Windows waxes good by comparison to Linux
notalinuxsnob
windows OS's
I am running 98se on an old laptop. It does everything I want,-wifi,
cdrom, browsers, chat, etc. There is a myriad of free and available
software for it. It is not the most stable OS, but when I crashes
recovery is usually easy. And all of it works on my 15 year old
laptop.It's not that slow and I can image it so if there is a bad OS
glitch, I just restore the last image and am up in running in a
minute.
Compare this to all these so called live cd and old hardware
compatible linux distros, NONE of which works out of the box. DSL,
for example does not run from the CD as they claim it should and
their forum is so user unfriendly that it becomes a chore just to
post to it. If you want to spend your time deciphering linux
gobbledy gook commands to try to get your linux running on such a
computer, good luck. A royal pain in the ass. Same for BSD. Guess
maybe the nix people could learn a few things from MS after all. So
called support for these nix Os's is poor to none.
Try getting answers here or elsewhere, you will be met with a stone
wall. These guys hubris runs so high they are like the "computer
guy"from saturday night live. Also these guys must be all smoking
from the same pipe as they keep claiming the ease and compatiblity
of their distros and it is mostly 90% bullshit. They expect users to
help them develop their distros in order to get it working on their
computers. Sorry, I am not using an OS to be a developer or
debugger.
philo
Don't know what you are talking about,
Damn Small Linux has always come through for me when setting up minimal
machines...I even put it on a 486 and it worked fine.
Once in a while I will get an old machine that cannot boot from the
cdrom so I either use a boot floppy to get things going...
or just pop the drive in another machine...install DSL,
then put the drive back in the original.
Though I have been using Windows and Linux for about 9 years...
I recently installed Linux on my main machine and it has now become my
operating system of choice.
That said, hey, if win98 works for you great
Harold Stevens
[Snip...]
> That said, hey, if win98 works for you great
Only wintrolls. Nobody else sane is still stuck in the last century.
--
Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
I toss GoogleGroup posts from gitgo (http://improve-usenet.org).
philo
> In <5LednYuFg54Iv1nU...@ntd.net> philo:
>
> [Snip...]
>
>> That said, hey, if win98 works for you great
>
> Only wintrolls. Nobody else sane is still stuck in the last century.
>
Even though I'm an old timer who took Fortran IV back in 1968...
by 1982 I gave up on computers and never really got back into it until
the end of 1999.
I then worked like hell to get caught up
and by the year 2000 felt at least slightly proficient in both Windows
and Linux.
I then joked that it was about time I had joined the 20th century...
too bad it was now (commonly) the 21st century!
Anyway I still like to fool around with old computers and old operating
systems...
but when it comes do doing some real work (or play) the last thing I
want is an unstable machine.
True, XP is a stable OS...but in this 21st century Linux is really the
best choice.
With Windows, it seems that way too much time is wasted performing
maintenance...and though Vista is supposedly more secure, it's a major
PITA operating system.
Linux is clearly the OS of choice for this century.
Windows reminds me of my old 1953 Chevy truck...
one day I got rid of it when I realized that half of my travel
was used simply to pick up parts for it!!!
The Natural Philosopher
Win 98 was small and fast and apart from crashes, fairly decent.
I've not had any problems with Linux apart from the edges of it..USB
stuff was poor a few years back..
Printing can be a bit tricky to set up..CUPS works, but when you step of
the edge of what works out of th box..it gets messy. Had to hack it a
bit to gt A3 color printing going on a Ricoh 3800..and ghostcript is
still a bit limited.
Ditto some models of scanners..
So in terms of peripheral support its always a bit behind, but in terms
of raw OS performance its well ahead of windows.
Maxwell Lol
John Thompson
If you're happy with Win98 and willing to live with its limitations,
more power to you. Personally, I run linux on my 12 year old laptop and
it's fine -- wifi, browsers, office apps, etc. I'm not a developer or
debugger either; I have had only one semester of formal computer
classwork in my life, and that was a semester of FORTRAN back in 1972.
--
John (jo...@os2.dhs.org)
Tarkin
WTF laptop had a cdrom 15 years ago?
DenverD
> And the best part is I have a much larger less elitist group of
> people from whom to draw support; if all else fails I can always
> try MS.
seems, you have found *your* perfect software and sub-elite supporting
group..
i do hope both serve you well for many years to come..
for me personally, i used OS/2 years past its useful life, so i
understand what you are about and respect your hard headed stick to it
stance..
however, i'm not totally sure your choice will provide me all i need
today...even if over ten years ago paid for and supported with
security updates...but, if your choice is to run antique software
which was deficient when compared to other commercial systems on the
market when issued, and it meets your meager needs, then more power to
ya'...press on and be proud of this exciting achievement, troll..
--
DenverD (Linux Counter 282315) via Thunderbird 3.0.1-1.1, KDE 3.5.7,
openSUSE Linux 10.3, 2.6.22.19-0.2-default #1 SMP i686 athlon