ZFGC
General => Boards => Archive => Other Discussion => Topic started by: thenoblesheep on August 02, 2006, 03:35:50 pm
-
I currently use Windows XP, but it really isn't my choice until I purchase my own computer. Once I purchase my own computer, I plan on installing a Linux distribution. Unfortunately, I won't be able to play my current game collection, without a special program.
Edit:Changed poll to say, "Other Unix-based OS".
-
I have Windows XP (which I just re-installed for the 4th time because of un repairable errors and hard drive corruption)
and Linux's Fedora Core 5
-
i use xp.
-
Windows XP, and I will never switch to Max or Linux or that crap.
I dont know about Vista yet
-
Dual boot XP and gentoo linux.
-
XP, with 2K and OSX 10.4 set up as virtual machines.
Linux is nice, but I don't have a use for it. I'm really familiar with windows, and Linux just doesn't offer anything to make me install it.
-
Windows XP, I plan on staying with Windows for as long as possible.
-
At the moment Windows 2000 I don't really feel like upgrading to XP seeing as XP just gives you a bunch of crap you don't really want and raises the system requirements for just running the OS. I had Fedora Core on here a little while ago but I mucked something up and ended up loosing it.
-
^_^ I run dual-boot XP and Vista already, YAY for beta. I used to have gentoo linux on another partition on my HDD but i ended up loosing that somehow, and oh do i miss it. gentoo=<3
-
windows xp
most compatable
-
If I can vote twice, which I can't, I'd vote for Windows and Linux.
-
windows xp
most compatable
That is complete hogwash. Windows is the opposite of compatible. 'Compatible' with games, yes. But if we are talking about compatibility with other systems anything POSIX based(which Windows is not) is the most.
Anyway, I use a range of Unices from OS X, to Solaris, to FreeBSD and Irix, and many more.
-
um, question, wouldn't Mac-based be classified under UNIX-based?
-
um, question, wouldn't Mac-based be classified under UNIX-based?
Now they are one in the same, although Mac based would be more NeXTSTEP based, which is a step away from the conventional Unices.
-
My primary OS was Slackware Linux since a year back, but now when I upgraded my hardware I choosed to switch to ubuntu to make life easier.
Why can't people learn it is called GNU/Linux, and not Linux. Linux is the name of the kernel, GNU is the name of the systools, together they form the OS GNU/Linux (v_v)
Linux is also NOT Unix. Linux = Linux Is Not Unix :P But it's influenced/based on Unix so I voted that.
-
I have a Linux, Mac, and Win, but my main one is my Mac. ^_^ Mac's are Unix-based btw ;)
-
Linux is also NOT Unix. Linux = Linux Is Not Unix
You're confusing this with GNU, which is an acronym. Linux is not an acronym. Linux is named after the person who developed it, Linus Torvalds.
Why can't people learn it is called GNU/Linux, and not Linux.
Quoting Linus himself:...It's justified if you actually make a GNU distribution of Linux ... the same way that I think that "Red Hat Linux" is fine, or "SuSE Linux" or "Debian Linux," because if you actually make your own distribution of Linux, you get to name the thing, but calling Linux in general "GNU Linux" I think is just ridiculous.
But don't let me discourage you! Keep on calling it "guh-N??-slash-Linux" or "guh-N??-plus-Linux". Me, I'll stick to saying "linux" because I've got stuff to do.
-
Linux is also NOT Unix. Linux = Linux Is Not Unix
You're confusing this with GNU, which is an acronym. Linux is not an acronym. Linux is named after the person who developed it, Linus Torvalds.
If you want to quote me, quote me right. I'm tired of being quoted of having posted sick pictures which I've never posted or saying things that I haven't said. Don't you recognise the smiley after it? I use it when I'm acting stupid on purpose. I never said it was the way it is. GNU not being Unix is IMO unquestionable since it's not even something on that level (which Linux would be), but I AM aware of it's acronymic meaning (how else would I be able to jokingly transfer the acronym to Linux? o.O). But meh, it's understandable to read posts differently than it was intended to.
Why can't people learn it is called GNU/Linux, and not Linux.
Quoting Linus himself:...It's justified if you actually make a GNU distribution of Linux ... the same way that I think that "Red Hat Linux" is fine, or "SuSE Linux" or "Debian Linux," because if you actually make your own distribution of Linux, you get to name the thing, but calling Linux in general "GNU Linux" I think is just ridiculous.
But don't let me discourage you! Keep on calling it "guh-N??-slash-Linux" or "guh-N??-plus-Linux". Me, I'll stick to saying "linux" because I've got stuff to do.
And I will. Because it's not only what Linus says that matters. It's also Richard Stallman. It's sad that only Linus gets the attention (which he undoubtly deserve though) and that GNU who actually made the standard programs to be run on Linux never got the attention (even though they are used in probably ALL Linuxdistros out there).
Oh and what he says that calling Linux in general for GNU/Linux is ridiculous is also true in a way. Linux is Linux. But GNU/Linux is GNU/Linux. The former is the kernel, the latter is the complete OS. Saying that Linux is the OS is wrong, but saying that Linux is the kernel is right. For me I don't really care either because if people actually take their time to try to use Linux and make the free software/open source movement stronger I'm happy. And I agree with him that people are allowed to name their distros in whatever way they want. That's why for example Slackware Linux is not called Slackware GNU/Linux. Anyway, it's just important to also give GNU the credit they deserve (when you know about their work) with or without the name (it is what people feels that matters, not what they do).
-
I run XP, I would like to run Tiger on my PC but I don't know how. XD
-
Mac OS X 10.3.9 on my Desktop, and Mac OS X 10.5/Win XP when I get my MacBook Laptop.