The best and worst of Windows

V3 is dull. Let me guess the format. They have a list and each page is another number on the list? Just like all the other lists?

LISTS ARE BORING.

Please give us a link to an INTERESTING V3 article, if there is one.

I think V3 is trying to kill The Inquirer by making The Inq a bit duller each time it runs a V3 list advert.

Is V3 only lists? Why doesn't V3 have something interesting?

5 reasons V3 is dull:
1 - Lists can be boring, espeicially if content is boring.
2 - V3 links on The Inq are always lists, and each time I've read them I've found them boring.
3 - Why isn't there just a page that has a short version of the list and 1 sentence summary for each item?
4 - I'm bored.
5 - Imagine having to write lists and pretend to myself that readers found lists interesting. Arrghhhhh!!!!

Computer viruses are in some ways much like biological viruses. In the example I use, the biological virus is one that is spread by touch.

If one person has a virus thats passed by touch, they will need to be able to touch another person for the virus to spread. Likewise if its airborne (and almost all airborne viruses don't last long without a host), someone needs to come in contact with the airborne virus (such as from a sneeze).

If a Windows computer gets a virus, you can almost guarantee that it has contact with another Windows computer. This facilitates the spreading of the virus.

If an Apple computer, or one thats running Linux etc gets a virus, its more than likely that it won't spread too far since they aren't common enough to facilitate the spread.

People write viruses to spread, and to get the maximum infection rate. If they write one for Apple or Linux, their goals are unlikely to be achieved, whereas with Windows it will. There are enough computers running Windows to be above the 'threshold' of where the spread of the virus is achievable, thus making it the perfect target for the virus.

Its also the case that there are a lot of Windows haters out there. Those Windows haters that use Mac because of Microsoft's monopoly are just plain dumb, since Apple monopolise the whole computer and software for their system, whereas Microsoft is just Windows. Windows has to be infinitely more complex than Apple as they have to support hundreds of times more hardware and software.

Linux isn't a realistic alternative to Windows either, its still underdeveloped. It will not have a chance of realistically competing with Windows widespread until a lot stronger hardware support in included in the system. Linux is more a system that better suits processing tasks than being useful for everyday operating.

The problem with Windows is not necessarily the OS itself, but the company's writing programmes and drivers for it. If a programme crashes or doesn't work properly, people instantly blame Microsoft, whereas it could just be the actual programme itself, even if its a Windows component that actually crashed (since the programme may have cause it to crash!!).

@bigger_luddite - not sure I did claim to be an expert in any of them. I use two of them on a professional and personal basis; it's not all my own choice. The last one I really do use purely for looking up cocktail recipes :-) Ah, OS/2 - I liked that a lot when it was new and shiny. If only... I wrote a lot of software for it once upon a time.

@Scott - no offence taken. It's just that some of us don't mind paying some money for what we poorly perceive as being bling. That, and Linux still doesn't do some things with mobile phones that I want it to. Whilst Linux is free a lot of companies are making money out of it. Redhat, Ubuntu, IBM, Novell, etc. Ok, the software may be free, but the money is coming from somewhere. It's not from trees.

Os X is my second choice, and you can run it on most computers. Apple hardware is just to expensive for me. I don't care for iTunes though. Microsoft's goal is to make money. Linux goal is to make a free good OS the works on most computers. Apple is propitiatory hardware and software. I do like Linux and after using it for a few months it's very hard to turn on one my Windows 7 computers, and waiting waiting and wait for it to finish booting. They hope if you go on the Internet you don't pick up something.
Linux is peace of mind to me plain and simple.
Windows does has a lot of great free software not made by MS, but so does Linux.
Not to offend anyone but I just can't stand Microsoft.

McAfee says 60,000 new Windows malwares every day. Suggests to me that M$'s lousy design still has gaping holes too big to patch.

http://newsroom.mcafee.com/article_display.cfm?article_id=3708

@Bazza: those who claim to be authorities because use 3 different OSs are actually just afraid to make a choice and stick with it. Indecisive at best, promiscuous at worst.

Me? I use OS/2 on an IBM 350MHz P2, and it very rarely annoys me.

Linux fanbois by any chance? I assume from your apparent dislike of DRM, proprietary software and insecurity that your not a OS X user.

Two hundred and forty million licensees suggest that not everyone shares your views. I use Win7, and I use Linux too, and an ancient Mac G4. Currently I'm preferring Win7 to Linux, and the G4 is just for looking up cocktail recipes. I find that there's enough good free or cheap software for Windows to make buying it acceptable. There's plenty of legit sources of DRM free music for every platform. Security isn't too bad - at least MS more or less get round to fixing the problems these days.

Here's an IT security metaphor. A Windows user is like someone cowering in a concrete bunker being shot at, and sometimes a bullet comes in through a gun slit and scares the living daylights out of them. But they've got some bricks, and the gradually filling in the holes. However the Windows user does sometimes open his bunker door just to let some fresh air, and gets chased back inside by a hail of bullets!

Meanwhile there's a Mac user casually stood outside the Windows bunker. He's dressed in his polo neck jumper and jeans, not being shot at at all. Polo necks must be bullet proof, or invisible or maybe even magically shielded! So he thinks he's OK, and he hasn't started building himself a bunker. But sooner of later the guys with the guns are going to get bored of not being able to shoot into the Windows bunker and will start looking round for a fresh target. Cocky polo neck is going to look like an easy target!

On the otherside of the Windows bunker is a very odd bunker with Linux written on the side. The Linux guy has seen the firing at the Windows bunker and concluded that it's coming from only one direction only, and that's the side his server is on. So he's built an impressively thick wall on his server side. It is seemingly impenetrable, even though it's been built out of cobbled together bits and pieces from here there and everywhere. But the wall on his desktop side has never really been tested, and only a few stray bullets have ever come from that direction. So he's feeling OK, maybe a bit wary. But he thinks he has a lot of friendly brick layers on hand to help him beef up the wall on his desktop side should the bullets ever start coming from that side.

I wouldn't want to be Mr Polo neck.

For me there is NOTHING about Windows that does not SUCK. DRM, Proprietary software. Insecurity. Spying on every song you play or movie you watch. What gives them the right.And even Windows 7 is so bloated it is still incredibly slow.
People have gotten so used to Microsoft crap that they gotten used to garbage and just tolerate it. You paid good money for it and it should be SO MUCH BETTER.