If you want to try Linux.....
Stray Dog
Since there was a good deal of well-meaning discussion recently about
Linux, let me make a few suggestions:
1. It's always nice to learn about the bad stuff before you let your
"dreams" blind you to reality.
So, do a google search on the string "linux sucks" and see what the
authors say and decide if what they say is something you can dismiss or
think about. Its always fun to do searches on strings "X sucks" because
you can get to the dirt under the rug before the dirt gets to you.
2. Some more recent distributions of Linux can be totally booted and run
all the aps off the CDROM disk (in the drive), and some are on DVD disks
(you'd better figure out what is what on DVD drives and disks because
there are different kinds, now, and I can't help you on that). You have to
be able to get into your CMOS BIOS setup and configure the boot sequence
for your CDROM (or DVD) drive first, then anything else.
My most recent tests were with Ubuntu ver 8.0 (about two years old or
less) on a CDROM disk in the back of an UBUNTU book from the local
bookstore ($35 out of my pocket). Yes, it did boot up and I could run it.
But, my disappointment was with the failure of the OS to find my modem.
Those of you with "winmodems" which are pnp technology will be out of luck
unless you can find Linux drivers for that modem. Some computers have the
modem built into the motherboard and that migh make them SOL for you.
But, you can try to boot up, and see if you can get your printer to work
and your modem (or whatever else you have for net access). If you have a
cable modem and fios cables, it might work.
3. Sometimes you can do a lot better by buying those big 800-1000 page
books at discount bookstores on Linux and if they have Linux install disks
in a pocket at the end of the book. My most recent purchass of Red hat
workstations (more expensive than the books) came with incredibly poor and
misleading "manuals" that were more like comic books and I don't see how
any newcomer would have any success at all.
4. My Ubuntu absolutely needed 256 MB of ram or it would not boot up. Both
of my Win XPs work fine at 128 MB of ram.
Tony Sivori
> Since there was a good deal of well-meaning discussion recently about
> Linux, let me make a few suggestions:
>
> 1. It's always nice to learn about the bad stuff before you let your
> "dreams" blind you to reality.
>
> So, do a google search on the string "linux sucks" and see what the
> authors say and decide if what they say is something you can dismiss or
> think about. Its always fun to do searches on strings "X sucks" because
> you can get to the dirt under the rug before the dirt gets to you.
And if you did the same for Microsoft Windows, you'd no doubt conclude
that each and every minute the blue screen of death fights the viruses,
worms, and Trojans for dominance on your computer.
> 2. Some more recent distributions of Linux can be totally booted and run
> all the aps off the CDROM disk (in the drive), and some are on DVD disks
> (you'd better figure out what is what on DVD drives and disks because
> there are different kinds, now, and I can't help you on that). You have
> to be able to get into your CMOS BIOS setup and configure the boot
> sequence for your CDROM (or DVD) drive first, then anything else.
Most late model PCs will boot automatically from a bootable CD, no mucking
about in the bios needed.
> My most recent tests were with Ubuntu ver 8.0 (about two years old or
> less) on a CDROM disk in the back of an UBUNTU book from the local
> bookstore ($35 out of my pocket). Yes, it did boot up and I could run
> it.
There is no 8.0 version of Ubuntu. Buy a clue.
> But, my disappointment was with the failure of the OS to find my modem.
>
> Those of you with "winmodems" which are pnp technology will be out of
> luck unless you can find Linux drivers for that modem. Some computers
> have the modem built into the motherboard and that migh make them SOL
> for you.
You're still on 56k dial up? You could buy a real hardware modem for about
$20. It would pay for itself in the next software (OS or applications)
that you didn't have to buy.
> But, you can try to boot up, and see if you can get your printer to work
> and your modem (or whatever else you have for net access). If you have a
> cable modem and fios cables, it might work.
If you have a cable modem that connects to the PC by Ethernet, it will
work. Period.
> 3. Sometimes you can do a lot better by buying those big 800-1000 page
> books at discount bookstores on Linux and if they have Linux install
> disks in a pocket at the end of the book. My most recent purchass of Red
> hat workstations (more expensive than the books) came with incredibly
> poor and misleading "manuals" that were more like comic books and I
> don't see how any newcomer would have any success at all.
You have no idea what you're talking about.
Buying a book or magazine for an included CD means you'll usually end up
with an outdated version.
Pick a good consumer oriented distro like Ubuntu or Mandriva, download it
free and legal, and try it.
I've used Linux on my desktop for five years. Getting started was easy.
Getting the depth of knowledge in Linux that I had in Windows involves
some learning.
> 4. My Ubuntu absolutely needed 256 MB of ram or it would not boot up.
> Both of my Win XPs work fine at 128 MB of ram.
Really? I just this moment pulled one stick from my spare computer,
leaving it with 128 MB. Ubuntu 8.10 (the latest version) booted just fine.
Although I'd be the first to say that I wouldn't want to try to do much
with any PC running a modern OS crippled by 128 MB of ram.
--
Tony Sivori
Due to spam, I'm now filtering all Google Groups posters.
Zee
> My most recent tests were with Ubuntu ver 8.0 (about two years old or
> less) on a CDROM disk in the back of an UBUNTU book from the local
> bookstore ($35 out of my pocket). Yes, it did boot up and I could run it.
Ubuntu are free shipped to your place whether you are in India, US or
Europe. I got
10 copies (CD's) of Ubuntu without shelling a single penny just last
week.
>
> 4. My Ubuntu absolutely needed 256 MB of ram or it would not boot up. Both
> of my Win XPs work fine at 128 MB of ram.
I had an old PC before that has 256mb of ram and XP is unbelievably
slow when running few browsers already not sure what will happen
if you cut that memory in half.
Stray Dog
On Tue, 6 Jan 2009, Tony Sivori wrote:
> Date: Tue, 06 Jan 2009 04:44:43 -0500
> From: Tony Sivori <TonyS...@yahoo.com>
> Reply-To: TonyS...@gmail.com
> Newsgroups: misc.consumers.frugal-living
> Subject: Re: If you want to try Linux.....
>
> On Mon, 05 Jan 2009 21:32:38 +0000, Stray Dog wrote:
>
>> Since there was a good deal of well-meaning discussion recently about
>> Linux, let me make a few suggestions:
>>
>> 1. It's always nice to learn about the bad stuff before you let your
>> "dreams" blind you to reality.
>>
>> So, do a google search on the string "linux sucks" and see what the
>> authors say and decide if what they say is something you can dismiss or
>> think about. Its always fun to do searches on strings "X sucks" because
>> you can get to the dirt under the rug before the dirt gets to you.
>
> And if you did the same for Microsoft Windows, you'd no doubt conclude
> that each and every minute the blue screen of death fights the viruses,
> worms, and Trojans for dominance on your computer.
Actually, I've had very few BSODs on any of my boxes, and Win98SE is
sufficiently stable for me that --including all of MY experience with
other OSes--is my favorite. Since I use a unix shell account on a unix
ISP, I eliminate 99.999% of viruses borne on email. Zone alarm keeps out
most hackers. Locked down firefox holds down the malware. And, I don't go
to porno/etc websites, known to unload spyware, etc., onto boxes.
So, I am satisfied with what I am doing, in addition to having tried
Linux, OS/2, BSD, and the books on OS-X are starting to tell people the
truth: it crashes too.
>> 2. Some more recent distributions of Linux can be totally booted and run
>> all the aps off the CDROM disk (in the drive), and some are on DVD disks
>> (you'd better figure out what is what on DVD drives and disks because
>> there are different kinds, now, and I can't help you on that). You have
>> to be able to get into your CMOS BIOS setup and configure the boot
>> sequence for your CDROM (or DVD) drive first, then anything else.
>
> Most late model PCs will boot automatically from a bootable CD, no mucking
> about in the bios needed.
I have one in which the BIOS setup was configured to boot only from the
HD. People have to know if their box is not booting from the CD-ROM drive
what they need to be thinking about.
>> My most recent tests were with Ubuntu ver 8.0 (about two years old or
>> less) on a CDROM disk in the back of an UBUNTU book from the local
>> bookstore ($35 out of my pocket). Yes, it did boot up and I could run
>> it.
>
> There is no 8.0 version of Ubuntu. Buy a clue.
Since you said, below, that I have no idea what I'm talking about, I dug
out my book "Ubuntu for non-geeks, 3rd edition" by Rickford Grant,
copyright 2008, ISBN 978-1-59327-180-0 (go ahead and put it into
Amazon.com and see), so it is quite recent and not obsolete, and both on
the front cover and the back cover it says "covers ubuntu 8.04 (hardy
heron)".
I think it is you that needs to "buy a clue."
>> But, my disappointment was with the failure of the OS to find my modem.
>>
>> Those of you with "winmodems" which are pnp technology will be out of
>> luck unless you can find Linux drivers for that modem. Some computers
>> have the modem built into the motherboard and that migh make them SOL
>> for you.
>
> You're still on 56k dial up? You could buy a real hardware modem for about
> $20.
At a computer fest a few years ago I bought five "real hardware modems" so
I could be able to put Linux on all of my boxes and throw out all of my
pnp modems, some of which came with some of the computers I had.
It would pay for itself in the next software (OS or applications)
> that you didn't have to buy.
As I said in a prior post, I've had experience with every version of Red
hat from 4.2 through 5, 6, 7, 8, 8, and the "workstation ver 3, Taroon",
and now, this Ubuntu.
And, some years ago I was on most of the Linux newsgroups for 3-4 years,
learning as well as reading several of the thick books.
>> But, you can try to boot up, and see if you can get your printer to work
>> and your modem (or whatever else you have for net access). If you have a
>> cable modem and fios cables, it might work.
>
> If you have a cable modem that connects to the PC by Ethernet, it will
> work. Period.
Yeah, I've heard that one before, too.
The way I answer that question, compared to your "chip on the shoulder"
response, is to say "try it and see if it works, but be thinking about
what to do if it doesn't."
>> 3. Sometimes you can do a lot better by buying those big 800-1000 page
>> books at discount bookstores on Linux and if they have Linux install
>> disks in a pocket at the end of the book. My most recent purchass of Red
>> hat workstations (more expensive than the books) came with incredibly
>> poor and misleading "manuals" that were more like comic books and I
>> don't see how any newcomer would have any success at all.
>
> You have no idea what you're talking about.
I'd like to know how you determine when a person knows anything about what
they talk about.
> Buying a book or magazine for an included CD means you'll usually end up
> with an outdated version.
There are actually at least two websites specifically devoted to "old
versions" of software, available for free download, because there is a
significant population of people out there who like their older versions
of software. My advice is that anyone who finds that they like an older
version over a newer version should not be criticised for their personal
preference. Not all older software is obsolete, no good, or has
undesireable characteristics. In fact, I can write a short essay on
various drawbacks in newer software such as: activation, embedded spyware,
and time dependent disabling capabilities (in some sharewares),
Many newer versions of software have more stringent hardware requirements
so that your "free" OS needs you to spend (not save) money on new
hardware. Net gain: maybe a lighter wallet.
> Pick a good consumer oriented distro like Ubuntu or Mandriva, download it
> free and legal, and try it.
I gave my advice with good intentions and my experience.
> I've used Linux on my desktop for five years. Getting started was easy.
> Getting the depth of knowledge in Linux that I had in Windows involves
Besides all the versions of Red Hat that I listed above, I also tried
TurboLinux, Mandrake, and a couple of others, including BSD. Many crashed
on install. I had Linux running on half of my 30 or so boxes that I've had
over the last 20 years.
I bought a copy of Applixware (the office suite for Linux) and it worked
on some boxes even with the same OS but not other boxes (because of
hardware incompatibilities). The manual listed, at the end, at least 200
known software bugs.
Star Office runs better, but it has bugs, too.
> some learning.
I also found out that not everything in the books is correct. I had to
learn some "tricks" the hard way and none of the books or the manuals that
came with the distributions warned anyone about.
>> 4. My Ubuntu absolutely needed 256 MB of ram or it would not boot up.
>> Both of my Win XPs work fine at 128 MB of ram.
>
> Really? I just this moment pulled one stick from my spare computer,
> leaving it with 128 MB. Ubuntu 8.10 (the latest version) booted just fine.
I was refering to booting off the CDROM disk in the CDROM drive. I wanted
to see if one of my 128 mB boxes would let me see if I could boot off the
disk. The book was vague about this (saying the official statistics say it
needs 256) but the book also implied a person could "try" it and see.
I had a second identical box and just swiped the 128 from it and added it
to the one I wanted to use, then it would boot up off the CDROM disk.
I don't know why anyone would want to put 256 into their box and then
install Linux then take out half unless they were working saturday night
and could not get to a computer store for more. Everyone brags about how
cheap ram is and they should always be getting more, but for my use, I'm
almost always with enough.
> Although I'd be the first to say that I wouldn't want to try to do much
> with any PC running a modern OS crippled by 128 MB of ram.
I don't know what people do these days. Maybe they launch every ap they
have and put them into the task bar. I run minimum ram and everything I do
runs fine. I only run one or two aps in the task bar. When those aps are
running, those aps are vulnerable to hacking attacks aimed at
vulnerabilities in the aps (maybe less so for Linux, than windows?).
--
> Tony Sivori
> Due to spam, I'm now filtering all Google Groups posters.
>
I'd like to finally say that I was, and still am, very "pro" linux and
"anti" BG and MicroSoft. However, after many years of actual experience
and tinkering well beyond the "simple stuff", I've come to appreciate the
practical side of Windows. I have XP on three boxes here, one that my wife
absolutely must use because of certain things not because she has an
option or I want it (ecommerce), and I still use 98SE or even DOS.
I also meant my suggestions to _help_ people get their feet wet in Linux
and not come across as a fanatical blowhard.
I now follow the philosophy that a person needs to see how the software
works and whether they like it rather than whether that software is "free"
or not. I think there is a real reason why Linux is only on 1-2% of all
home-based desktops and if anything is gaining market share it is Apple
with their "Macs" running OS-X (derived from Darwin, derived from BSD),
and now Apple is really not selling "Macs" anymore, but PCs (486 CPU
architectures) that can run Windows, too.
Rod Speed
> Since there was a good deal of well-meaning discussion recently about Linux, let me make a few suggestions:
This is from the terminal fuckwit thats actually stupid enough to use DOS and
a terminal program for newsgroup access so his system doesnt get 'hacked'
> 1. It's always nice to learn about the bad stuff before you let your
> "dreams" blind you to reality.
The reality is that anyone with a clue can use linux fine. Even fuckwit dinosaurs.
> So, do a google search on the string "linux sucks" and see what the
> authors say and decide if what they say is something you can dismiss
> or think about. Its always fun to do searches on strings "X sucks"
> because you can get to the dirt under the rug before the dirt gets to you.
So stupid that it hasnt even noticed that there are
ALWAYS mindless religious wars about OSs.
> 2. Some more recent distributions of Linux can be totally booted and run all the aps off the CDROM disk (in the
> drive), and some are on DVD disks (you'd better figure out what is what on DVD drives and disks because there are
> different kinds, now, and I can't help you on that).
Or anything else at all, either.
> You have to be able to get into your CMOS BIOS setup and configure the boot sequence for your CDROM (or DVD) drive
> first, then anything else.
Wrong, as always.
> My most recent tests were with Ubuntu ver 8.0 (about two years old or less) on a CDROM disk in the back of an UBUNTU
> book from the local bookstore ($35 out of my pocket).
Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> Yes, it did boot up and I could run it.
It would be a tad more surprising if you couldnt.
> But, my disappointment was with the failure of the OS to find my modem.
Only fools hobble along with dialup modems anymore.
> Those of you with "winmodems" which are pnp technology will be out of luck unless you can find Linux drivers for that
> modem.
Wrong, as always. Plenty of distros, including Ubuntu, handle them auto fine.
> Some computers have the modem built into the motherboard and that migh make them SOL for you.
The vast bulk of laptops do, and any decent distro handles them fine.
> But, you can try to boot up, and see if you can get your printer to
> work and your modem (or whatever else you have for net access). If you have a cable modem and fios cables, it might
> work.
Corse it will work with any decent router etc.
> 3. Sometimes you can do a lot better by buying those big 800-1000 page books at discount bookstores on Linux and if
> they have Linux install disks in a pocket at the end of the book.
Only fools do that, the distros are always well out of date.
> My most recent purchass of Red hat workstations (more expensive than the books) came with incredibly poor and
> misleading "manuals" that were more like comic
> books and I don't see how any newcomer would have any success at all.
Not everyone is actually as stupid as you and there is plenty of stuff online, if you
arent crippling along with dos and a terminal program so you cant get 'hacked'
> 4. My Ubuntu absolutely needed 256 MB of ram or it would not boot up.
> Both of my Win XPs work fine at 128 MB of ram.
There's plenty of linux distros that do fine in 128 MB of ram.
Stray Dog
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
> Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 09:23:20 +1100
> From: Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: misc.consumers.frugal-living
> Subject: Re: If you want to try Linux.....
>
> Stray Dog wrote:
>
>> Since there was a good deal of well-meaning discussion recently about Linux, let me make a few suggestions:
>
> This is from the terminal fuckwit thats actually stupid enough to use DOS and
> a terminal program for newsgroup access so his system doesnt get 'hacked'
I've been doing a pretty good job kicking your ass all over the NGs,
though.
>> 1. It's always nice to learn about the bad stuff before you let your
>> "dreams" blind you to reality.
>
> The reality is that anyone with a clue can use linux fine. Even fuckwit dinosaurs.
If everything is just right, yes.
However, the fact that Linux is only on 1-2% of all home PCs -- as it has
been for many years now -- should be a big clue to goofballs like you that
Linux is not going to "save" mankind from big bad bill.
>> So, do a google search on the string "linux sucks" and see what the
>> authors say and decide if what they say is something you can dismiss
>> or think about. Its always fun to do searches on strings "X sucks"
>> because you can get to the dirt under the rug before the dirt gets to you.
>
> So stupid that it hasnt even noticed that there are
> ALWAYS mindless religious wars about OSs.
Including mindless "religious wars" carried out by yourself.
>> 2. Some more recent distributions of Linux can be totally booted and run all the aps off the CDROM disk (in the
>> drive), and some are on DVD disks (you'd better figure out what is what on DVD drives and disks because there are
>> different kinds, now, and I can't help you on that).
>
> Or anything else at all, either.
Pure ad hominem.
>> You have to be able to get into your CMOS BIOS setup and configure the boot sequence for your CDROM (or DVD) drive
>> first, then anything else.
>
> Wrong, as always.
Incorrect boast from Rod Speed The Troll.
>> My most recent tests were with Ubuntu ver 8.0 (about two years old or less) on a CDROM disk in the back of an UBUNTU
>> book from the local bookstore ($35 out of my pocket).
>
> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
> never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
Some people might like to know.
>> Yes, it did boot up and I could run it.
>
> It would be a tad more surprising if you couldnt.
I've had that experience, too, Mr Buffoon.
>> But, my disappointment was with the failure of the OS to find my modem.
>
> Only fools hobble along with dialup modems anymore.
At least 1/3 of all users in the US can't get anything else. However, I
can easily kick your ass all over the place just as fast as anything you
can do on anything you never tell anyone you're using. You might even be
the biggest liar that ever existed.
>> Those of you with "winmodems" which are pnp technology will be out of luck unless you can find Linux drivers for that
>> modem.
>
> Wrong, as always. Plenty of distros, including Ubuntu, handle them auto fine.
Plenty don't.
>> Some computers have the modem built into the motherboard and that migh make them SOL for you.
>
> The vast bulk of laptops do, and any decent distro handles them fine.
Completely at odds with all the info I've heard.
>> But, you can try to boot up, and see if you can get your printer to
>> work and your modem (or whatever else you have for net access). If you have a cable modem and fios cables, it might
>> work.
>
> Corse it will work with any decent router etc.
Fine if it does. Not eveyone has a router. Etc.
>> 3. Sometimes you can do a lot better by buying those big 800-1000 page books at discount bookstores on Linux and if
>> they have Linux install disks in a pocket at the end of the book.
>
> Only fools do that, the distros are always well out of date.
The basic strategy is to get a decent manual that is more likely to help
you than the 50 page "comic book 'manual'" that come with the pure SW
distro.
>> My most recent purchass of Red hat workstations (more expensive than the books) came with incredibly poor and
>> misleading "manuals" that were more like comic
>> books and I don't see how any newcomer would have any success at all.
>
> Not everyone is actually as stupid as you and there is plenty of stuff online, if you
> arent crippling along with dos and a terminal program so you cant get 'hacked'
Actually, there are a lot of people who actually ask questions before the
jump into an unknown. I know that must be a new idea for you, but I'll
invite you to go skydiving and not check your parachute before you go.
>> 4. My Ubuntu absolutely needed 256 MB of ram or it would not boot up.
>> Both of my Win XPs work fine at 128 MB of ram.
>
> There's plenty of linux distros that do fine in 128 MB of ram.
My first distro, Red Hat 5.2, did fine with 16 MB.
And, now, for everyone else's benefit......
Here is the Rod Speed FAQ.......(I didn't write it)
The "Rod Speed FAQ" read it below or at the URL for yourself.....
- - - - - - - - -
http://newsgroups.derkeiler.com/Archive/Alt/alt.internet.wireless/2006-07/ms
g00462.html
- - - - - - - - - -
After its recent emergence in the thread "How to calculate increase
of home wireless router range?", readers of this group may find
this useful. [based on a post in comp.sys.ibm.pc.hardware.storage]
Who or What is Rod Speed?
Rod Speed is an entirely modern phenomenon. Essentially, Rod
Speed is an insecure and worthless individual who has discovered
he can enhance his own self-esteem in his own eyes by playing "the
big, hard man" on the InterNet.
Rod is believed to be from Australia.
Rod certainly posts a lot. Why is that?
It relates back to the point about boosting his own self esteem by
what amounts to effectively having a wank in public. Rod's
personality, as exemplified by his posts, means he is practically
unemployable which means he sits around at home all day festering
away and getting worse and worse. This means he posts more and
more try and boost the old failing self esteem. Being unemployed
also means he as a lot of time on his hands to post in he first
place.
But maybe Rod really is a very clever and knowledgable person?
Clever? His posts wouldn't support that theory. As far as being
knowledgable, well, Rod has posted to various aus newsgroups
including invest, comms, and politics. He has posted to all as a
self professed "expert" and flames any and all who disagree with
him. Logically, here's no way any single individual could be
more than a jack of all trades across such a wide spread of
subject matter.
But maybe Rod really is an expert in some areas?
Possibly. However, his "bedside manner" prevents him from being
taken seriously by most normal people. Also, he has damaged his
credibility in areas where he might know what he's on about by
shooting his self in the foot in areas where he does not. For
example, in the case of subject matter such as politics, even a
view held by Albert Einstein cannot be little more than an
opinion and to vociferously denigrate an opposing opinion is
simply small mindedness and bigotry, the kind of which Einstein
himself fought against his whole life.
What is Rod Speed's main modus operandi?
Simple! He shoots off a half brained opinion in response to any
other post and touts that opinion as fact. When challenged, he
responds with vociferous and rabid denigration. He has an
instantly recognisable set of schoolboy put downs limited pretty
much to the following: "Pathetic, Puerile, Little Boy, try
harder, trivial, more lies, gutless wonder, wanker, etc etc".
The fact that Rod has been unable to come up with any new insults
says a lot about his outlook and intelligence.
But why do so many people respond to Rod in turn?
It has to do with effrontery and a lack of logic. Most people
who post have some basis of reason for what they write and when
Rod retorts with his usual denigration and derision they respond
emotionally rather than logically. It's like a teacher in a
class room who has a misbehaving pupil. The teacher challenges
the pupil to explain himself and the student responds with "***
off, Big Nose!" Even thought the teacher has a fairly normal
proboscis, he gets a dent in his self-esteem and might resort to
an emotional repsonse like "yeah? well your *** wouldn't fill a
pop rivet, punk", which merely invites some oneupmanship from the
naughty pupil. Of course, the teacher should not have justified
the initial comment with a response, especially in front of the
class. The correct response was "please report to the
headmaster's office right NOW!"
What is a "RodBot"?
Some respondents in aus.invest built a "virtual Rod" which was
indiscernable from the "real" Rod. Net users could enter an
opinion or even a fact and the RoDBot would tell them they were
pathetic lying schoolboys who should be able to do better or some
equally pithy Rod Speedism.
Are you saying that Rod Speed is a Troll?
You got it!
What is the best way to handle Rod Speed?
KillFile!
.
Rod Speed
> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>> Stray Dog wrote
<reams of your puerile attempts at insults any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
>>> Since there was a good deal of well-meaning discussion recently about Linux, let me make a few suggestions:
>> This is from the terminal fuckwit thats actually stupid enough to use DOS and a terminal program for newsgroup access
>> so his system doesnt get 'hacked'
> I've been doing a pretty good job kicking your ass all over the NGs, though.
Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
You've got done like a fucking dinner, time after time after time.
In this thread in spades. EVERYONE has done you like a fucking dinner.
>>> 1. It's always nice to learn about the bad stuff before you let your "dreams" blind you to reality.
>> The reality is that anyone with a clue can use linux fine. Even fuckwit dinosaurs.
> If everything is just right, yes.
Doesnt have to be anything like just right. Just like it doesnt with any other OS either.
> However, the fact that Linux is only on 1-2% of all home PCs -- as it has been for many years now
Completely and utterly irrelevant to whether even fuckwith dinosaur like you can use it
if someone was actually stupid enough to lend you a seeing eye dog and a white cane.
>>> So, do a google search on the string "linux sucks" and see what the authors say and decide if what they say is
>>> something you can dismiss or think about. Its always fun to do searches on strings "X sucks" because you can get to
>>> the dirt under the rug before the dirt gets to you.
>> So stupid that it hasnt even noticed that there are
>> ALWAYS mindless religious wars about OSs.
And that if anyone was stupid enough to go that route, they'd never use a single OS ever.
>>> 2. Some more recent distributions of Linux can be totally booted and run all the aps off the CDROM disk (in the
>>> drive), and some are on DVD disks (you'd better figure out what is what on DVD drives and disks because there are
>>> different kinds, now, and I can't help you on that).
>> Or anything else at all, either.
>>> You have to be able to get into your CMOS BIOS setup and configure the boot sequence for your CDROM (or DVD) drive
>>> first, then anything else.
>> Wrong, as always.
> Incorrect
Plenty of systems dont require anything like that. At most
you just select what to boot from on the initial boot screen.
Plenty will boot from any bootable CD without doing
anything but put the CD in the drive too and rebooting too.
>>> My most recent tests were with Ubuntu ver 8.0 (about two years old or less) on a CDROM disk in the back of an UBUNTU
>>> book from the local bookstore ($35 out of my pocket).
>> Thanks for that completely superfluous proof that you have
>> never ever had a fucking clue about anything at all, ever.
> Some people might like to know.
Everyone already does.
>>> Yes, it did boot up and I could run it.
>> It would be a tad more surprising if you couldnt.
> I've had that experience, too,
Fuck all do with those CDs included with a book like that.
>>> But, my disappointment was with the failure of the OS to find my modem.
>> Only fools hobble along with dialup modems anymore.
> At least 1/3 of all users in the US can't get anything else.
Bare faced pig ignorant lie.
>>> Those of you with "winmodems" which are pnp technology will be out of luck unless you can find Linux drivers for
>>> that modem.
>> Wrong, as always. Plenty of distros, including Ubuntu, handle them auto fine.
> Plenty don't.
Wrong, as always with current distros.
>>> Some computers have the modem built into the motherboard and that migh make them SOL for you.
>> The vast bulk of laptops do, and any decent distro handles them fine.
> Completely at odds with all the info I've heard.
Thats because you're so stupid you rely on the sort of mindless obsolete
shit you get from the sort of google search you stupidly listed above.
>>> But, you can try to boot up, and see if you can get your printer to
>>> work and your modem (or whatever else you have for net access). If you have a cable modem and fios cables, it might
>>> work.
>> Corse it will work with any decent router etc.
> Fine if it does. Not eveyone has a router. Etc.
Anyone who needs one can get one.
>>> 3. Sometimes you can do a lot better by buying those big 800-1000
>>> page books at discount bookstores on Linux and if they have Linux
>>> install disks in a pocket at the end of the book.
>> Only fools do that, the distros are always well out of date.
> The basic strategy is to get a decent manual that is more likely to help you than the 50 page "comic book 'manual'"
> that come with the pure SW distro.
Anyone thats so stupid that it needs that sort of manual has enough of a clue
to get the book and download the latest distro, or get real radical and have it
delivered for free it they are stupidly crippling along on a dialup modem etc.
>>> My most recent purchass of Red hat workstations (more expensive
>>> than the books) came with incredibly poor and misleading "manuals"
>>> that were more like comic books and I don't see how any newcomer would have any success at all.
>> Not everyone is actually as stupid as you and there is plenty of stuff online, if you arent crippling along with dos
>> and a terminal program so you cant get 'hacked'
> Actually, there are a lot of people who actually ask questions before the jump into an unknown.
No reason why you cant do that online too.
>>> 4. My Ubuntu absolutely needed 256 MB of ram or it would not boot up. Both of my Win XPs work fine at 128 MB of ram.
>> There's plenty of linux distros that do fine in 128 MB of ram.
> My first distro, Red Hat 5.2, did fine with 16 MB.
So what the fuck were you mindlessly rabbitting on about just above ?
Stray Dog
On Wed, 7 Jan 2009, Rod Speed wrote:
> Date: Wed, 7 Jan 2009 12:48:28 +1100
> From: Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com>
> Newsgroups: misc.consumers.frugal-living
> Subject: Re: If you want to try Linux.....
>
> Stray Dog wrote
>> Rod Speed <rod.sp...@gmail.com> wrote
>>> Stray Dog wrote
>
> <reams of your puerile attempts at insults any 2 year old could leave for dead flushed where it belongs>
Best for you....
You got it!
KillFile!
.
>>>> Since there was a good deal of well-meaning discussion recently about Linux, let me make a few suggestions:
>
>>> This is from the terminal fuckwit thats actually stupid enough to use DOS and a terminal program for newsgroup access
>>> so his system doesnt get 'hacked'
>
>> I've been doing a pretty good job kicking your ass all over the NGs, though.
>
> Just another of your pathetic little drug crazed fantasys.
You got it!
KillFile!
.
> You've got done like a fucking dinner, time after time after time.
>
> In this thread in spades. EVERYONE has done you like a fucking dinner.
You got it!
KillFile!
.
>>>> 1. It's always nice to learn about the bad stuff before you let your "dreams" blind you to reality.
Rod Speed
delusions about being a dog, desperately cowering behind
Stray Dog desperately attempted to bullshit and lie its way out
of its predicament and fooled absolutely no one at all, as always.
No surprise that it got the bums rush, right out the door, onto its lard arse.
No surprise that its so pathetically bitter and twisted about it.
Jeff
I've got a touch screen tablet I'm thinking of loading a *nix flavor on.
I've heard all the raving about Ubuntu, but it seems like Mandriva has
long had the edge. I don't have much spare time, should I believe the
Ubuntu hype or just load up Mandriva?
Jeff
OhioGuy
didn't work out for me because the computer I was trying it on did not
have any connection to the OS.
I needed something that would play various multimedia files (h.264,
mpeg4, etc.) right out of the box.
Instead of basic Ubuntu, I went with a variant that was developed
exactly for this purpose: Linux Mint. Right out of the box, it will
play pretty much any video file you throw at it.
Stray Dog
On Fri, 9 Jan 2009, OhioGuy wrote:
> Date: Fri, 09 Jan 2009 08:06:26 -0500
> From: OhioGuy <no...@none.net>
> Newsgroups: misc.consumers.frugal-living
> Subject: Re: If you want to try Linux.....
>
It is good of you to share your experiences with everyone else.
Thank you.
As for myself, the "best" Linux out of all I tried was Red Hat 6.2. Of
course, I think a lot of the later versions might have been "tweaked" up
more specifically for the latest hardwares but I've still got a lot of old
hardware here (some 10 years old), and the hardware incompatibilities
start showing up. My old hardware did not have "boot-off-CDROM"
capability, so there was almost no way available to me to install the
later versions, and the new CDROM drivers were not compatible with my old
CDROM drives. Not to mention some of the other problems I ran into, or
things I wanted but could not get in Linux.
Tony Sivori
>
> I've got a touch screen tablet I'm thinking of loading a *nix flavor on.
>
> I've heard all the raving about Ubuntu, but it seems like Mandriva has
> long had the edge. I don't have much spare time, should I believe the
> Ubuntu hype or just load up Mandriva?
Gnome or KDE?
If Gnome, I'd lean toward Ubuntu. If KDE, you might want to try Mandriva
first. Mandrake (as Mandriva was called back then) was the first distro I
tried and I stuck with it for years.
Currently I'm using Kubuntu, the KDE based version of Ubuntu. In my
opinion, the biggest advantage of Kubuntu over Mandriva is Kubuntu's
software repositories. The disadvantage is that Canonical is Gnome
centric, so Kubuntu doesn't get as much development as Ubuntu.
If you will be using KDE, I would avoid KDE 4 until it has had some time
to mature. Perhaps six months to a year. Kubuntu 8.04 is the last version
with KDE 3.x, not sure about Mandriva.
As for specifics about touch screen tablets, I don't know what would best
suit your needs. I've never had or used one.
If you can find time, you might want to read the Ubuntu and Mandriva
newsgroups and website forums.