jerryleecooper, that is. Mr. Cooper is a frequent poster and proponent of Microsoft Vista on the ZDNet forums. He has quite a cult following for his often hilarious comments regarding Linux. I’ll be posting some of these ZDNet forum comments below. They for personal, noncommercial use and are used with permission from CNET Networks, Inc., Copyright 2008. All rights reserved.
On the topic of “Why Linux will not displace Windows”
Linux looks very interesting, even if some of the screen colours and menu options appear to be a little out of the ordinary.
But you are missing a vital point, a point which takes some experience and depth of knowledge in the field of computers. You see, when a computer boots up, it needs to load various drivers and then load various services. This happens long before the operating system and other applications are available.
Linux is a marvellous operating system in its own right, and even comes in several different flavours. However, as good as these flavours are, they first need Microsoft Windows to load the services prior to use.
In Linux, the open office might be the default for editing your wordfiles, and you might prefer ubuntu brown over the grassy knoll of the windows desktop, but mark my words young man – without the windows drivers sitting below the visible surface, allowing the linus to talk to the hardware, it is without worth.
And so, by choosing your linux as an alternative to windows on the desktop, you still need a windows licence to run this operating system through the windows drivers to talk to the hardware. Linux is only a code, it cannot perform the low level function.
My point being, young man, that unless you intend to pirate and steal the Windows drivers and services, how is using the linux going to save money ? Well ? It seems that no linux fan can ever provide a straight answer to that question !
May as well just stay legal, run the Windows drivers, and run Office on the desktop instead of the linus.
Its clearly evident that vista is the future.
One only has to watch TV for a short period of time and see the advertising.
I personally love the part where the young man is taking a stroll in the delightful snow covered streets, and sees firsthand a young deer with a gleefull glint in its eye. It sends a shiver down my spine. WOW is all I can say.
Vista is clearly the future of enterprise computing.
I dont see how this will happen at all.
Vista is far more powerful than windows XP, and runs twice as fast. It is also much harder to pirate, and this point more than anything else has the Linux crowd in a panic.
It wont be long until Windows XP is no longer supported, and when that happens, what is Linux going to do ?
Linux will have to find a way to work under Vista from here on, since it wont be able to rely on XP being readily available anymore.
Linux may seem like a good alternative to Office, but all that is happening in linux is that the windows interface is cleverly hidden away. It still needs the drivers and software services in order to run, and in most cases – that happens WITHOUT a valid windows licence.
This is just plain piracy.
Vista will finally put an end to this blatant abuse of intellectual property, and linux should decline, taking the pirates with it.
Anyone that supports the continuation of Windows XP in place of Vista surely has a hidden agenda .. and you will surely be caught out.
On the topic of “Why does Linux hate me?”
So, let me get this right – you downloaded a trial version of the linux from the internet, and tried to install it on a perfectly good machine.
Your trial version failed to install. This is most likely because the time period for the trial had expired, so thats easy enough to understand. Another probable reason for the failure to install is because your machine was running too fast – linux works best on machines around the 1GHz mark, and would be very unstable running on a 3GHz machine.
All those facts aside, what concerns me most is that the linux loaded a virus onto the windows petition, and corrupted your machine ?
Novell has every right to restrict the distribution of their trial freewares, and abort the installation if the terms of the EULA have not been met. However, it is absolutely against the law for Novell to go that one fatal step further, and install a virus in retribution.
It is illegal for a supplier of software to inflict such punitive measures.
You have an excellent case here for taking Novell to a court of law, and prosecuting this malicious action on their part without predjudice.
I highly recommend that you pursue this course of action.
Yes, well, I did receive quite a few pointed ‘pointers’ about linux not requiring windows, but I am yet to be convinced on that score.
I did witness first hand just the other day, a demonstration of a machine loading up the linux, and several points piqued my interest for sure.
Firstly, the machine loaded into the Microsoft boot sequence prior to loading the linux. This is the segment of the operating system which counts down the memory, and configures the A:, C: and D: drives prior to loading the Microsoft windows. Although the machine did not display the familiar windows animation, it was obvious that the linux was freeloading off the back of this prior installation/boot sequence. The aforementioned demonstrator, upon further questioning, even admitted that ‘Oh, That part is not the linux’, and then went on to confuse the issue with technical jargon. However, one cannot mask a simple act of piracy with excessive verbosity. A fool and his lamb are worth 2 in the bush.
Now – I will admit after some further research, that the linux is not in fact a complete copy of Microsoft Windows. My research indicates that it is in fact a copy of Unix. I bet you didnt know that young man ? Yes, its a straight copy of Unix, even down to copying verbatim codefiles straight from the source of Unix. I believe there is a court case in progress regarding this latest discovery. The magnitude of the theft is now becoming apparent.
However, this remarkable fact may well uncover the answer to Ed Bott’s mystery linux installation failure. You see, the Unix was designed to run within the VHF to UHF spectra (much like a radio), which is all well and good until you consider that modern computers run in the microwave range, at which regular radio reception starts to have serious issues. If one were to use a UHF receiver to tune in to a quad-phased broadcast in the Microwave spectra, one would fail miserably.
I would wager a bet that Ed Bott’s computing apparatus was a more contemporary design utilizing a 3GHz central processor unit (or CPU). Under such frequencies, the linux would literally tear itself apart, its code lacking the internal cohesion to sustain this extreme environment. The Microsoft by comparison, is streamlined and engineered to withstand this Microwave environment, thanks no doubt to the forethought of its designers.
And of this there is ample evidence, which one can easily do an msn-search for and witness first hand. All of this evidence is on the public record, and cannot be denied.