Sean Kelly wrote:
> I installed Linux recently and was amazed at how easy it has become in the 12 or so years since I last installed it.  It was actually easier to install than Windows, and the application install/upgrade tools are a sight better than Windows as well (though they don't seem to indicated *where* they've installed something, which is a tad confusing when I'm installing kernel headers and such).

One annoying thing with these Windows Installshield wizards is that they usually save both the uninstall-files and the original application installation packages (.cab) in some windows/user tmp-folder. If you remove those files, it becomes impossible to uninstall the software. They are not that small (sometimes hundreds of megabytes) and might even reserve more space than the program itself.

> I tried Ubuntu and Fedora
> recently, and found Ubuntu to be the easier of the two to install, but
> as it's a single CD install it lacks the "out of the box" functionality
> available in the fixe CD (or one DVD) Fedora.  Still, that simply means

I've heard that FC5 is badly broken. Some problems with LVM, booting and networking.

> I choose a bunch of stuff from the install/upgrade tool, which takes all
> of ten minutes and guarantees I'm not getting extra stuff I don't want.
>  Linux is getting darn close to being a viable primary OS IMO.
> Particularly with VM software for running the few Windows apps I still
> need (WINE being an alternative in some cases).

Wine + free VMWare server both work nicely. It's even possible to play old windows games, but some old programs with low-level I/O don't work so well.

-- 
Jari-Matti

Georg Wrede wrote:
> Don Clugston wrote:
>>
>> I think that the games market is tremendously important to Microsoft's market share. If it were to lose that, it would be game over. Seriously.
> 
> This might be something for Apple. They've got a lot of good press and goodwill lately: iPods, Intel-Macs, etc. And they have a user base where folks are used to paying (overprice) for everything. Since they control both the hardware and the OS, there's never a problem with drivers or compatibility.
> 
> Imagine buying the newest computer game -- and just _knowing_ it _works_!  NO hassle.
> 
> I'd pay extra just for the peace of mind.

In that case you should consider game consoles. The semi-old ones (Sega Megadrive, SNES, ...) are IMO the best.

The game-intensive Vista will be the most expensive version and have the best DRM-technologies available. Since it's possible to do almost everything else with Mac/Linux/BSD, the only reason to buy Vista will be new games. I suppose most proprietary business/educational software will still run on XP (and a bit later with WINE).

-- 
Jari-Matti

Jari-Matti Mäkelä wrote:
> Georg Wrede wrote:
>> Don Clugston wrote:
>>> I think that the games market is tremendously important to Microsoft's
>>> market share. If it were to lose that, it would be game over. Seriously.
>> This might be something for Apple. They've got a lot of good press and
>> goodwill lately: iPods, Intel-Macs, etc. And they have a user base where
>> folks are used to paying (overprice) for everything. Since they control
>> both the hardware and the OS, there's never a problem with drivers or
>> compatibility.
>>
>> Imagine buying the newest computer game -- and just _knowing_ it
>> _works_!  NO hassle.
>>
>> I'd pay extra just for the peace of mind.
> 
> In that case you should consider game consoles. The semi-old ones (Sega
> Megadrive, SNES, ...) are IMO the best.

Consoles are a lot of fun, but the games they offer are a bit different than those for the PC so it really depends on what sort of games you like to play.  I like them both, but prefer different platforms for different game types.  That aside, I'm hoping that Apple's switch to Intel will ease porting concerns a bit and that we'll begin to see a few more OSX games than in the past.

> The game-intensive Vista will be the most expensive version and have the
> best DRM-technologies available. Since it's possible to do almost
> everything else with Mac/Linux/BSD, the only reason to buy Vista will be
> new games. I suppose most proprietary business/educational software will
> still run on XP (and a bit later with WINE).

Thing is, Vista doesn't really offer anything for games over XP--all the same APIs are supported, etc.  Also, Vista will consume far more resources behind the scenes than XP, so you'll need a more powerful system just to get equivalent performance as on XP.  As you say, it may well be the DRM features publishers will find most attractive, but that's obviously not a selling point for users.


Sean