I love all this wallpaper

[64x]

I mean install it on my pc ...that i can use it with out internet anyways

OpenOffice, LibreOffice, Gnumeric, Abiword... anything available for Linux is available for Windows.

I can run linux with 128mb of memory can you run windows 7 with 128mb of memory?

Just for argument sake, Windows 2000 and XP Embedded (even regular XP with some work) can run on 128mb, which is irrelevant because the point is that your OS choice does not prevent you from becoming a power user, nor a vendor from trying to take advantage and oversell you.

Back to my original statement, to each problem its tool. Want to build a firewall with a 10 year old computer? Use linux. Want the ultimate gaming PC? Use Windows. Want a bulletproof monolithic architecture? Use z/OS. Want a computer for granny to check facebook? Call me lazy but I don't want to teach her how to go into repositories or upgrade a kernel, she may end up taking me off her will.

[Uly]

~ Note - This message was written before 64x posted his message above ~

I mean install it on my pc ...that i can use it with out internet anyways

The first link I posted is OpenOffice, the one you'd like to look for.

I can run linux with 128mb of memory can you run windows 7 with 128mb of memory?

What does that have to do with "I have thousands of dollars worth of software for no cost because I don't use Windows"?

Anyway, Windows 7 is not the only Windows versions that exist, you could basically win any argument against me by just focusing on the awful OS that Vista was.

But you can run Windows XP with 128mb of memory just fine, I did that for years, and had to upgrade to improve performance of Chess engines (the same reasons I upgraded to 64bit and 4 cores, if it wasn't for this hobby I think I'd have remained happy with 128MB of memory).

[orgfert]

Out of the box, *nix has all the tools required to meet the needs of the creative imagination -- programming options aplenty without cost. And if you need 3 or 4 hammers, Openoffice is available.

What does Windows give you out of the box? Nothing (for you anyway). But it is a nice wallet opening device for vendors.

You can get almost all the same free tools for Win than for *nix anyway (development or otherwise).

I said as much with regard to Cygwin but such tools are alien to Windows, not integral.

Vendors try to make money the regardless the platform (Oracle, SAP, IBM).

Open Source projects are mostly available for all platforms. VSE and many other tools are also free for Windows.

That sounds nice to people who don't know any better, but the fact remains that Windows ships with nothing. The free tools you talk of are not integral to Windows, i.e. Windows was not created with and/or maintained with these tools like unix is with its tools. You can control a unix machine with the free tools that ship with it, not to mention the creation of processes and applications that interact with it and other systems of like design, swimmingly, out of the box. Not so Windows.

[64x]

That sounds nice to people who don't know any better, but the fact remains that Windows ships with nothing. The free tools you talk of are not integral to Windows, i.e. Windows was not created with and/or maintained with these tools like unix is with its tools. You can control a unix machine with the free tools that ship with it, not to mention the creation of processes and applications that interact with it and other systems of like design, swimmingly, out of the box. Not so Windows.

Your argument leads me to believe that I just don't get your point. If this is about what OS can do more when you are not allowed to install anything (not even the SDK that is free and was used to create Windows and can be used as well to create/control) or have access to the net then I guess you may be right (would like to know which commands you refer to though). I just don't see the relevance of such scenario.

FWIW I agree that *nix is FAR more elegant than Windows. My reaction is to statements such as "using Windows stifles creativity/productivity/etc", which are plain wrong. Those attributes are related to the user and the solution design, not your choice of OS.

Sebastian Vettel can do more on a 1966 Beetle than I can do on a Formula 1... but that is because of his capability compared to mine not because he drove an F1 and I didn't.

[JcMaTe]

~ Note - This message was written before 64x posted his message above ~

I mean install it on my pc ...that i can use it with out internet anyways

The first link I posted is OpenOffice, the one you'd like to look for.

I can run linux with 128mb of memory can you run windows 7 with 128mb of memory?

What does that have to do with "I have thousands of dollars worth of software for no cost because I don't use Windows"?

Anyway, Windows 7 is not the only Windows versions that exist, you could basically win any argument against me by just focusing on the awful OS that Vista was.

But you can run Windows XP with 128mb of memory just fine, I did that for years, and had to upgrade to improve performance of Chess engines (the same reasons I upgraded to 64bit and 4 cores, if it wasn't for this hobby I think I'd have remained happy with 128MB of memory).

Dont take me wroing Uly I have windows too and the best windows is XP .all i been saying is that linux is free and most of the software are free

[alfons]

It is not deniable that almost all of output of various open-source projects is available for the windows environment too. The reason I use Linux (on a daily basis) is, that all your applications get their enhancements or security updates from one source in one surf - that is from your distributor's repository. This is most comfortable, as I do not have the ugly choices that exist under windows:
-enable auto-checking for updates->several hundreds of demons/applications are running and connect to the net
-if this is disabled you have to check for yourself, which is tiresome and time consuming
-refraining from updating however would be dangerous; it leaves you with half updated/configured shit on your machine (this is the standard condition of the normal windows-driven pc)

Linux/*-BSD-Desktops are universally configurable (to me most important too) - but this is known and old news. There's simply no reason to use this ugly windows: it's a system for messies as itself can't keep any ordnung which is despicable. An alternative would be Mac OS X, which is nice too.

[Uly]

all i been saying is that linux is free and most of the software are free

Most Windows software is also free. That is, software that was made to run on Windows. I still have to hear a counter-example.