Might I ask all the Vista fans why they don't use Linux?
At present, while I dual boot Vista and XP, I'm now running Ubuntu Gutsy Gibbon on an external drive to evaluate/play with it prior to installing it proper on my other box when it arrives next Jan/Feb.
Yeah, there's a bit to get used to, and there's a learning curve that's different to Vista's, but I'm enjoying it thus far and will report back with my thoughts/opinion when I'm a lot more qualified/experienced in its use....but so far so good.
M$ for some reason thinks that when you put Vista on your computer, they have the right to tell you how you should do things, and that somehow they bought controlling stock on YOUR machine
Very good point. You may have only leased the software license, but you BOUGHT the hardware. At least with Linux, you OWN the O/S.
Now this is one thing I am not happy about with Vista...Microsoft's decision to impose its will with regard to Stardock changing Windowblinds and Iconpackager, etc, skins storage to the Public Documents Folder. Supposedly, the argument is to make the skins accessible to all users, but to me that is a crock of sh!t. First of all, why does MS assume there are any other users on my PC, that I'd even let anyone else use it?
Secondly,
I am the Administrator of MY PC, so I should be the one who decides on the storage on MY skins and downloads, whether or not I allow other users...and if I do, whether or not I want them to have access to MY skins, etc.
Microsoft overstepped the boundaries here big time...it assumed wrongly! There are NO other users on MY PC...nor will there ever be, and it had NO effing right to make decisions regarding MY property. The hardware is mine, the 3rd party software is mine by virtue of the licenses with developers, etc...and the OS is mine to use as I see fit within and by virtue of the terms of the EULA I entered into with MS. However it did NOT originally include proviso for MS to stick its nose into my personal affairs or designate itself Administrator of MY HDD space or the files contained thereon. That changed after the fact and it is patently wrong.
Frankly, the whole debacle is piss poor and I'm rather disappointed that Stardock caved in to MS' demands, that we, as Stardock's bread and butter, were not consulted...even notified that it was
being done