Torrents and Sharing

Status
Not open for further replies.
ok, windows costs $230 at the cheapest shop i have found, so theres that. and i bought my comp back when i had a bit of disposable income. even then i had to settle for a less than high end comp with secondhand bits. and was only jsut able to put a decent harddrive in it to keep it running(it got to the point where my harddrive was so overworked it barely went).

those games i play: also downloads.

if anyone really wanted to do damage then they would make a linux virus, even microsoft uses unix servers. the fact is that microsoft wolud be the only ones wanting to make a linux virus, because most people whe use linux and are able to write a wirus for it, dont want to do anything to it because they are people who respect it is a free program poeple put hours into for no reward. not a money hungry corporate giant.
 
I've noticed a few of you arguing "How can you buy hardware or games if you don't have the money for an OS or use P2P to get cracked versions" I would of thought it self explanatory.

If those people were to only buy retail, their money would be stretched, it would take them years to build up the funds for the game and the hardware while also dealing with an OS. Mixing a bit of P2P with legitamite goods means allowing them to buy some things and have to deal with the dodgy copies for the other things.

As far as I'm concerned if you are paying any more that £20 or approx $30 USD for a piece of software then you are being ripped off. I believe people should support software titles that are around that price though, this way you become a part of the solution to software costs as apposed to a party to the rise in costs.

It can be suggested that prices like that couldn't work, but the reality is they are full of ****. There is no need for CD's now adays (other than those still stuck on a dialup, poor souls that they are) which means there is no cost for Boxes or CD's to be printed. Admittedly there is the Bandwidth needed to make the software available but thats of course where P2P networks come in making cheaper in the long run.

What MS should of really done was not package so much crap in their install, I mean out of all the programs, tools and processes on the system how many of them do you actually need? How many do you actually end up paying for though?

Thats the one thing that BSD has going, you can start with a Barebones system and build it up the way you want it. Of course it's not "newbie friendly" which means some people won't be able to use the OS because of the Learning curve, however if the evolution of such OS's allows a Skeletal OS that allows an easy way to update and add things to then it will take over from MS's OS.
 
i think there is a version of linux where you can choose what it has, what it does and what it looks like. i cant remember tha name though
 
Any Linux can be such, Mandriva for instance, you can set it up as a server, development box, office station, or all of them. The looks can be changed with no problems on most of the desktop environments or window managers. I like KDE and Fluxbox best..
This is my desktop
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Back
Top