Windows Sucks! ...and so does Linux

  There, I said it. Yes, they both suck.

  For very different reasons, but both offer one thing in common for the end-user - disappointment...

  or...

  Something I like to refer to as pissappointment which is when you're both pissed off and disappointed at the same time.

  Anyway...

  Windows sucks for pretty obvious reasons. It's bloated and slow. It's designed to be faulty - what else would you call it? When you design an operating system specifically to be vulnerable to viruses, trojans, and other damaging crap, just so your friends at McAfee and Norton will still have jobs when your next OS is released, again...

  What the hell else would you call it? Microsoft could've plugged up those holes in its OS years ago, but they didn't. They cover up the source code and similtaniously leave it open to every manner of attack, I'm convinced, to keep fellow software giants, Norton and McAfee in business indefinitely.

  At the same time, every new version of Windows gets more bloated, more vulnerable, and more expensive.

  Thank God there's an alternative, right?

  Yeah, Linux...

  Linux ranks high on the pissappointment scale. It's not the little operating system that could, no...

  It's the little operating system that almost could.

  I love Linux. I do. I have five machines running under it right now.

  For a reliable server, whether it be a Windows file server, FTP server, web server (you're reading this on port 80 over a Fedora-based Apache web server), you can't beat it. Price? Unbeatable. Red Hat's Fedora Project is free to anyone who wants a top-quality OS. I've used it successfully for years. Google uses Fedora on its servers - nuff said...

  As a file server, it beats Windows hands-down. Server 2003 leaks like a sieve comapred to any Linux installation. Three quarters of the attacks launched by bots against these servers are aimed at Server 2003. Linux is lightweight, secure, and fast.

  What's the problem then, right?

  Compatibility.

  Try to mold Linux into a functional desktop. Go 'head. I dare ya! It'll perform a few interesting tricks, my favorite being using Nero to burn .iso images under WINE...

  My main machine is an AMD-based WinXP beast I've been building and rebuilding for more than nine years. It has three hard drives. It has three monitors - all of which display three totally different desktops with individual task bars, that is, for me, a dream machine. I'm a multi-tasker to the extreme. I need three monitors. For web design, I'd never go back to having just one...

  ...but every time I try to install Linux into it, it fails - miserably. I got two of the three monitors working under Fedora 7 (maybe 9) once, after hours of pissing around with xorg.conf, but it was streched, and stupid. Definitely not what I wanted. When it comes to video drivers, Linux is primitive at best. On the Fedora web site, they're touting the advances in video card driver support in they're upcoming release, Constatine.

  I installed the beta release today, and you know what? It just isn't there.

  So, once again, I'm back to using Windows for my main machine.

  My laptop is a dual-boot affair, utilizing both Vista ( blech ! ) and Fedora 10. I end up using the factory Vista install way more than Linux - why? Civilization III...

  A game I love to play, which WINE can't even begin to understand. I don't know why. I mean, damn...

  It's been around long enough. It's certainly popular enough. Why can't a Windows emmulator run it?

  I dunno...

  I'm just frustrated with all of it. What I have works, and for that, I'm happy. I just wish I could get it all running the way I want it to under Fedora...