>Linux clearly violates Microsoft Intellectual Property. This has been proven in a court of law. Microsoft software patents are stolen just to get Linux to boot up. And thousands more are infringed on by runlevel 5 (multi-user, networking, X11).
>Linux users owe Microsoft 10s of Billions of dollars in damages to compensate for this infringement, and 10s of Billions of dollars more in reasonable royalties. Everything you do and create using Linux, Microsoft owns the rights to.
>Everyone knows that without stolen Microsoft IP, Linux is nothing more than a bloated file manager.
Want to learn more?
>I wrote some words on paper 20 years ago
>Hey, you can't do that! I wrote words about that!!!
>mfw patent advocates actually believe this promotes innovation
I am fucking sick and tired of all the useless shitposting on this board. Maybe I'll try talking about technology on Reddit, I bet they don't shit up every thread with le Android/Linux autismal virgin may-may.
>Living in the largest 3rd world country by population
>Guzzling amerifat laws like it's made of chocolate
Dude, we don't live in your wierd boxed in world, EU doesn't support your bullshit. Or asia for that matter.
Are you saying that this linux can run on a computer without windows underneath it, at all ? As in, without a boot disk, without any drivers, and without any services ?
That sounds preposterous to me.
If it were true (and I doubt it), then companies would be selling computers without a windows. This clearly is not happening, so there must be some error in your calculations. I hope you realise that windows is more than just Office ? Its a whole system that runs the computer from start to finish, and that is a very difficult thing to acheive. A lot of people dont realise this.
Microsoft just spent $9 billion and many years to create Vista, so it does not sound reasonable that some new alternative could just snap into existence overnight like that. It would take billions of dollars and a massive effort to achieve. IBM tried, and spent a huge amount of money developing OS/2 but could never keep up with Windows. Apple tried to create their own system for years, but finally gave up recently and moved to Intel and Microsoft.
Its just not possible that a freeware like the Linux could be extended to the point where it runs the entire computer fron start to finish, without using some of the more critical parts of windows. Not possible.
I think you need to re-examine your assumptions.
hey, think about it this way
piracy is bad because potential sales, right?
so every time you run linux on your machine you could be running windows instead, so thats potential windows sales that youre stealing
everyone who runs linux owe's microsoft hundreds of dollars per every machine for potential windows sales
Ooh Micro$oft spin. Politics of envy incoming.
> Cool story bro.
I would like to interject for a moment. What you're referring to as Windows, is in fact, NT/Windows, or as I've recently taken to calling it, NT plus Windows. Windows is not an operating system unto itself, but rather another proprietary component of a fully functioning NT kernel made useful by the NT scheduler, memory manager, and services comprising a full OS as defined by Microsoft.
Many computer users run a modified version of the NT kernel every day, without realizing it. Through a peculiar turn of events, the version of NT which is widely used today is often called "Windows," and many of its users are not aware that it is basically the NT kernel, developed by the NT Project.
There really is a Windows, and these people are using it, but it is just a part of the system they use. Windows is the shell: the program in the system that allows you to interface with the kernel and utilize its services in a user-friendly fashion. The shell is an essential part of an operating system, but useless by itself; it can only function in the context of a complete kernel. Windows is normally used in combination with the NT kernel: the whole system is basically NT with Windows added, or NT/Windows. All the so-called "Windows" distributions are really distributions of NT/Windows.
"Windows (in contrast to Linux) is written and developed with high quality Object Oriented C++, using best practices, with a .NET subsystem. The development tools such as Visual Studio are top notch, world class and mind boggling. And just like Bill Gates’ food, the source-code is only allowed to be touched by the hands of virgins."
If linux was any good, it would have an install base on par with Windows.
And OEMs would be shipping it with every single PC they manufacture.
I'm not saying Linux isn't good, but it's not as good as Windows.
Patent and intellectual property is bullshit. There's no strong ethical basis of IP laws.
>And just like Bill Gates’ food, the source-code is only allowed to be touched by the hands of virgins.
shit, i've taken the bait