However, I think it is wrong for you to turn people away from "altruistic" open-source projects that have not reached their "imagined potential".

a) Because windows offers simple RAD programs that can easily be found off a number of warez sites for free.

b) VB, cause it takes very few brain cells to code. In fact, it's the only language where the code written has an efficiency factor in direct proportion to how much beer you are consuming at the time.

c) I associate C/C++ with Linux, programming in C/C++ forces the programmer to code efficiently from the start. Also it is which way you look at it a lot more powerful than VB.

Listen, I have no problem when someone says "this is neat and has potential." (I'm actually going to download and try it.) But you will incur my wrath when you say something like "OMG MenuET OS SCREW WINDOWZ N MICRO$OF BRO, THIS WILL BE A BETTER OS FOR CAR PCS ONCE SOMEONE MAKES IT A BETTER OS FOR CAR PCS."

Tidder, I love your posts man. Keep 'em coming.

Listen, I have no problem when someone says "this is neat and has potential." (I'm actually going to download and try it.) But you will incur my wrath when you say something like "OMG MenuET OS SCREW WINDOWZ N MICRO$OF BRO, THIS WILL BE A BETTER OS FOR CAR PCS ONCE SOMEONE MAKES IT A BETTER OS FOR CAR PCS."

that group hug thing is so great. and frodo, i'm telling you! you're on the forums 24/7! i see you on here like ALL the time, and yes i know that doesn't say much for me lol

It makes me sick when people with zero coding experience regard excellent software as a naturally occurring phenomenon. You have no idea how much work is involved with even the smallest project. Coding in assembly is like maintaining a golf course with a pair of scissors. The very existence of the vast majority of useful freeware is due to Windows' hardware and software abstraction layers; before that everyone had to understand how to compile and tweak code to even attempt to use it-- and even then it only worked on one particular type of hardware. The level of usability and functionality of software is directly proportional to the resources applied to the its development, therefore free software can never be as useful and productive as software that is sold for profit. Exceptions are anomalous and temporary. But that's not even what really bothers me. There's something patently solipsistic in looking at this software and thinking "Damn, this is so much better than what actually works well, even though it doesn't actually work at all."

But still, screw windows. Think about it, it's not a good os, but it's the best out there. Would you buy a car that you have to pull over, roll up all the windows, turn it completely off, lock the doors, unlock the doors, start the car, only roll down 2 windows, then your stereo should work? Hell no man. But we are stuck. That's why I'm always on the lookout for something better, or something that has the potential.

You know though, I can't knock it too much. I'm a computer tech. If it weren't for MS crappy software, I wouldn't have a job. You can see the point though right?

(I hear that bill gates uses a variation of Linux to power his "smart house")

don't we all drive cars like that ?? Aren´t we just putting pc's in our cars because we get bored from driving for hours and there is nothing to "fix"?

I pop in for a few minutes several times a day.