No announcement yet.

Ubuntu 24.04 Boosts Performance, Outperforming Windows 11 On The AMD Ryzen Framework 16 Laptop

  • Filter
  • Time
  • Show
Clear All
new posts

  • #41
    Originally posted by HEL88 View Post

    Pick one.
    Rock solid = doesn't crash randomly unless it's broken by a bug and in that case crashes all the time (so you need to revert, easy to do). Never had a BSOD by using it normally for years unless my hardware was actually dead.

    Some GUIs are good enough, like old Windows classic GUIs. You have choice here. If you're stuck choosing either GNOME or Windows GUI, my sympathies.

    As for backwards compatibility, that has nothing to do with "stability" in terms of "crashes". Stability can have multiple meanings. Breaking on update because of API changes is a different kind of stability. I agree about this one. That's one area where Windows is better. Probably the only one.

    There's other areas where Windows is equal though, but not better.


    • #42
      Originally posted by HEL88 View Post

      Let's take a look at the Linux kernel:

      This year alone 220 vulnerabilities were patched in the Linux kernel. That comes out to two vulnerabilities a day ONLY in the KERNEL - yes, 60 vulnerabilities per month in only kernel!

      How about KDE?

      160 vulnerabilities in 2024 alone.

      How about GNOME:

      260 vulnerabilities only in 2024.

      And the rest of the system components?

      The moral of this is that Linux is full of vulnerabilities Much more than Windows.

      In addition, the Widnows desktop is also much more stable, so it is the basis for desktops in corporations, work on it, lawyers, managers, board of directors, CEO. And not on Linux. And the fact that it is a little slower is not a problem. Because more important is the stability and quality of the desktop.

      As if Linux on desktop was better then companies would have switched to it long ago. But it isn't. Companies would rather spend a bunch of money on a license than fight with Linux.

      Linux works well on servers. Where it has well-paid administrators and where care 24/7 like in intensive care.​​
      Lol number of vulnerabilities disclosed means that linux kernel is thoroughly looked into and fixed. If you think that windows having less number of vulnerabilities disclosed means it's better i have a news for you: You have no idea how this all works. It may very well have much much more of those, but MS does not tell you this.

      Corporations and others you mentioned work on windows because it's commercial and has commercial support + have specific programs. It has absolutely nothing to do with stability. If stability was an issue linux would not be used on EVERY single TOP 500 supercomputers, >95% web servers, smart appliances, routers, SpaceX rocket, electric cars and so on. It's highly customizable, more efficient on hardware, much more stable and secure.

      You contradict yourself by saying that windows is more stable and admitting that linux works well on servers. You think server people are stupid using less stable OS for a computer that is meant to run 24/7?
      Last edited by t1r0nama; 21 April 2024, 11:27 AM.


      • #43
        Originally posted by rmfx View Post
        MSFT market cap as of April 18th 2024 : 3.003 Trillion dollars ( = 3003 Billions dollars, 3 003 000 000 000 dollars ).

        So yes, I mean it, TRILLIONS with a S of dollars.
        I think you need to look up the definition of market cap.

        Market cap is the total dollar market value of a company's outstanding shares of stock​, i.e. a company has issued 1 million shares of stock at a price of $1 their market cap is...say it with me, 1 million dollars.

        The fact that MSFT has a market cap of 1 trillion dollars does not mean they spent 1 trillion million dollars developing Windows.

        That statement is so stupid is hurts, lol.

        It also hurts that people don't know enough of about basic economics that they upvoted your comment.

        Originally posted by rmfx View Post
        PS: your plan makes no sense, why would they start with external opensource code bases, they could simply clean up their own, ditching things from the past without relying on adopting bsd. Same for the UI, they made their own toolkit. What they need is to ditch retro compatibility and crappy bad habits for their next Windows and start clean for real. They all they need for it, it's more a matter of want then can.
        My plan is based on the fact that MS already has a fully functional Linux distro available for download and actively supports the Linux Foundation financially.

        The GPL is not commercially friendly so it would not make sense for MS to base their next version if Windows on Linux but they do have the expertise to make a great BSD based Windows.