Re: Does linux support my new widescreen monitor
sull...@gmail.com
Making it actually work is an entirely different kettle of fish.
There is a reason why Newegg and other manufacturers don't bother
certifying Linux to work
with their hardware and that is the market for Linux is so small it
isn't worth wasting the glue for the sticker on.
Linux: When your time has no value.
On Sep 22, 3:40 pm, "Judge Dredd" <go_a...@nospam.com> wrote:
> I'm thinking of buying this widescreen from NewEgg
>
> http://www.newegg.com/Product/Product.aspx?Item=N82E16824009101
>
> The monitor is advertised as being "Windows Vista Certified" so it will
> obviously work with Vista. But I'm concerned if it will work with linux
> because it doesn't say anything about being "Linux Certified."
>
> Will linux be able to automatically use the 1920x1200 resolution or will
> have need to tweak some config files to get the full resolution. I worry
> about editing config files becase I don't type too good and if I make a
> mistake I worry that I will have no video at all.
>
> Thanks,
>
> - Scott -
>
> --
> Posted via a free Usenet account fromhttp://www.teranews.com
Stephan Rose
> Linux should support it.
>
> Making it actually work is an entirely different kettle of fish.
Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the video
card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an extremely
difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power cord.
>
> There is a reason why Newegg and other manufacturers don't bother
> certifying Linux to work
> with their hardware and that is the market for Linux is so small it
> isn't worth wasting the glue for the sticker on.
>
> Linux: When your time has no value.
Vista: When you should be getting reimbursed for your time using it.
--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6
君のこと思い出す日なんてないのは
君のこと忘れたときがないから
Tattoo Vampire
> Linux: When your time has no value.
sull...@gmail.com: When you want to hear someone speak while
simultaneously licking their own privates.
Tim Smith
Stephan Rose <nos...@spammer.com> wrote:
> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the video
> card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an extremely
> difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power cord.
Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge for
many.
--
--Tim Smith
Charlie Tame
Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
easier all the time.
Stephan Rose
Matter of fact it's so easy that with the upcoming October Release, it
has hot plug monitor and driver support. So you can change monitors all
you want, drivers all you want, all on the fly without ever rebooting or
even seeing a command line.
Now try to change a driver under Vista without rebooting.
Charlie Tame
Well I have to admit that a year or two back Linux was sadly lacking in
friendliness, but it seems that the community has switched resources
toward competing with "Windows" on this topic and preserving the
existing security while MS has been forced to try and backwards engineer
security into the "Easy" system. Actually UAC seems to me to be trying
to "Emulate" the more GUI oriented Linux but for appearances only.
I mean obviously a user with the PW can screw up Linux security if they
want to, same applies to Vista, but WRT UAC I think there's more
incentive to set about screwing it up.
I take some of Dennis' points that Linux is not as secure as (Say) some
military system, but hey, I'd expect military systems to be operated by
trained people for specific purposes, not editing MP3s one minute and
launching missiles the next, could give a whole new meaning to "All
Shook Up" or "Bomb the Bass"...
That said it is not Linux but the Unix philosophy or model on which it
is based that is inherently better, and there is no blame attached to
Microsoft for this per-se, much has changed since W95, however I do
think maybe they would have done better to design a more isolated core
than to continue this never ending "Integration" between Apps like IE
and the OS itself.
As for compatibility, well, I seen no real need for our server at work
to look and feel like XP, but it does, as do all the rest of them.
Having system updates brought in by a "Browser" for example seems
counter intuitive when you think about it.
dennis@home
"Charlie Tame" <cha...@tames.net> wrote in message
news:u5Zj%23gh$HHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
Yes Ubuntu sets 1280x768 on my widescreen monitor automatically.
Shame its a 1280 x 720 lcd panel.
Just as well I can change it but I wonder how many newbies would fail?
XP and Vista get it right BTW.
Charlie Tame
Well maybe you should follow your own advice as offered to many here on
occasions and blame the manufacturer for using a non standard
resolution, or blame the user for not doing research into Ubuntu
requirements before installing. These kinds of comments work both ways :)
dennis@home
Don't be stupid 1280x720 is a standard format. It is one of the two HDTV
formats.
A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a standard
display mode.
There are plenty of OSes that do support it out of the box including some
Linux distros.
> These kinds of comments work both ways :)
Only if someone has a distorted view of the world.
Stephan Rose
Well nor does it need to be as secure as some military system. It's
installed on frigging home computers for crying out loud...I think the
whole security hype's going overboard.
Any system that is modifiable by the user is inherently only as secure as
the user using it. No amount of UAC popups or passwords can compete
against a user that willingly installs malware.
dennis@home
"Stephan Rose" <nos...@spammer.com> wrote in message
news:EMidnXilcNHyf2vb...@giganews.com...
> Any system that is modifiable by the user is inherently only as secure as
> the user using it. No amount of UAC popups or passwords can compete
> against a user that willingly installs malware.
>
Do you think you can explain that to alias?
He thinks linux is secure.
Charlie Tame
Where did I say it wasn't, read what I said again... you do read some of
the fanboy's allegations about users I take it? No, maybe not.
> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
> standard display mode.
Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems are
due to their lack of research?
> There are plenty of OSes that do support it out of the box including
> some Linux distros.
Please quote the part of my original post that suggests that Ubuntu is
perfect. I said it is easier than most and getting easier, you have
obviously decided to try and twist that around to build your straw man...
>> These kinds of comments work both ways :)
>
> Only if someone has a distorted view of the world.
Given your ability to distort a couple of sentences and reverse the
meaning of what was in them I should think that's more your problem than
mine...
Alias
No, I just think it's much MORE secure than Windows is all. Nothing is
infallible. With the slippery slope that Vista is taking Redmond, as a
computer user for business and pleasure, I guess I am a bit excited
about not having to put up with sliding down slopes.
--
Alias
To email me, remove shoes
The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'
Definitely. I really like the whole package manager concept much better
for updates. I use an IBM thinkpad tablet at work, and I was thrilled
when I saw how easy it is to check for updates for drivers, IBM
software, etc. because they designed a package manager for Windows that
finds all the updates for you and you can just pick and choose what you
would like to update. I found it quite ironic when I learned that most
of the features on the IBM website for PC support were supported on IE only.
--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html
"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett
dennis@home
"Alias" <iama...@shoesgmail.com> wrote in message
news:fd6r8o$n3h$1...@aioe.org...
That is not what you keep telling people here.
dennis@home
>
>> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
>> standard display mode.
>
>
>
> Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems are
> due to their lack of research?
There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.
This is the PC world which is an open platform, mainly due to M$ selling
windows/dos to anyone that wanted to build a clone PC.
If they hadn't we would have had expensive IBM PCs and expensive Macs both
running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a computer.
Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we pay for
having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$ had sold
exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no internet as
we know it, no linux..
Penn...@derrymaine.gov
>running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a computer.
>Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we pay for
>having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$ had sold
>exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no internet as
>we know it, no linux..
And then AmigA would of ruled the world as it was ment to.
--
Get the whole thing.
http://www.transbuddha.com/mediaHolder.php?id=1142
dennis@home
"dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote in message
news:OBEveHn$HHA....@TK2MSFTNGP04.phx.gbl...
> There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
> operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.
> This is the PC world which is an open platform, mainly due to M$ selling
> windows/dos to anyone that wanted to build a clone PC.
> If they hadn't we would have had expensive IBM PCs and expensive Macs both
> running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a
> computer. Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we
> pay for having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$
> had sold exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no
> internet as we know it, no linux..
>
>
s/afford\ a/affordable/g
Hadron
But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up getting
Beryl to work on Debian for example.
For some "it just works".
Fortunately the "advocates" here are not in charge of prioritising bug
fixes. If so, we would all be tweaking the MBR and xorg.conf from now
until eternity.
--
"BTW, does Jesus know you flame?"
-- Diane Holt, dia...@binky.UUCP, to Ed Carp
Alias
If you reread my posts, you will see that I say that Ubuntu is not a
*prone* to viruses and malware as Windows is.
HeyBub
>
> If you reread my posts, you will see that I say that Ubuntu is not a
> *prone* to viruses and malware as Windows is.
I think you mean Linux is more "supine."
Stephan Rose
> "Charlie Tame" <cha...@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:Oq9i2Vj$HHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>
>
>>> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
>>> standard display mode.
>>
>>
>>
>> Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems are
>> due to their lack of research?
>
> There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
> operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.
Well on that note, Vista does not out of the box support my nVidia 8800
GTX which definitely is not in the "odd hardware" category. The best
choice of a screen resolution that Vista gave me was 1024x768 on a
1600x1200 monitor.
Ubuntu supports it out of the box and instantly gives me the correct
resolution.
Vista, I needed to hunt down a beta driver to make it work. Having to use
Beta drivers on a production machine 6 months after an OS' release is
pathetic.
Now one could blame nVidia for this, but then again, nVidia had full
support for Linux for their 8800 GTX cards from day one and Ubuntu 7.10
will recognize it out of the box. If I didn't need full 3D Acceleration I
could even just run the open source driver and not even bother clicking
the "enable" button next to the nVidia proprietary driver. Would save a
mouse click or two during the install process.
So if Linux is fully supported, XP is fully supported, but 6 months down
the line Vista drivers are still in a Beta stage...to me, that points to
more of a problem with Vista than anything else.
Stephan Rose
> Charlie Tame <cha...@tames.net> writes:
>
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJV...@giganews.com>,
>>> Stephan Rose <nos...@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>> cord.
>>>
>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>> for many.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
>> easier all the time.
>
>
> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up getting
> Beryl to work on Debian for example.
One can always find a problem with anything if one looks for it. A quick
visit to google can also reveal all sorts of issues that people can have
doing a simple task such as breathing! Breathing must suck apparently...
Hadron
No two ways. And I agree. But getting high performance Video cards
working is a damn sight easier on XP because the installers are
better. Debian/Ubuntu are a pain in the hole - you need to recompile
the latest NVidia drivers using a set version of the compiler, for
example, when changing kernels.
http://forums.debian.net/viewtopic.php?p=101723&sid=ee1ce9d8a0d2bdc079993f49ee87136b
--
Siempre surgen emergencias cuando un gobierno desea fabricarlas..., y en
una emergencia, suelen romperse las reglas.
--- Isaac Asimov
dennis@home
"Stephan Rose" <nospam...@screwspammers.com> wrote in message
news:uO-dnUkdCuY...@giganews.com...
> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 07:11:52 +0100, dennis@home wrote:
>
>> "Charlie Tame" <cha...@tames.net> wrote in message
>> news:Oq9i2Vj$HHA....@TK2MSFTNGP03.phx.gbl...
>>
>>
>>>> A user shouldn't really need to research to see if an OS supports a
>>>> standard display mode.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Then why are users constantly told here that many of their problems are
>>> due to their lack of research?
>>
>> There is a big difference between expecting an OS to support a standard
>> operating mode and expecting it to support every bit of odd hardware.
>
> Well on that note,
Not on that note at all really but if you must bring odd hardware into a
discussion about software..
> Vista does not out of the box support my nVidia 8800
> GTX which definitely is not in the "odd hardware" category.
It certainly isn't in the common hardware either.
> The best
> choice of a screen resolution that Vista gave me was 1024x768 on a
> 1600x1200 monitor.
>
> Ubuntu supports it out of the box and instantly gives me the correct
> resolution.
>
> Vista, I needed to hunt down a beta driver to make it work. Having to use
> Beta drivers on a production machine 6 months after an OS' release is
> pathetic.
It is.. why did you buy such crap hardware? Didn't you have a choice? Why
didn't you choose something that did what you wanted?
>
> Now one could blame nVidia for this, but then again, nVidia had full
> support for Linux for their 8800 GTX cards from day one
I bet they don't have *full* support.
There is nothing on linux to use the full capability of the card.
If you think there is maybe you would let us know.
> and Ubuntu 7.10
> will recognize it out of the box. If I didn't need full 3D Acceleration I
> could even just run the open source driver and not even bother clicking
> the "enable" button next to the nVidia proprietary driver. Would save a
> mouse click or two during the install process.
>
> So if Linux is fully supported, XP is fully supported, but 6 months down
> the line Vista drivers are still in a Beta stage...to me, that points to
> more of a problem with Vista than anything else.
What it probably means is that they took an old driver and bodged it for
linux.. easy to do as there are *no applications* that are going to use all
the cards features.
With windows they need to support the full 3D feature set and get it
reasonably quick or gamers aren't going to buy it.
Stephan Rose
Crap hardware? The 8800GTX is the highest performance card available so I
chose what I wanted: The highest performance card I could buy because
that is what I needed.
>
>
>> Now one could blame nVidia for this, but then again, nVidia had full
>> support for Linux for their 8800 GTX cards from day one
>
> I bet they don't have *full* support. There is nothing on linux to use
> the full capability of the card. If you think there is maybe you would
> let us know.
Actually yes they have *full* support. And yes, there is software on
linux to use the full capability of the card, such as the CAD/CAM package
I am looking to buy: Pro/Engineer. Most certainly not a toy.
I also write software that requires 3D Acceleration via OpenGL.
>
>> and Ubuntu 7.10
>> will recognize it out of the box. If I didn't need full 3D Acceleration
>> I could even just run the open source driver and not even bother
>> clicking the "enable" button next to the nVidia proprietary driver.
>> Would save a mouse click or two during the install process.
>>
>> So if Linux is fully supported, XP is fully supported, but 6 months
>> down the line Vista drivers are still in a Beta stage...to me, that
>> points to more of a problem with Vista than anything else.
>
> What it probably means is that they took an old driver and bodged it for
> linux.. easy to do as there are *no applications* that are going to use
> all the cards features.
Sorry but that's simply not true. The nVidia driver has support for every
feature of the card. Sorry to burst your poor little bubble. There isn't
a single feature of the card that is available to me under Windows that
is not available to me under Linux.
Stephan Rose
No you don't. Well, Debian Maybe.
Ubuntu? No.
I've been running 7.10 for about a month now and gone through at least 5
or more kernel updates.
Number of times I've recompiled the nVidia kernel module: ZERO.
It's handled automatically when the kernel is updated. I don't have to do
a single thing. I *haven't* needed to do a single thing on two computers
both running 7.10 for the same length of time, both running nVidia
drivers, both having seen the same number of Kernel changes.
Hadron
You're right. I forgot about the restricted driver manager now. It is a
BIG improvement.
>
> It's handled automatically when the kernel is updated. I don't have to do
> a single thing. I *haven't* needed to do a single thing on two computers
> both running 7.10 for the same length of time, both running nVidia
> drivers, both having seen the same number of Kernel changes.
--
En el futuro no se usará MODEM para acceder a Internet.
-- Vinton Cerf. (1934) Padre de Internet. (Fundador de Internet
Society).
Peter Köhlmann
The "true linux advocate", "kernel hacker", "emacs user", "swapfile
expert", "X specialist", "CUPS guru", "USB-disk server admin", "newsreader
magician" and "hardware maven" Hadron Quark, aka Hans Schneider, aka Damian
O'Leary has these problems because he is running a liveCD only
So he needs to scrounge the net for all his problems he "has"
Some "small errors" might creep in that way
--
Linux: Because rebooting is for adding new hardware
JEDIDIAH
XP could also just be "getting it right by accident". That
happens on occasion when a confluence of malfunctions happen to line
up right. If Ubuntu is setting up a monitor to a certain resolution
I would expect that the monitor is giving it some indication that it
should be set to that resolution.
In an absence of any real information, it's hard to say really.
--
If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \
Charlie Tame
> "dennis@home" <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>> running on fixed hardware and none of this compatibility afford a computer.
>> Its worth remembering that incompatible hardware is the price we pay for
>> having so much choice and it could have been so different if M$ had sold
>> exclusive rights to windows/dos to IBM, no affordable clones, no internet as
>> we know it, no linux..
>
> And then AmigA would of ruled the world as it was ment to.
>
>
True enough, always makes me smile when they accuse MS of stealing from
Apple, it was actually Workbench and Intuition they stole :)
Charlie Tame
> Charlie Tame <cha...@tames.net> writes:
>
>> Tim Smith wrote:
>>> In article <od6dnb_MGJV...@giganews.com>,
>>> Stephan Rose <nos...@spammer.com> wrote:
>>>> Very true. Plugging the cable into the connector on the back of the
>>>> video card and then pushing the power button on that monitor is an
>>>> extremely difficult task. Oh and, don't forget to plug in the power
>>>> cord.
>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>> for many.
>>>
>>>
>>
>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>> get easier all the time.
>
>
> But a quick visit to Google reveals all sorts of issues. Look up getting
> Beryl to work on Debian for example.
Don't need to look it up, I have it running alongside the one I'm typing
on. BTDT
> For some "it just works".
Probably not on Debian actually but see this is what you are missing.
Beryl, Compiz and a couple of others are NOT finished products and the
community does NOT release them pretending that they are. I said, which
you and Dennis apparently cannot interpret, "Getting easier", I did not
say perfect...
> Fortunately the "advocates" here are not in charge of prioritising bug
> fixes. If so, we would all be tweaking the MBR and xorg.conf from now
> until eternity.
I have had far worse challenges trying to get things to work under Vista.
Charlie Tame
For Debian look up "Envy".
dennis@home
Apple stole it from Xerox even down to the one button mouse.
How a thief has the nerve to accuse someone else of stealing what they stole
I will never understand.
Must be a lack of morals I suppose.
dennis@home
> Probably not on Debian actually but see this is what you are missing.
> Beryl, Compiz and a couple of others are NOT finished products and the
> community does NOT release them pretending that they are. I said, which
> you and Dennis apparently cannot interpret, "Getting easier", I did not
> say perfect...
I think its you that doesn't understand.. Linux is unfinished and it
probably will remain that way as there will always be a new windows manager
in the wings.. shame they don't fix the simple things first. However they
won't as the existing Linux users and developers can't grasp how hard it is
for a newbie to install and use Linux. How do they expect Linux to actually
take over the desktop when they can't understand something so simple? Its
not rocket science, its understanding your target users. If you look at the
possible users M$ targets 100% while Linux might target 1-2%. Now if you
look at the one laptop per child initiative they are targeting their users
and are using "linux" howevr they have done a proper job and hidden all the
cr@p that you get with most Linux distros.
>> Fortunately the "advocates" here are not in charge of prioritising bug
>> fixes. If so, we would all be tweaking the MBR and xorg.conf from now
>> until eternity.
>
> I have had far worse challenges trying to get things to work under Vista.
>
Are they more difficult or do you just not know how?
People always find things the know easy, just ask a rocket scientist if its
difficult (PS no it isn't).
It would be a waste of time asking you what needs to change in Linux to make
it more acceptable to new users, unfortunately it is people like you that
will be asked and who will guide Linux in the wrong direction.
Its damn hard knowing how simple to make a system.. I know I have worked on
systems that are expected^W required to work for *all* people, not just
people who have been using the product for six months.
Peter Köhlmann
< snip bullshit>
When you have actually installed a modern linux, come back to us
But that will not happen anytime soon, as you miss the single braincell
needed to click on "OK" a few times and be greeted with a working install
one hour later.
Luckily for you, the "easy" windows got preinstalled. So you will never see
the major differences in the ease to install linux and the royal pain in
the ass to get windows working
--
The Day Microsoft makes something that does not suck is probably
the day they start making vacuum cleaners.
Alias
Interesting. I wonder why back in 84, if you wanted to buy a Mac in
Venezuela, you had to buy it from a company called Team Apple-Xerox?
Stephan Rose
> "Charlie Tame" <cha...@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:OUARBay$HHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>> Probably not on Debian actually but see this is what you are missing.
>> Beryl, Compiz and a couple of others are NOT finished products and the
>> community does NOT release them pretending that they are. I said, which
>> you and Dennis apparently cannot interpret, "Getting easier", I did not
>> say perfect...
>
> I think its you that doesn't understand.. Linux is unfinished and it
> probably will remain that way as there will always be a new windows
> manager in the wings.. shame they don't fix the simple things first.
> However they won't as the existing Linux users and developers can't
> grasp how hard it is for a newbie to install and use Linux. How do they
> expect Linux to actually take over the desktop when they can't
> understand something so simple? Its not rocket science, its
> understanding your target users. If you look at the possible users M$
> targets 100% while Linux might target 1-2%. Now if you look at the one
> laptop per child initiative they are targeting their users and are using
> "linux" howevr they have done a proper job and hidden all the cr@p that
> you get with most Linux distros.
Man your ignorance regarding Linux is absolutely amazing. All you can
apparently do is parrot information that is either outdated by several
years or does not apply to any modern and up to date distribution.
You claim they don't fix the simple things, when the 7.10 beta release I
am using right now mainly consists of one thing only: Fixes for the
simple things!
All I see with every single new Ubuntu release for instance are fixes for
the very issues, that rightly so, are complained about.
Most, if not all, of the various graphics issues regarding video drivers,
monitor setup, etc. are all being addressed with the current upcoming
release. Matter of fact, it's even capable of switching drivers via a
mouse click without a reboot. Try that under Vista.
Every single graphical aspect, multi-monitor, screen size, multi monitor
layout, driver selection, you frigging name it, is configurable via the
UI.
And if it fails to start up with the currently selected driver /
resolution, then it will come with a safe-mode setup that allows someone
to restore a working screen setup via a standard UI.
So please, explain to me how this is *NOT* fixing the simple things?
How is this NOT addressing the concerns and complaints people have had?
How are the developers NOT listening when they are implementing this like
that?
>
>>> Fortunately the "advocates" here are not in charge of prioritising bug
>>> fixes. If so, we would all be tweaking the MBR and xorg.conf from now
>>> until eternity.
>>
>> I have had far worse challenges trying to get things to work under
>> Vista.
>>
>>
> Are they more difficult or do you just not know how? People always find
> things the know easy, just ask a rocket scientist if its difficult (PS
> no it isn't).
You realize how easily that very statement can be turned around and said
about Linux too right? None of it is difficult, but you personally must
simply not know how.
> It would be a waste of time asking you what needs to change in Linux to
> make it more acceptable to new users, unfortunately it is people like
> you that will be asked and who will guide Linux in the wrong direction.
> Its damn hard knowing how simple to make a system.. I know I have worked
> on systems that are expected^W required to work for *all* people, not
> just people who have been using the product for six months.
And when I have people using Linux on a daily basis whose technical
knowledge doesn't exceed the ability to press a mouse button without any
kind of a problem...I simply call bullshit to your statements.
Same people would NOT be able to install windows.
They would NOT be able to install drivers.
They would NOT be able to configure windows.
And of course, they also are not able to install Linux. They are not able
to install *ANY* operating system as it is beyond their technical
knowledge to do so.
But you know what I find funny? They don't want to see windows again.
Ever. Their own personal opinion uninfluenced by me.
Finally download
The one guy is so happy saying his machine has never been as fast or as
efficient ever before.
And like I said, this is coming from a guy with absolutely zero technical
knowledge or skills. About the only "problem" he has encountered so far
is when e-mail server was temporarily unavailable and he came to me with
a POP3 error message stating that the e-mail server was not available.
And you know what? I've installed Vista on my hardware before. And I'll
tell you right now, it's more work than installing Ubuntu. I don't care
if it's different on *other* hardware. I only care about *my* hardware as
that is the hardware I own and use. Anything else has little relevance to
me.
Ubuntu Install Procedure (new 7.10 release):
1. Insert CD
2. Click Install
3. Answer a couple simple questions via a full 32-bit color UI
4. Reboot
5. Be greeted with a 1600x1200x32bit screen
6. Switch to nVidia's proprietary driver with less than 5 mouse clicks.
7. Install Updates
8. Reboot
Vista Install Procedure:
1. Insert CD
2. Answer a few equally simple questions on a 16 COLOR (not 16-bit) UI
3. Reboot
4. Be greeted with a 1024x768x16 bit screen
5. Boot back to Ubuntu because Vista doesn't recognize my Ethernet port
6. Download Ethernet drivers
7. Boot back into Vista
8. Install Ethernet driver
9. Reboot
10. Still using a 1024x768x16 bit screen on a 1600x1200 LCD
11. Hunt down nVIDIA Beta driver
12. Install nVIDIA Beta driver on a production machine
13. Reboot
14. No sound, hunt down sound card driver
15. Install sound card driver
16. Reboot
17. Curse as I realize that Vista doesn't correctly recognize the layout
of my MICROSOFT Japanese keyboard even after telling it my layout is
Japanese.
18. Hunt down some 20 megabyte bloated keyboard software from Microsoft.
19. Install said keyboard software so that Vista can get the layout right
occasionally. It still randomly gets it wrong just like XP.
20. No IME installed. Install support for Asian languages.
21. Scratch my head in confusion about 3-4 additional "Unknown Devices"
listed in my device manager. No clue what they are. Just hope I don't
need them.
22. Install some updates
23. Reboot
24. Install some more updates
25. Reboot
26. Install some more updates
27. Reboot
28. Hope there aren't any more updates to install and try to actually USE
the operating system for once...
I mean I agree with you, Vista just couldn't be simpler or easier to
install...you're absolutely right.
Kier
>
> "Charlie Tame" <cha...@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:OUARBay$HHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>> Probably not on Debian actually but see this is what you are missing.
>> Beryl, Compiz and a couple of others are NOT finished products and the
>> community does NOT release them pretending that they are. I said, which
>> you and Dennis apparently cannot interpret, "Getting easier", I did not
>> say perfect...
>
> I think its you that doesn't understand.. Linux is unfinished and it
> probably will remain that way as there will always be a new windows manager
> in the wings.. shame they don't fix the simple things first. However they
> won't as the existing Linux users and developers can't grasp how hard it is
> for a newbie to install and use Linux. How do they expect Linux to actually
The thing is, it's *not* hard, even for a newbiew, to install and use
Linux. I don't know why this keeps being repeated, when it's so manifestly
not true.
If someone is putting Linux on a machine where they aren't worried about
losing the existing OS, nothing could be simpler. In most cases, put the
CD or DVD into the machine and reboot. HOw is that hard?
If there's aneed to partition first, then yes, that's alittle more
daunting, but that goes for Windows too.
> take over the desktop when they can't understand something so simple?
How is Linux any harder to use than Windows? In general usage, they are
virtually the same - move a mouse and click on menus or icons. Providing
all is set up correctly to start with, little or no recourse to the
command line should be required. Apps may be different, but they don
similar things in largely similar ways, and quite a few of the core FOSS
apps are available to Windows users anyway.
> Its not rocket science, its understanding your target users. If you look
> at the possible users M$ targets 100% while Linux might target 1-2%. Now
> if you look at the one laptop per child initiative they are targeting
> their users and are using "linux" howevr they have done a proper job and
> hidden all the cr@p that you get with most Linux distros.
Not sure what crap you're referring to.
>
>>> Fortunately the "advocates" here are not in charge of prioritising bug
>>> fixes. If so, we would all be tweaking the MBR and xorg.conf from now
>>> until eternity.
>>
>> I have had far worse challenges trying to get things to work under Vista.
>>
>
> Are they more difficult or do you just not know how?
Exactly. Linux is just the same. It's not 'difficult' to use, merely
unfamiliar. If you've been used to Windows, you might need to find your
way around in a different fashion, but it's no harder than Windows.
> People always find things the know easy, just ask a rocket scientist if its
> difficult (PS no it isn't).
> It would be a waste of time asking you what needs to change in Linux to make
> it more acceptable to new users, unfortunately it is people like you that
> will be asked and who will guide Linux in the wrong direction.
So, what do you consider the right direction to be? Bear in mind that most
Linux users and developers don't want to see Linux become another lazy
clone of Windows.
--
Kier
MICHAEL
* dennis@home:
You must be joking.
If Kevin (kevp...@hotmail.com) can install Linux,
anyone can install Linux.
Especially, Ubuntu or PCLinuxOS.
I've installed a few versions of each, it really is quite simple.
Really. Probably, even for you, Dennis.
By the way, most folks in the Windows world *never* actually
install the operating system, they buy computers with Windows
already installed. This group would be 1000 times busier if
many PC users had to install Windows themselves, as do most Linux users.
-Michael
Adam Albright
>I think its you that doesn't understand.. Linux is unfinished and it
>probably will remain that way as there will always be a new windows manager
>in the wings.. shame they don't fix the simple things first.
Let me guess, by that stupid statement you're implying Windows is
finished? You want to talk windows manager, explain to me why in over
twenty years of trying the Boys of Redmond still haven't come up with
a shell good enough that many of their MVPs recommend and use
something else.
>However they
>won't as the existing Linux users and developers can't grasp how hard it is
>for a newbie to install and use Linux. How do they expect Linux to actually
>take over the desktop when they can't understand something so simple? Its
>not rocket science, its understanding your target users.
Oh, understanding target users. Yea, your right, Microsoft is so good
at that. Like the morons that designed a START button to turn off your
computer or give you an option that ends up deleting your recycle bin
when some newbies think you're just emptying the contents?
You're right Dennis, shame those developing Linux don't have designers
like Microsoft that make those kind of awe inspiring design decisions.
The poster formerly known as 'The Poster Formerly Known as Nina DiBoy'
A hypocritical lack of morals, methinks.
--
Priceless quotes in m.p.w.vista.general group:
http://protectfreedom.tripod.com/kick.html
"Fair use is not merely a nice concept--it is a federal law based on
free speech rights under the First Amendment and is a cornerstone of the
creativity and innovation that is a hallmark of this country. Consumer
rights in the digital age are not frivolous."
- Maura Corbett
dennis@home
"Adam Albright" <A...@ABC.net> wrote in message
news:fq4if3dq6qh3uj6ei...@4ax.com...
> On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:02:09 +0100, "dennis@home"
> <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>
>>I think its you that doesn't understand.. Linux is unfinished and it
>>probably will remain that way as there will always be a new windows
>>manager
>>in the wings.. shame they don't fix the simple things first.
>
> Let me guess, by that stupid statement you're implying Windows is
> finished? You want to talk windows manager, explain to me why in over
> twenty years of trying the Boys of Redmond still haven't come up with
> a shell good enough that many of their MVPs recommend and use
> something else.
Why are you so stupid as to bring windows into everything?
Do you have a fixation on it?
That comment was about linux and makes no comparisson to any other OS and
stands alone Linux doesn't need anymore windows managers it does need some
applications.
>
>>However they
>>won't as the existing Linux users and developers can't grasp how hard it
>>is
>>for a newbie to install and use Linux. How do they expect Linux to
>>actually
>>take over the desktop when they can't understand something so simple? Its
>>not rocket science, its understanding your target users.
>
> Oh, understanding target users. Yea, your right, Microsoft is so good
> at that. Like the morons that designed a START button to turn off your
> computer or give you an option that ends up deleting your recycle bin
> when some newbies think you're just emptying the contents?
>
> You're right Dennis, shame those developing Linux don't have designers
> like Microsoft that make those kind of awe inspiring design decisions.
>
You are being really stupid ATM, have you been stealing someone's pills?
Top
It might surprise you that there are NG just linux. If you are that
interested in linux you might want to check them out. I'm sure that be
more procutive for you. With your knowledge they will be glad to have when
they need help.
Top
MICHAEL
> interested in linux you might want to check them out. I'm sure that be
> more procutive for you. With your knowledge they will be glad to have when
> they need help.
The only thing that surprises me is the constant show of ignorance
proudly displayed by so many.... and that doofus light seems to be
shining rather brilliantly on you, too.
I didn't set the cross-posting, I simply replied from the vista.general
group. I've been posting in the Vista newsgroups since June 2006,
and will continue to do so. If I feel like making a comment about Linux,
I will do so. I use Vista on three machines, but I am certainly not anti-Linux,
any more than I'm anti-Windows.
-Michael
Adam Albright
<den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>"Adam Albright" <A...@ABC.net> wrote in message
>news:fq4if3dq6qh3uj6ei...@4ax.com...
>> On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 10:02:09 +0100, "dennis@home"
>> <den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>>
>>
>>>I think its you that doesn't understand.. Linux is unfinished and it
>>>probably will remain that way as there will always be a new windows
>>>manager
>>>in the wings.. shame they don't fix the simple things first.
>>
>> Let me guess, by that stupid statement you're implying Windows is
>> finished? You want to talk windows manager, explain to me why in over
>> twenty years of trying the Boys of Redmond still haven't come up with
>> a shell good enough that many of their MVPs recommend and use
>> something else.
>
>Why are you so stupid as to bring windows into everything?
>Do you have a fixation on it?
Answering a question by asking your own is a very weak "debating"
tactic. A question for you is why are you like all fanboys so
defensive of Windows? Every time I ask a question concerning one of
Windows' many failings all fanboys either go into their yell and
scream mode, try to change the topic or like you attempt to dodge the
question.
>> You're right Dennis, shame those developing Linux don't have designers
>> like Microsoft that make those kind of awe inspiring design decisions.
>>
>
>You are being really stupid ATM, have you been stealing someone's pills?
Why Dennis, I thought you were above name calling and snipping parts
of other people's posts you can't answer. I guess you're not.
Frank
What a totally ignorant drunken POS you are!
Loser.
Frank
Adam Albright
<den...@killspam.kicks-ass.net> wrote:
>
>"Adam Albright" <A...@ABC.net> wrote in message
>news:6ihif39a8jaoss8f6...@4ax.com...
>
>Still wrong.
Frank should be worried. You may surpass him as the most moronic
poster in this newsgroup. Considering how many nuts there are here, a
considerable achievement. Bully for you Dennis!
Peter Köhlmann
> Charlie Tame wrote:
>
>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge for
>>> many.
>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
>> easier all the time.
>
> Dual monitors is a real PITA under linux too. Even if you get them both
> working, there are very limited options for configuration.
>
>
Really? Strange that I haven't noticed since two years
--
Another name for a Windows tutorial is crash course
goos...@gmail.com
wrote:
> sittingduck wrote:
> > Charlie Tame wrote:
>
> >>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge for
> >>> many.
> >> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things get
> >> easier all the time.
>
> > Dual monitors is a real PITA under linux too. Even if you get them both
> > working, there are very limited options for configuration.
>
> Really? Strange that I haven't noticed since two years
Of course you don't Peter Kohlmann.
You earn your living running and programming WINDOWS applications.
That's why you haven't noticed.
Stephan Rose
> sittingduck wrote:
>
>> Charlie Tame wrote:
>>
>>>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>>>> for many.
>>> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>>> get easier all the time.
>>
>> Dual monitors is a real PITA under linux too. Even if you get them both
>> working, there are very limited options for configuration.
>>
>>
>>
> Really? Strange that I haven't noticed since two years
Me neither. Last I recall, it was Windows that left me stranded on dual
monitor support when nVidia dropped full screen overlay support on their
video drivers. I ceased being able to watch movies on Windows' halfassed
second "Desktop". Bad thing when my second desktop is my TV.
"Oddly enough," this is absolutely no problem under Ubuntu and took about
a few mouse clicks to set up. =)
Frank
You should worry and wondere why a friggin minkie is smarter than you'll
ever be, mr genius...mr computer expert...hahaha...lol!
Frank
Shenan Stanley
<paraphrased>
> Dual monitors is a real PITA under ____ (insert OS here)
<snip>
Isn't most of what this has to do with (dual monitor support) a function of
the drivers and software coming from the hardware manufacturer of said video
card being utilized?
I realize there are some simplistic support functions in the OS itself for
such things - but in the end - with good drivers and software from the
manufacturer - the built in functions of the OS are completely replaced with
the ones provided by the driver/software which shgould be provided for
whatever OS by the manufacturer of said hardware?
--
Shenan Stanley
MS-MVP
--
How To Ask Questions The Smart Way
http://www.catb.org/~esr/faqs/smart-questions.html
Peter Köhlmann
> On Sep 25, 5:32 pm, Peter Köhlmann <peter.koehlm...@t-online.de>
> wrote:
>> sittingduck wrote:
>> > Charlie Tame wrote:
>>
>> >>> Getting the video modes right can sometimes be a bit of a challenge
>> >>> for many.
>> >> Yes it can but Ubuntu is easier than most and these kinds of things
>> >> get easier all the time.
>>
>> > Dual monitors is a real PITA under linux too. Even if you get them both
>> > working, there are very limited options for configuration.
>>
>> Really? Strange that I haven't noticed since two years
>
> Of course you don't Peter Kohlmann.
Wrong.
> You earn your living running and programming WINDOWS applications.
Wrong again. Programming and debugging windows apps
*Not* running them. I am not interested in /running/ windows apps
And programming windows is *part* of what I am doing to earn my living
And you better believe me, it is the part I don't like that much
You see, windows is unbelieveable shitty. *Especially* for programmers
> That's why you haven't noticed.
Strange that I run linux for everything except programming and debugging
windows apps, then
And you may stop that particular nymshift now, flatfish
--
Just out of curiosity does this actually mean something or have some
of the few remaining bits of your brain just evaporated?
Peter Köhlmann
Nobody is worried
After all, you seem to have inherited the smarts of max two slightly
retarded slices of bread
--
Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
It could be worse, but it'll take time.
Shenan Stanley
> <paraphrased>
> Dual monitors is a real PITA under ____ (insert OS here)
> <snip>
Shenan Stanley wrote:
> Isn't most of what this has to do with (dual monitor support) a
> function of the drivers and software coming from the hardware
> manufacturer of said video card being utilized?
>
> I realize there are some simplistic support functions in the OS
> itself for such things - but in the end - with good drivers and
> software from the manufacturer - the built in functions of the OS
> are completely replaced with the ones provided by the
> driver/software which shgould be provided for whatever OS by the
> manufacturer of said hardware?
* correction in quote made above...
JEDIDIAH
>
> "Charlie Tame" <cha...@tames.net> wrote in message
> news:OUARBay$HHA....@TK2MSFTNGP02.phx.gbl...
>
>> Probably not on Debian actually but see this is what you are missing.
>> Beryl, Compiz and a couple of others are NOT finished products and the
>> community does NOT release them pretending that they are. I said, which
>> you and Dennis apparently cannot interpret, "Getting easier", I did not
>> say perfect...
>
> I think its you that doesn't understand.. Linux is unfinished and it
> probably will remain that way as there will always be a new windows manager
I don't know what the alleged fuss is about.
Linux completely supports the widescreen monitors on laptops.
It completely supports desktop widescreen monitors.
It completely supports your TV in the living room.
> in the wings.. shame they don't fix the simple things first. However they
[deletia]
--
Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.