up languages, like assemblers? Apart from C#, and how to use Windows do you know any languages that matter? I had to train this engineer dude how to write a new transition network for a machine (both products needed extensive documentation, but I essentially made the overall assembler look like one they were familiar with, they never told anyone, but it was fairly full-featured, with every extension to the basic set of declarations in it I had time to add in - possibly my magnum opus that sucker); I don't just know a few languages (and architectures) I know how to make them up too. Last edited: Aug 15, 2008 13. ### BlindmanValued Senior Member Messages: 1,425 He he he .. Yep fine 8086 is the bee's knees ha... I guess not. MS IDE 2008 does it matter what language you use.. 14. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 Do you know what a language is - for a computing machine - then, or not? You would say there's a difference between assembling machine instructions, and writing code for a compiler, say? P.S. what's with the 8086? It was the first Intel chip with 16-bit extensions; the 186, 286, were also 16-bit architecture, right? Why would engineers want more than 8 or 16-bit controllers? You know what a controller is, right? Or just what C# is? Last edited: Aug 15, 2008 15. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 One more stab at it then Blindman? So you've used an assembler to write code, for Motorola and Intel cpu sets? Have you modified any [language] compilers, even on the fly, or the quick and dirty "compile object extensions into the program" way? You would have used a text-based paradigm when the robo-design got put together - a text file you passed to a compiler, an "assembler" is what they usually call one --? 16. ### darksidZzValued Senior Member Messages: 4,922 Well, linux isn't there yet.............................yet. But it's so very close it's like touching Windows. When it's been perfected abit longer then we'll see people switching over in droves just to keep the hardware they have instead of upgrading to the next thing. 17. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 If you're talking about PCs, maybe that's the case in the home/office markets; PCs and the stuff that runs on them aren't like lawnmowers, but that's what people want, and that's what the industry tries to deliver. I just think, despite MS's efforts, it can't manage to provide a simple, easy to use, foolproof, recoverable OS that degrades gracefully, nor have the linux distributors managed it. Because PCs aren't lawnmowers, mainly; and because mostly people have an inaccurate idea about what they are, how complicated it all is, how it's a bit miraculous the thing goes at all. How people write programs, which means it's impossible to say that programs are faultless - they aren't and they won't be, we can only approach some limit. The hardware side is more rigorous, designs have to fit tighter bounds. 18. ### BlindmanValued Senior Member Messages: 1,425 Text based indeed. I wrote my code on paper, then using the instruction set listed in a expensive book, I wrote out the hex for the code. As that machine only had a basic interpreter, i wrote a program to poke the values I wrote down into memory, then poked the start address into the overflow interrupt and did a divide by zero to lauch my code. I wrote a game in assembly for the 386 that had a self modifying graphics pipe. That is, data and code where integrated. It was faster the write the code to draw a sprite on the fly then have the code generalized. So I guess that the quickest and dirtest compile you could think of. Written in 1994 and still works on Vista. And more much more, 6502, 8086,80286-80486,68000,(Texas Instruments) T34010, (IMOS) T800 and a verity of 4-32 bit controllers. I have not had the opportunity to do assembly on a 64bit cpu but I just dont bother anymore as its all just in time compilation and the languages run very fast. I will use the ASM directive on the occasional intensive loop but thats just to get the register usage right. Compilers cant do everything. Dude I have be programing since I was 13, i am 40 now and spent all that time working as a computer programmer. I think that Vista is a master piece, Not only for it OS strenght but as a base for a million software packages. For it 24/7 reliability, and for me specializing in CG DirectX, All hale DX.. Window is over kill for a DNS server and the like and Linux has its place. But for a PC its Windows. Remember PC means "Personal Computer" WHAT.. degrades??? did not know that was a property of an OS. No people are not infallible. But we have design standards, and windows has a lot of code that is designed to catch bad code. I have not seen a fatal interrupt for years (blue screen of death). remember I wrote code in a basic interpreter that launched assembly code. Try and do that in Vista... (via a buffer overflow) Thank god they produce fool proof cars. OH wait we cant even do that. God dang fools should we line them up against the wall..... I told a friend whoI thought would know better that he should Format C: and he did... LOL fools.... 19. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 They can do everything you want if you design them well. The multi-target platform one I built for these dudes was able to assemble code for the first 2 chips in your list, after 6 months writing the thing, and about 6 or 7 chipsets altogether a few months later; if the mini had been a bit more tool-heavy I wouldn't have taken as long to build the ATN compiler, which had to produce a state table in object form that was self-relative - which meant doing something the compiler wasn't happy about, some assembler code for the mini; all a bit clunky. It's called a cross-compiler - you write code on a system that dumps target code for Intel etc chipsets. But they got an assembler they could add instruction sets to when new chips were released, and primarily, in those days it was Intel/Motorola - these guys weren't bucking any trends. I got some experience designing (pretty much on my own) a compiler and some insights into one way to make an extendable one. So, that's enough trumpet-blowing for me, for now. Last edited: Aug 17, 2008 20. ### BlindmanValued Senior Member Messages: 1,425 A lisp man.. Oh dear mate. There is no way you can turn a natural human language into good code. C++ and the ASM directive creates the most efficient code. C# is the bee's knees. CLR has been adopted by MS to there great advantage. Windows mobile is a great example of cross compilers. THey even provide emulators all for free... You got to love MS for all their free IDE's, API's, and SDK's. 21. ### s0meguyWorship me or suffer eternallyValued Senior Member Messages: 1,635 I find myself going back to windows a lot of the time, since what I want to do in linux is also possible in windows, with a few exceptions, mostly advanced hardware driver capabilities, and it is easier and fool proof in most cases. No config files (and dependent apps) to configure, easier GUI and better support when I am experiencing problems. Last edited: Aug 18, 2008 22. ### VkothiiBannedBanned Messages: 3,674 But I just love Nvidia and the CUDA SDK, on linux where it's more at home as an interface to the GPU processor architecture. The GPU processor systems themselves are up in the$10-30k range, but.

But the prices of these things will be coming down one day, and I'd like to think I can do a course somewhere that teaches CUDA, and so would need actual systems. Note, this is the C language.
C is what led to Unix, I think is how it went.

Wonder what sort of a sound synth you could build with GPUs?

23. ### BlindmanValued Senior Member

Messages:
1,425
sits on top of openGL or DirectX API's. Nothing to fancy. Direct access to these very unusual CPU's is still the best way to write code for the GPU. Once again MS's DX is far superior to OpenGL... Hey this is a OS battle thread...