Linux or Win if both are GPL'd ?

[tart666]

How much do the Linux faithfuls really love the OS. Or how much do they love not having to pay? I just wanna find out.
EDIT: There seems to be lots of interest in making GPL'd distro's that look and feel like windows. Lycoris (redmond), Lindows, the new hat desktop , redflag come to mind. But is this really what people want? or do they want ACTUAL real windows but at GPL prices?

 

[n0cmonkey]

Its not about the license to me (Im not a big GPL fan), its about usability. Microsoft Windows (ANY VERSION) just doesnt have it.

 

[Chaotic42]

I pay for Windows and I use Linux.

I will continue to do so until one (or both) fail to meet my standards.

 

[tart666]

I will continue to do so until one (or both) fail to meet my standards.

Dude, what?
no seriously, whaaat?

 

[Nothinman]

I agree with n0c, the licensing helps (both BSD and GPL help differently) but it's not the main reason we use it.

All other things equal, I'd rather have a closed Solaris workstation than a GPL'd Windows one.

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: tart666

I will continue to do so until one (or both) fail to meet my standards.

Dude, what?
no seriously, whaaat?

What what?

I use Windows for games and Photoshop, Debian for everything else. It works nicely.

 

[tart666]

I will continue to do so until one (or both) fail to meet my standards.

are you saying you will keep the dual boot until you don't like one of the OS's? And then you are switching to single boot? or triple boot? you are not making any sense at all, DUDE

 

[Chaotic42]

Originally posted by: tart666

I will continue to do so until one (or both) fail to meet my standards.

are you saying you will keep the dual boot until you don't like one of the OS's? And then you are switching to single boot? or triple boot? you are not making any sense at all, DUDE

Eh, I will use Windows and Debian until they start to become inadequate for my needs. Then I'll find something else.

 

[DaHitman]

Can you imagine what spagetti the Windows code is? I bet is a horrible bunch of hacks held together by string and duct tape.. that just the way things happen when no one from the outside looks at your code, and your only focus year after year is NEW FEATURES, NEW FEATURES... never taking the time to clean things up, etc.. thats when you get gaping security holes creaping in too, which we have seen over and over again with Microsoft... ... We also saw horrible code when the formerly closed Netscape went OpenSource/GPL and released its source code.. it was so horrible, after 2 years of a team trying to clean it up and move forward... the team had to admit defeat, and decided to scrap it all (source code for Netscape 4.x) and start from scratch which is how we got mozilla and why it took a few extra years to get Netscape 6 after 4.

And one thing is for sure, there is a very high level of quality required for any contribution of code to Linux... you will get seriously laughed at and made fun of by the Linux developers if your code is at all sloppy, and Linus will ignore your submission and give you a "I am sure it works great, but until it looks better, I am not going to accept it into the main kernel source"... I have seen this happen over and over again on the kernel developers mailing list.

 

[Bremen]

There are quite a few GPL maniacs out there, but I think you'll find most linux users are not all too concerned about the license. Granted we'd rather have source to play with; either BSD/GPL or similiar, but at the end of the day I like linux because, well... I like it.

As for GPL'ing Windows, well it just wouldn't be Windows if you GPL'd it.

 

[bmacd]

i'm still a linux n00b and i've grown up with windows (and geoworks if any of you remember that).

-=bmacd=-

 

[Electrode]

I agree with n0c and all who agree with him. I use Linux because I like it, not because it's open source. If I were using Linux because I was a licensing nut, would I be using the closed-source NVidia drivers, or the closed-source games, or commercial stuff like Maya and VMware? Probably not.

If Windows were made open-source (which it never will, even if the DOJ ordered microsoft to do so, since MS is above the law) I still wouldn't even consider using it. By the time the hacking community had worked it into something usable, it wouldn't be windows anymore anyway.

Also, I throughly despise anything that attemps to hot glue a windows-like interface onto Linux. LINUX IS NOT WINDOWS, so don't pretend it is!!! :disgust:

 

[sciencewhiz]

if windows was GPL, it wouldn't suck so much.

 

[Sunner]

I've said it before, and I'll say it again.

Im a technician, not a politician.

Windows lacks lots of fundamental functionality that I want, if Windows was free and Linux, *BSD, etc all cost $100, i'd shell out the money for one of them anyways.
Heck, OpenBSD is free, and I still support it by buying the CD sets just as my way to say "Thank you for giving me this excellent product", and I've bought a couple of Linux distros as well.

But of course, somewhere deep down there's a little idealist in me too

 

[Need4Speed]

I'll have to agree with the general feeling here, that it's not about the GPL, but rather the functionality and support of the product. I have purchased XP, but I also purchased Linux for the same reasons already mentioned, ie. as a sign of gratitude for such a good product and to support further development. I like to have a copy of windows handy for any gaming I might do, but just about everything else I do on linux now.