Why Does Linux attract Life's Rejects like Homosexuals and other Social Outcasts.
Brother John
"Friends,
It’s very difficult to find a review of Linux free of
ultra-leftist bias, which is why ShelleyTheRepublican’s
annual review of Linux has become the most trusted
source of truthful information about this operating
system upstart: Christians the world over know that they
can turn to STR for factual and unbiased reviews of the
latest technology.
That is why every God-Given year we like to compare the
state of the art Linux and ask the simple question – is
Linux ready for the desktop yet? So far the answer has
been a resounding no. The freedom-hating red-communist
Linux freetards have consistently failed to deliver
compared to American free-market solutions such as
Microsoft Windows.
Our Christianity teaches us that redemption is
possible. so this is why we are mindful to check that
users of free-software have improved their ways. "
"When we last reviewed Linux we pitched the then
state-of-the art “Ibex’s Ubutu Interpid” against
Microsoft’s excellent flagship Windows Vista.
We felt that Vista outclassed Ibex’s open source
operating system, however we did note that since the
Ibex operating system could be downloaded for free it
may be suitable for non-business critical tasks (e.g.
lightweight letter-writing, or web-surfing) – provided
you can overcome it’s idiosyncratic user interface. We
were not 100% uncritical of Microsoft’s offering: We
felt that at the time Apple and Microsoft were both
failing in terms of their provision of Christian
oriented biblical software, and the important task of
pornography filtering."
"You may also remember that we promoted a stern
criticism of Apple’s tendancy to appeal to the
homosexual agenda with their range of candy coloured
gadgets and open adoption of liberal values. Since then
we are proud to say that Steve Jobs of the Apple company
has listened to our sensible criticisms and developed a
brand new product called the iPad with the needs of
American Christians like ourselves in mind. As you may
know for the last two months every bit of content on our
site has been written on Apple’s 100% porn free device,
which we agree is the obvious future of computing.
Meanwhile, Linux seems to have lost ground: A year ago
we were told that Linux would soon be the dominant
operating system on mobile phones:
Even their staunchest adocate Google seems to have
abandoned Linux in favour of it’s homage to iPhone
called Android.
Linux users seem to be leaving the operating system in
droves, most likely as a consequence of the continued
in-fighting between the various companies such as the
business-oriented Red-Hat and the
increasingly absurd maker of Ubunto which has just
renamed itself to “Lucid Lynx”. A year ago Linux could
be found on popular video-game consoles – even Sony who
once promoted this freetard operating system have come
to realize that free software is commercial suicide.
Incidentally, we tried to install this software without
much luck: We were able to conclude that this
African-made version of the Linux operating system we
can confidently say it’s the President Obma of
computer-programs: All ideology but rotten to the core.
Nobody could enjoy this nigger-rigged operating system.
Our installation woes began right from the start: The
install CD forced us to re-format the entire hard drive.
It would not install on a perferctly normal Windows NTFS
partition.
The installation process asked us a bunch of pointless
questions (such as where we live) – why not just make a
version for Americans since few other countries can
afford or know how to use computers. Next we had to wait
for almost an hour as the CD drive copied thousands of
meaningless files to the computer’s hard drive.
As you may know, Ubunto are known for packaging their
operating systems with hundreds of megabytes of
bloatware with bizarre names such as Gnome, and Pidgin.
Alas the documentation came with no freetard to English
dictionary to allow me to make sense of this gibberish.
How much simpler Apple’s model which is to simple ship
the device with everything pre-installed!
A wasted hour later the system finally permitted me to
login, boy what a disappointment. If we were under any
doubts about the sanity of the developers before our
suspicions were confirmed by the mass of swirling pink
which is their excuse for a desktop.
The disapointment was double since we could not find
any means of installing software. The usual approach of
browsing the web and then clicking on setup.exe did not
work. Ubunto first complained that it did not have any
Wine and then kept asking for me to type in “root
password” – this was a bizarre charade of security
especially given that the user-name I had created was
not even called root!
Why should a computer require wine in order to run – we
have no plans to test the effects of giving wine to a
computer.
After much research I figured that Ubunto intend us to
use something called “Synaptic” to install programs:
Compared to Apple’s lively market this synaptic is like
a store in pre-collapse communist Russia.
The presentation is awful and it lacks any of the
software brand you or I might find familiar. For example
a search for Microsoft Office will yield nothing of use.
So what are we supposed to use for our word-processing?
Ubuntu actually provide a number of word-processors the
most well-known being Open-Office:
You may remember that the bankrupted computer company
Sun were so unsuccessful selling this failed product
that they had to give it away. Linux users are used to
this kind of thing, it probably explains why they are
such losers!
Installing great Christian software on the iPad was a
breeze: Simply activate Apple’s easy to use market icon
and type in the kind of software you want. A search for
the word “bible” gave us an excellent selection of bible
quizzes, reference and concordance. You can even
download a spoken word bible for when you want some
prayerful bedtime listening.
Apple’s iPad has everything that a Christian could ever
need – simply the best selection of Bible related apps.
Since there are no apps worth speaking of for Ubunto – I
expect that most people will use it for little more than
browsing the web. Here parents should take note. Unlike
the iPad which includes excellent porn filtering
software Ubunto ships with nothing at all. We wondered
if any of these ubunto people have children? Most likely
they have already been sacrificed a pagan African god
since they are apparently unconcerned by the needs of
typical American parents.
We found that it was possible to browse pornographic
sites for hours and hours without any form of
obstruction. The danger of this should be immediately
apparent to any parent who does not wish their children
to become pornography addicts.
"Once again, we are forced to conclude that not only is
Linux not yet ready for the desktop – it has entirely
missed the boat. The desktop PC is dead – nobody uses
them any more. Ubunto should be consigned to the
scrap-heap of Ghetto technology and never considered
again.
Yours in Christ,
Jimmy Goddard"
Jerry
> http://shelleytherepublican.com/category/indecent-behavior/sexuality/...
Obviously a spoof. And not very well done.
Moshe
Agreed.
There is too much truth in it.
Looks like it might be the work of "Reverend" High
Plains Thumper = HPT = George Hostler = Wendy
Toiletwater = many more nyms.
He/she/it is comp.os.linux.advocacy 's very own Bible
"thumping" Jimmy Swaggart.
Hey George, you have really slipped a cog this time!
Chris Ahlstrom
> <snip>
Are you sleeping?
Are you sleeping?
Brother John?
Brother John?
--
November, n.:
The eleventh twelfth of a weariness.
-- Ambrose Bierce, "The Devil's Dictionary"
Brother John
wrote:
> Brother John pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> <snip>
>
> Are you sleeping?
> Are you sleeping?
> Brother John?
> Brother John?
No I am not sleeping.
Will you be confessing your sins today brother Chris?
Have you been a dirty man?
Foraging another man's penis or anus perhaps?
Keeping company with strumpets and trollops?
You need to be cleansed of Linux and the filth that it
breeds.
Brother John is here for you son and I will listen and
advocate to God on your behalf.
Moshe
You're a sick puppy Brother John!!
LSMFT
> http://shelleytherepublican.com/category/indecent-behavior/sexuality/homosexuality
>
> "Friends,
There's your problem, Christianity.
--
LSMFT
I haven't spoken to my wife in 18 months.
I don't like to interrupt her.
N8N
I don't really care, but how does this relate to home repair? I don't
even read any Linux newsgroups anymore because of this shit.
nate
Bob Villa
> Brother John wrote:
> >http://shelleytherepublican.com/category/indecent-behavior/sexuality/...
>
> > "Friends,
>
> There's your problem, Christianity.
>
> --
> LSMFT
>
> I haven't spoken to my wife in 18 months.
> I don't like to interrupt her.
Go smoke one!
chrisv
>"Friends,
*plonk* author and thread
Chris Ahlstrom
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 06:49:17 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom
> wrote:
>
>> Brother John pulled this Usenet boner:
>>
>>> <snip>
>>
>> Are you sleeping?
>> Are you sleeping?
>> Brother John?
>> Brother John?
>
> No I am not sleeping.
>
> <shitsnip>
>
> Brother John is here for you son and I will listen and
> advocate to God on your behalf.
Take it to alt.religion, God Boi.
--
As well look for a needle in a bottle of hay.
-- Miguel de Cervantes
White Spirit
> Brother John is here for you son and I will listen and
> advocate to God on your behalf.
Tell him I need some cocaine.
One Shot, One Kill
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:5dte16dlmqfviqj1f...@4ax.com...
> Brother John wrote:
>
>>"Friends,
>
> *plonk* author and thread
>
chrisv is a stupid piece of shit. chrisv is a liar.
HeyBub
>
> I don't really care, but how does this relate to home repair? I don't
> even read any Linux newsgroups anymore because of this shit.
>
The Linux devotees discovered a knock-off of a 40-year old operating system
designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone company and
think it is swell. They, like others who proselytize, have their
questionable decision validated by getting others to sign on.
While they are as successful in this endeavor as Jehovah's Witnesses in
South Boston, they are not detered from their daily rounds.
krivine
<snip>
Ha ha ha!
Thanks for that - best laugh I've had in a *long* while.
--
krivine
N8N
I disagree, I *use* Linux daily and think that it is a great
improvement over (pick your fave Windows distro here, i've used most
of 'em.) Currently running Ubuntu 10.04 on three different machines,
although I do have to admit that it has some problems, the issues with
Intel video support being most crucial.
That said, both the Linux fanatics and the Linux critics that inhabit
your average Linux newsgroup are equally unpleasant, and if you
killfile all the assholes, there isn't enough content left to be worth
the trouble.
nate
HeyBub
>>
>> The Linux devotees discovered a knock-off of a 40-year old operating
>> system designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone
>> company and think it is swell. They, like others who proselytize,
>> have their questionable decision validated by getting others to sign
>> on.
>>
>> While they are as successful in this endeavor as Jehovah's Witnesses
>> in South Boston, they are not detered from their daily rounds.
>
> I disagree, I *use* Linux daily and think that it is a great
> improvement over (pick your fave Windows distro here, i've used most
> of 'em.) Currently running Ubuntu 10.04 on three different machines,
> although I do have to admit that it has some problems, the issues with
> Intel video support being most crucial.
Disagree with what? I never said Linux didn't have its uses. I was merely
commenting on the fervor displayed by its acolytes. For some, I'm sure it
fills all their need marvelously, just as a blow-up vinyl doll satisfies the
yearnings for a nerd living in his parent's basement.
>
> That said, both the Linux fanatics and the Linux critics that inhabit
> your average Linux newsgroup are equally unpleasant, and if you
> killfile all the assholes, there isn't enough content left to be worth
> the trouble.
>
Notice I was not the one who observed that Linux was all sizzle and no
steak.
Jerry
> http://shelleytherepublican.com/category/indecent-behavior/sexuality/...
>
> ultra-leftist bias,
http://distrowatch.com/
> That is why every God-Given year we like to compare the
> state of the art Linux and ask the simple question – is
> Linux ready for the desktop yet? So far the answer has
> been a resounding no.
False. This is what GNU + Linux looks like.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/switch/try/oneday/index.php
> We
> felt that at the time Apple and Microsoft were both
> failing in terms of their provision of Christian
> oriented biblical software, and the important task of
> pornography filtering."
GNU + Linux has 300+ distros. One of them is specifically for
Christians. This includes stuff for Bible study and "parental
controls".
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntuce
> Our installation woes began right from the start: The
> install CD forced us to re-format the entire hard drive.
It does allow you to to partition your hard drive.
> It would not install on a perferctly normal Windows NTFS
> partition.
But it does allow you to read and write on a Windows partition. On the
other hand Windows does not recognize a Linux format.
> The installation process asked us a bunch of pointless
> questions (such as where we live) – why not just make a
> version for Americans since few other countries can
> afford or know how to use computers. Next we had to wait
> for almost an hour as the CD drive copied thousands of
> meaningless files to the computer’s hard drive.
Did you ever install Windows? Probably not, because Windows comes with
the computer. Windows also has thousands of seemingly meaningless
files. All modern operating systems have many files.
> As you may know, Ubunto are known for packaging their
> operating systems with hundreds of megabytes of
> bloatware with bizarre names such as Gnome, and Pidgin.
> Alas the documentation came with no freetard to English
> dictionary to allow me to make sense of this gibberish.
> How much simpler Apple’s model which is to simple ship
> the device with everything pre-installed!
Microsoft does that with Windows. You buy Windows whether you want it
or not. There are a few places where you can buy a computer with GNU
+Linux pre-installed.
But how do you upgrade your operating system? Or do you think that you
will never did to upgrade your operating system in this fast moving
world?
> A wasted hour later the system finally permitted me to
> login, boy what a disappointment. If we were under any
> doubts about the sanity of the developers before our
> suspicions were confirmed by the mass of swirling pink
> which is their excuse for a desktop.
I find the Ubuntu desktop more intuitive and simpler and easier to use
than the Vista desktop.
> The disapointment was double since we could not find
> any means of installing software.
That is extremely gross ignorance. One of the strong points about GNU
+Linux is that it is easy to install or upgrade software.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/items/global_update/index.php?lang=
> The usual approach of
> browsing the web and then clicking on setup.exe did not
> work.
That is out of date. Does Windows still do that?
> Ubunto
It is Ubunu. Learn to spell the name of the distro.
> Ubunto first complained that it did not have any
> Wine and then kept asking for me to type in “root
> password” – this was a bizarre charade of security
> especially given that the user-name I had created was
> not even called root!
This is gross ignorance. With GNU+Linux the problem of security is
simply solved and has been for long time. With Windows it is not
solved and probably never will be.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/items/viruses/index.php?lang=
> Why should a computer require wine in order to run – we
> have no plans to test the effects of giving wine to a
> computer.
wine is a program that runs on Linux and its purpose is to run Windows
programs without Windows. You don't need wine if you are not running
Windows programs.
> After much research I figured that Ubunto intend us to
> use something called “Synaptic” to install programs:
> Compared to Apple’s lively market this synaptic is like
> a store in pre-collapse communist Russia.
Again, it's Ubuntu, not Ubunto.
I have no problem with synaptic. I think it's wonderful. You also can
use the Ubuntu Software Center.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/items/search_software/index.php?lang=
> The presentation is awful and it lacks any of the
> software brand you or I might find familiar. For example
> a search for Microsoft Office will yield nothing of use.
> So what are we supposed to use for our word-processing?
Software made by Microsoft does not run on Linux, unless you use wine
(or something like wine). Linux is not Windows. Similarly GNU+Linux
software does not run on Windows. These are 2 different operating
systems. But whatever Windows has, GNU+Linux probably has something
equivalent. And you probably already have it installed.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/items/all_in_one/index.php?lang=
> Ubuntu actually provide a number of word-processors the
> most well-known being Open-Office:
And it's very good too.
> You may remember that the bankrupted computer company
> Sun were so unsuccessful selling this failed product
> that they had to give it away. Linux users are used to
> this kind of thing, it probably explains why they are
> such losers!
One of the strong points of GNU+Linux is that nearly everything is
zero price. This does not make Linux users losers; it makes them
winners.
> Since there are no apps worth speaking of for Ubunto – I
> expect that most people will use it for little more than
> browsing the web. Here parents should take note. Unlike
> the iPad which includes excellent porn filtering
> software Ubunto ships with nothing at all. We wondered
> if any of these ubunto people have children?
Again, it's Ubuntu, not Ubunto. This is not a typo. This person does
not know how to spell the name of the distro.
And again the obsession with porn. Here again is the distro for
Christians.
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntuce
> Most likely
> they have already been sacrificed a pagan African god
> since they are apparently unconcerned by the needs of
> typical American parents.
The word 'Ubuntu' is from a South African language and it has no exact
equivalent in English. It means something like "we are what we are
because others are what they are". It is a philosophy of community
and Mark Shuttleworth (founder of the Ubuntu distro) apparently
believes in this philosophy. It has nothing to do with a pagan African
god.
> We found that it was possible to browse pornographic
> sites for hours and hours without any form of
> obstruction. The danger of this should be immediately
> apparent to any parent who does not wish their children
> to become pornography addicts.
http://distrowatch.com/table.php?distribution=ubuntuce
You probably don't need this distro. You probably can find and install
the necessary software on any GNU+Linux distro.
> "Once again, we are forced to conclude that not only is
> Linux not yet ready for the desktop – it has entirely
> missed the boat. The desktop PC is dead – nobody uses
> them any more.
The popular statement that Linux is not ready for the desktop is
ridiculous.
I run Ubuntu 24/7. I'm running it now as I type.
This is the Ubuntu desktop.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/switch/try/oneday/index.php
For more info, see:
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
and:
http://distrowatch.com/
I'm not trying to peddle GNU+Linux. I'm not saying GNU+Linux is better
than Windows. I'm merely pointing out some false statements about GNU
+Linux. If you want to criticize GNU+Linux, fine. But first get
familiar with it so you know what you are talking about.
Jerry
> > Ubunto
>
> It is Ubunu. Learn to spell the name of the distro.
Nate Nagel
> N8N wrote:
>>>
>>> The Linux devotees discovered a knock-off of a 40-year old operating
>>> system designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone
>>> company and think it is swell. They, like others who proselytize,
>>> have their questionable decision validated by getting others to sign
>>> on.
>>>
>>> While they are as successful in this endeavor as Jehovah's Witnesses
>>> in South Boston, they are not detered from their daily rounds.
>>
>> I disagree, I *use* Linux daily and think that it is a great
>> improvement over (pick your fave Windows distro here, i've used most
>> of 'em.) Currently running Ubuntu 10.04 on three different machines,
>> although I do have to admit that it has some problems, the issues with
>> Intel video support being most crucial.
>
> Disagree with what? I never said Linux didn't have its uses. I was merely
> commenting on the fervor displayed by its acolytes. For some, I'm sure it
> fills all their need marvelously, just as a blow-up vinyl doll satisfies the
> yearnings for a nerd living in his parent's basement.
>
And again, from your original statement that using Linux is a
"questionable decision" to comparing it to a blow-up doll, you are
consistently implying that Linux is a second-rate OS. That may be true.
What would then be a first-rate OS? I'd like to try one. That would
make Windows about fourth or fifth-rate then by my reckoning, as I've
found Linux to be superior in just about every way.
The only reason that I still maintain a Windows partition is for crap
like updating my GPS, using AutoCAD, and cellphone-related stuff where
there's proprietary software involved that only runs on Windows. I
suppose I should figure out WINE one of these days.
In any case, discussing Linux on Usenet seems very similar to the old
saying about arguing on the Internet, with the twist that at the
beginning, you *think* you might have a shot at having an intelligent
discussion, so it's sort of like self-trolling.
nate
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
HeyBub
>
> And again, from your original statement that using Linux is a
> "questionable decision" to comparing it to a blow-up doll, you are
> consistently implying that Linux is a second-rate OS. That may be
> true. What would then be a first-rate OS? I'd like to try one. That
> would make Windows about fourth or fifth-rate then by my
> reckoning, as I've found Linux to be superior in just about every way.
I apologize for your misunderstanding. My "questionable decision" comment
was directed at proselytizers of ANY ilk. And the blow-up doll analogy was
meant to high-light those who can't seem to make it in the real world.
>
> The only reason that I still maintain a Windows partition is for crap
> like updating my GPS, using AutoCAD, and cellphone-related stuff where
> there's proprietary software involved that only runs on Windows. I
> suppose I should figure out WINE one of these days.
>
> In any case, discussing Linux on Usenet seems very similar to the old
> saying about arguing on the Internet, with the twist that at the
> beginning, you *think* you might have a shot at having an intelligent
> discussion, so it's sort of like self-trolling.
By my reckoning, and 93% of all computer users agree with me, Windows is
appropriate for virtually all personal computer applications. You have,
however, a valid point that, aside from GPS, AutoCAD, cellphone, and a few
dozen other production, application, and utility programs in daily use at
your house, what has Windows to offer?
Nate Nagel
Well, under Windows, my computer takes longer to boot, runs slower due
to the anti-virus software that I have to install, and Microsoft allows
me to pay for the upgrade to the newest distro when it is released, as
well as charging me extra for their office suite and other crucial
pieces of software that one needs for day to day computing. Also, it
gets rid of those pesky file permissions which make it so difficult to
write over or modify other people's files.
OTOH, if you have a fast Internet connection, with the exception of the
items I listed above, you can have a Linux system up and running in a
couple hours, with a FREE office suite (OpenOffice.org,) image editor
(GIMP,) etc. and the whole file system was designed by paranoid geeks,
so it's a lot harder to mess stuff up unless you deliberately log in as
root and start screwing with stuff. Pretty much everything seems to run
faster, as well. When the new distro comes out, whether or not I
upgrade has nothing at all to do with finances, as it's simply a matter
of pushing a button and waiting a couple hours. Also, Linux will read
FAT32 and NTFS partitions natively, but Windows does not read ext*
partitions without add-on drivers, and I don't believe that it reads
ext4 (the latest Linux file system) at all, so if you have a mix of
both, it makes sense to have Linux as your "main" OS.
Really, I have two functional OSes on all my computers (one Linux/XP,
one Linux/Vista and one Linux/Seven) and I find that just for basic
email, web surfing, website maintenance, maybe banging out a letter here
and there, I am in Linux 99% of the time and Windows rarely. In fact, I
boot to Windows so seldom that it's even more a PITA as there's always
many security updates/reboots that I have to do each time.
Oh, yeah, that's another nice thing about Linux. If upgrades/patches
are available, they always download as one big whack, and if a reboot is
required (rarely, usually only for kernel upgrades) it'll only be one to
get you thoroughly up to date.
Really, the only big, gaping hole in the Linux world for me is the lack
of a true competitor to AutoCAD for real, business-related CAD work, now
that ProEngineer has dropped *nix support (why? makes no sense.)
David Nebenzahl
> By my reckoning, and 93% of all computer users agree with me, Windows is
> appropriate for virtually all personal computer applications. You have,
> however, a valid point that, aside from GPS, AutoCAD, cellphone, and a few
> dozen other production, application, and utility programs in daily use at
> your house, what has Windows to offer?
Well, just to keep the record straight, it should be noted that Linux
(as well as practically all variants of (*nix) is *far* superior to Windoze.
Disclaimer: I am not an acolyte nor a proselyte for Linux, nor any other
*nix. I use Windoze (W2K pro) and am reasonably satisfied with it,
quirks and all.
But you're absolutely correct: for 93%[1] of all computer users, Windoze
is more than adequate. Even if Linux is far superior, it doesn't matter.
It's like talking about a Maserati when all you need is an old Chevy
Nova to get to and from work and to the grocery store.
It just doesn't matter to most users.
[1] As determined by gov't test. (Like the sign they have down there in
Redwood City: "CLIMATE BEST BY GOVERNMENT TEST". I'm not kidding.)
--
The fashion in killing has an insouciant, flirty style this spring,
with the flaunting of well-defined muscle, wrapped in flags.
- Comment from an article on Antiwar.com (http://antiwar.com)
Tegger
news:X8KdnS8oFbciloXR...@earthlink.com:
One word: EASY. (Apologies to Staples.)
To use an automotive analogy: Linux is good for geeks that like to design
and make their own brake master-cylinder pistons. If all you want to do is
step on the brakes and have the car cease motion, forget Linux and use
Windows.
I was a Linux geek for years. For years I ran an old Alphaserver with Red
Hat that handled everything from tape backup to Web-hosting to caching DNS-
server to an X-console to Mac-to-Win-to-Linux server to PPPoE router to
Internet firewall to I forget what all else.
Ever tried getting Linux and its apps to work on Alpha? Much of what was
available was broken out-of-the-box. Some stuff I could only get to work
using RPMs. Some stuff I could only get to work by compiling from source.
Windows is EASY. You download the program, or you put the CD/DVD in its
drive. You double-click on the appropriate thing (or maybe not even that).
Then you wait. Then you maybe reboot. If extra stuff is needed, you're
usually prompted to allow the install, and it goes and does it itself.
Easy. Easy equals 93% market share.
--
Tegger
Nate Nagel
Linux has gotten WAY better. "shopping" for software under Ubuntu is as
simple as firing up Synaptic, and if you don't add any unofficial
repositories, pretty much everything works out of the box. The only
thing that requires any cajoling at all is playing DVDs, but that's more
due to licensing issues with the DVD format itself than with Linux.
Nate Nagel
> On 6/15/2010 4:24 PM HeyBub spake thus:
>
>> By my reckoning, and 93% of all computer users agree with me, Windows
>> is appropriate for virtually all personal computer applications. You
>> have, however, a valid point that, aside from GPS, AutoCAD, cellphone,
>> and a few dozen other production, application, and utility programs in
>> daily use at your house, what has Windows to offer?
>
> Well, just to keep the record straight, it should be noted that Linux
> (as well as practically all variants of (*nix) is *far* superior to
> Windoze.
>
> Disclaimer: I am not an acolyte nor a proselyte for Linux, nor any other
> *nix. I use Windoze (W2K pro) and am reasonably satisfied with it,
> quirks and all.
>
> But you're absolutely correct: for 93%[1] of all computer users, Windoze
> is more than adequate. Even if Linux is far superior, it doesn't matter.
> It's like talking about a Maserati when all you need is an old Chevy
> Nova to get to and from work and to the grocery store.
>
> It just doesn't matter to most users.
>
>
> [1] As determined by gov't test. (Like the sign they have down there in
> Redwood City: "CLIMATE BEST BY GOVERNMENT TEST". I'm not kidding.)
>
>
If only I could have a Maserati for free simply by downloading and
installing it, I would be a happy camper indeed! And yes, if I could
afford a Maserati, I would happily drive it to the grocery store. Why
not use the best if you can?
David Nebenzahl
Well, you know what they say about how temperamental those Eye-talian
sports cars are. Same thing with Linux vs. Windoze (at least so far as
the easy user experience goes, as brilliantly explained elsewhere in
this thread).
Tegger
news:hv95t...@news6.newsguy.com:
> On 06/15/2010 08:02 PM, Tegger wrote:
>>
>> Easy. Easy equals 93% market share.
>>
>
> Linux has gotten WAY better.
Aha! An admission.
If Linux has gotten "WAY better", then it obviously was at one time
WAY worse. And that is my point, quite precisely.
Microsoft's desktop operating systems have their undeniable flaws, but MS
has very obviously spent untold hours making their system EASY for the end-
user. And they have succeeded better than Linux has.
The clueless non-techie end-user has a chance at success with Windows that
he does not have with Linux. Market share tells all, here.
> "shopping" for software under Ubuntu is
> as simple as firing up Synaptic, and if you don't add any unofficial
> repositories, pretty much everything works out of the box.
Oh, there's a catch. I am unaware of any such "repository" restrictions in
Windows.
> The only
> thing that requires any cajoling at all is playing DVDs, but that's
> more due to licensing issues with the DVD format itself than with
> Linux.
Except that with computers running Windows, all you do is put the DVD in,
and...it plays. EASY.
--
Tegger
HeyBub
>>
>
> Linux has gotten WAY better. "shopping" for software under Ubuntu is
> as simple as firing up Synaptic, and if you don't add any unofficial
> repositories, pretty much everything works out of the box. The only
> thing that requires any cajoling at all is playing DVDs, but that's
> more due to licensing issues with the DVD format itself than with
> Linux.
I'm glad for you, I truly am.
I need a solution that will process credit cards, can talk to my bank, can
do wire transfers of funds to an offshore account and accept invoices
denominated in sheckels.
I'm reminded of the TV commercial:
Tech: "Look, I've got flames on our web site."
Boss: "I need something that can integrate our inventory system with our
accounts receivable system.
Tech: "Yeah, but look, I've got flames on our web site."
HeyBub
> Anything attracts fruits. They don't need a reason be deviant.
There is a notion that Microsoft secretly funded the development of Linux so
the poke-noses, nit-pickers, cut-purses, four-flushers, fishwives, haradins,
and atheletes of the tongue would migrate to it, leaving the rest of us in
relative peace to enjoy our computing experience unsullied by epithets and
spittle. In the main, that plan has worked brilliantly.
In military parlance, I think this is called the "flypaper effect."
Nate Nagel
> Nate Nagel<njn...@roosters.net> wrote in
> news:hv95t...@news6.newsguy.com:
>
>> On 06/15/2010 08:02 PM, Tegger wrote:
>
>>>
>>> Easy. Easy equals 93% market share.
>>>
>>
>> Linux has gotten WAY better.
>
>
>
> Aha! An admission.
>
> If Linux has gotten "WAY better", then it obviously was at one time
> WAY worse. And that is my point, quite precisely.
Sure, 15 years ago or so, it really helped to be a techie.
Today, with the improved user-friendliness of Linux, and the
availability of high-speed internet darn near everywhere (and better
search engines to help you find answers to questions) there's no
question in my mind that Linux is easier to use, at least for this
non-techie.
>
> Microsoft's desktop operating systems have their undeniable flaws, but MS
> has very obviously spent untold hours making their system EASY for the end-
> user. And they have succeeded better than Linux has.
> The clueless non-techie end-user has a chance at success with Windows that
> he does not have with Linux. Market share tells all, here.
>
>
>> "shopping" for software under Ubuntu is
>> as simple as firing up Synaptic, and if you don't add any unofficial
>> repositories, pretty much everything works out of the box.
>
>
> Oh, there's a catch. I am unaware of any such "repository" restrictions in
> Windows.
The "repository" for Windows is called a "store," and it does not come
with the OS, you pay extra.
>
>> The only
>> thing that requires any cajoling at all is playing DVDs, but that's
>> more due to licensing issues with the DVD format itself than with
>> Linux.
>
>
> Except that with computers running Windows, all you do is put the DVD in,
> and...it plays. EASY.
Not without third party software.
RonB
> On Tue, 15 Jun 2010 00:24:16 -0700 (PDT), Jerry wrote:
>
>>> http://shelleytherepublican.com/category/indecent-behavior/sexuality/...
>
> Agreed.
> There is too much truth in it.
If by "truth" you mean lies -- as in Orwell's "1984."
--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
RonB
> I don't really care, but how does this relate to home repair? I don't
> even read any Linux newsgroups anymore because of this shit.
Which is one of the objects of trolls -- to chase off as many people
interested in the subject as possible.
RonB
> N8N wrote:
>> I don't really care, but how does this relate to home repair? I don't
>> even read any Linux newsgroups anymore because of this shit.
>>
>
> The Linux devotees discovered a knock-off of a 40-year old operating system
> designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone company and
> think it is swell. They, like others who proselytize, have their
> questionable decision validated by getting others to sign on.
So, how many anti-virus and anti-malware applications are you currently
maintaining?
aemeijers
investment money at Apple, or why (decades ago) GM sold engines and
other parts to AMC and Checker- to maintain the illusion of competition,
and keep the legions of Federal Anti-trust investigators at bay. MS
would do well to study what happened to GM in the decades since.
--
aem sends...
Marti van Lin
[nothing worth reading]
Same old crap from the mentally ill Microsoft Astroturfer.
FOAD Imbecile!
--
|_|0|_| Marti T. van Lin
|-|_|0| http://ml2mst.googlepages.com
|0|0|0| http://osgeex.blogspot.com
Jerry
> I need a solution that will process credit cards, can talk to my bank, can
> do wire transfers of funds to an offshore account and accept invoices
> denominated in sheckels.
You can do that with any operating system that runs firefox or any
modern browser. Recently I did a bank transaction using firefox on
Ubuntu.
Chris Ahlstrom
<snipped>
Because of trolls, that's why. If you must respond, keep it in COLA.
--
Humor in the Court:
Q. And who is this person you are speaking of?
A. My ex-widow said it.
Bob Villa
As in COLA RECTAL? ; )
RayLopez99
Who are these trolls fool? And why do you fear them and the truth?
You need a walled garden to debate Linux? Insulated from the real
world?
RL
Moshe
wrote:
Kind of.
COLA (comp.os.linux.advocacy) is considered the rectum
of USENET.
It's main purpose is to siphon off the bottom feeders,
radical Linux loons, religious zealots and freaks of the
Linux community so that they don't pollute the other
legitimate groups.
As you can tell it doesn't work too well.
Bob Villa
More to the point...anus. JK guys!
Marti van Lin
LOL stupid POS.
You and only *you* are the radical religious (not so) "Christian" zealot
who screams "God hates fagots" all over the place, because only you are
that pathetic closet queer, who has a grudge against all Bi- and
Homosexuals who - at least have - the balls to come out of the closet.
You and only *you* are spamming GNU/Linux USENET groups 24/7
Evangelizing your (un)holy church of Microsoft.
You are a abomination to the rational thought!
>> As you can tell it doesn't work too well.
>
> More to the point...anus. JK guys!
Oh crap, now you've just got him started, since the troll is obsessed
with genitals and especially the anus :-(
--
|_|0|_| Marti T. van Lin
|-|_|0| Registered GNU/Linux user 513040
|0|0|0| http://www.soundclick.com/martivanlin
Tegger
> On 06/15/2010 09:00 PM, Tegger wrote:
>> Nate Nagel<njn...@roosters.net> wrote in
>> news:hv95t...@news6.newsguy.com:
>>
>>> On 06/15/2010 08:02 PM, Tegger wrote:
>>
>>>>
>>>> Easy. Easy equals 93% market share.
>>>>
>>>
>>> Linux has gotten WAY better.
>>
>>
>>
>> Aha! An admission.
>>
>> If Linux has gotten "WAY better", then it obviously was at one time
>> WAY worse. And that is my point, quite precisely.
>
> Sure, 15 years ago or so, it really helped to be a techie.
>
> Today, with the improved user-friendliness of Linux, and the
> availability of high-speed internet darn near everywhere (and better
> search engines to help you find answers to questions) there's no
> question in my mind that Linux is easier to use, at least for this
> non-techie.
"...easier to use". Hm. The phrase, "damning with faint praise", comes
to mind here...
Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
>
>>
>> Microsoft's desktop operating systems have their undeniable flaws,
>> but MS has very obviously spent untold hours making their system EASY
>> for the end- user. And they have succeeded better than Linux has.
>> The clueless non-techie end-user has a chance at success with Windows
>> that he does not have with Linux. Market share tells all, here.
>>
>>
>>> "shopping" for software under Ubuntu is
>>> as simple as firing up Synaptic, and if you don't add any unofficial
>>> repositories, pretty much everything works out of the box.
>>
>>
>> Oh, there's a catch. I am unaware of any such "repository"
>> restrictions in Windows.
>
> The "repository" for Windows is called a "store," and it does not come
> with the OS, you pay extra.
You're going to have to define this a bit further. I have no idea what
you mean.
>
>>
>>> The only
>>> thing that requires any cajoling at all is playing DVDs, but that's
>>> more due to licensing issues with the DVD format itself than with
>>> Linux.
>>
>>
>> Except that with computers running Windows, all you do is put the DVD
>> in, and...it plays. EASY.
>
> Not without third party software.
With which all PCs ship, when they ship with DVD players. Even if you
have to load it yourself, all you do is pop the software CD in, and
Bob's your uncle.
--
Tegger
Nate Nagel
> Nate Nagel<njn...@roosters.net> wrote in
> news:hv9bp...@news7.newsguy.com:
>
>> On 06/15/2010 09:00 PM, Tegger wrote:
>>> Nate Nagel<njn...@roosters.net> wrote in
>>> news:hv95t...@news6.newsguy.com:
>>>
>>>> On 06/15/2010 08:02 PM, Tegger wrote:
>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> Easy. Easy equals 93% market share.
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Linux has gotten WAY better.
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Aha! An admission.
>>>
>>> If Linux has gotten "WAY better", then it obviously was at one time
>>> WAY worse. And that is my point, quite precisely.
>>
>> Sure, 15 years ago or so, it really helped to be a techie.
>>
>> Today, with the improved user-friendliness of Linux, and the
>> availability of high-speed internet darn near everywhere (and better
>> search engines to help you find answers to questions) there's no
>> question in my mind that Linux is easier to use, at least for this
>> non-techie.
>
>
>
>
> "...easier to use". Hm. The phrase, "damning with faint praise", comes
> to mind here...
>
> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
Not in my experience. What I meant above, to clarify, is that Linux,
for me, at least the distros that I have recently used (specifically
Ubuntu 9.04, 9.10, and 10.04) is easier to use than any release of
Windows since 3.1.
>>
>>>
>>> Microsoft's desktop operating systems have their undeniable flaws,
>>> but MS has very obviously spent untold hours making their system EASY
>>> for the end- user. And they have succeeded better than Linux has.
>>> The clueless non-techie end-user has a chance at success with Windows
>>> that he does not have with Linux. Market share tells all, here.
>>>
>>>
>>>> "shopping" for software under Ubuntu is
>>>> as simple as firing up Synaptic, and if you don't add any unofficial
>>>> repositories, pretty much everything works out of the box.
>>>
>>>
>>> Oh, there's a catch. I am unaware of any such "repository"
>>> restrictions in Windows.
>>
>> The "repository" for Windows is called a "store," and it does not come
>> with the OS, you pay extra.
>
>
>
> You're going to have to define this a bit further. I have no idea what
> you mean.
I mean that with Ubuntu, at least, most of the software that you could
ever want is available through repositories and there's already
utilities set up both command-line and GUI based to let you download and
install literally anything with only a few lines or clicks. And it's
all open-source and free. Windows? Need an office suite? Want to rip
a song off a CD? Want to... do pretty much anything? Most software
*ain't* free, and that that is, is likely a port of some GNU software
that was originally written for *nix and runs better under a *nix
operating system.
>>
>>>
>>>> The only
>>>> thing that requires any cajoling at all is playing DVDs, but that's
>>>> more due to licensing issues with the DVD format itself than with
>>>> Linux.
>>>
>>>
>>> Except that with computers running Windows, all you do is put the DVD
>>> in, and...it plays. EASY.
>>
>> Not without third party software.
>
>
>
> With which all PCs ship, when they ship with DVD players. Even if you
> have to load it yourself, all you do is pop the software CD in, and
> Bob's your uncle.
Too lazy to piss around with CDs, and what if you're using a junkpile
computer? And most of the software that comes with a CD burner, say, is
crippled to only work with that exact burner. Want to use it on another
computer? gotta buy the full version for "only" $50. I don't have
those problems.
Moshe
> I mean that with Ubuntu, at least, most of the software that you could
> ever want is available through repositories and there's already
> utilities set up both command-line and GUI based to let you download and
> install literally anything with only a few lines or clicks. And it's
> all open-source and free. Windows? Need an office suite? Want to rip
> a song off a CD? Want to... do pretty much anything? Most software
> *ain't* free, and that that is, is likely a port of some GNU software
> that was originally written for *nix and runs better under a *nix
> operating system.
The problem is most people want their software to work.
It's great that all this stuff exists for free.
Now try and make it work...
Look here for details:
http://www.mail-archive.com/ubunt...@lists.ubuntu.com/mail13.html
RonB
> "...easier to use". Hm. The phrase, "damning with faint praise", comes
> to mind here...
>
> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
Bullcrap. Nothing easy about recovering from a virus infestation, or
even maintaining anti-virus and anti-malware applications. Linux is
easier to install and much, much easier to maintain.
Jerry
> With which all PCs ship, when they ship with DVD players. Even if you
> have to load it yourself, all you do is pop the software CD in, and
> Bob's your uncle.
With Ubuntu, playing a CD or DVD is no problem. How did anyone get the
idea that it's a problem?
Tony Hwang
> http://shelleytherepublican.com/category/indecent-behavior/sexuality/homosexuality
>
> "Friends,
>
> It嚙踝蕭s very difficult to find a review of Linux free of
> ultra-leftist bias, which is why ShelleyTheRepublican嚙踝蕭s
> annual review of Linux has become the most trusted
> source of truthful information about this operating
> system upstart: Christians the world over know that they
> can turn to STR for factual and unbiased reviews of the
> latest technology.
>
>
> That is why every God-Given year we like to compare the
> state of the art Linux and ask the simple question 嚙碾 is
> Linux ready for the desktop yet? So far the answer has
> been a resounding no. The freedom-hating red-communist
> Linux freetards have consistently failed to deliver
> compared to American free-market solutions such as
> Microsoft Windows.
>
>
> Our Christianity teaches us that redemption is
> possible. so this is why we are mindful to check that
> users of free-software have improved their ways. "
>
> "When we last reviewed Linux we pitched the then
> state-of-the art 嚙踝蕭Ibex嚙踝蕭s Ubutu Interpid嚙踝蕭 against
> Microsoft嚙踝蕭s excellent flagship Windows Vista.
>
>
>
> We felt that Vista outclassed Ibex嚙踝蕭s open source
> operating system, however we did note that since the
> Ibex operating system could be downloaded for free it
> may be suitable for non-business critical tasks (e.g.
> lightweight letter-writing, or web-surfing) 嚙碾 provided
> you can overcome it嚙踝蕭s idiosyncratic user interface. We
> were not 100% uncritical of Microsoft嚙踝蕭s offering: We
> felt that at the time Apple and Microsoft were both
> failing in terms of their provision of Christian
> oriented biblical software, and the important task of
> pornography filtering."
>
> "You may also remember that we promoted a stern
> criticism of Apple嚙踝蕭s tendancy to appeal to the
> homosexual agenda with their range of candy coloured
> gadgets and open adoption of liberal values. Since then
> we are proud to say that Steve Jobs of the Apple company
> has listened to our sensible criticisms and developed a
> brand new product called the iPad with the needs of
> American Christians like ourselves in mind. As you may
> know for the last two months every bit of content on our
> site has been written on Apple嚙踝蕭s 100% porn free device,
> which we agree is the obvious future of computing.
>
> Meanwhile, Linux seems to have lost ground: A year ago
> we were told that Linux would soon be the dominant
> operating system on mobile phones:
>
> Even their staunchest adocate Google seems to have
> abandoned Linux in favour of it嚙踝蕭s homage to iPhone
> called Android.
>
> Linux users seem to be leaving the operating system in
> droves, most likely as a consequence of the continued
> in-fighting between the various companies such as the
> business-oriented Red-Hat and the
> increasingly absurd maker of Ubunto which has just
> renamed itself to 嚙踝蕭Lucid Lynx嚙踝蕭. A year ago Linux could
> be found on popular video-game consoles 嚙碾 even Sony who
> once promoted this freetard operating system have come
> to realize that free software is commercial suicide.
>
> Incidentally, we tried to install this software without
> much luck: We were able to conclude that this
> African-made version of the Linux operating system we
> can confidently say it嚙踝蕭s the President Obma of
> computer-programs: All ideology but rotten to the core.
> Nobody could enjoy this nigger-rigged operating system.
>
> Our installation woes began right from the start: The
> install CD forced us to re-format the entire hard drive.
> It would not install on a perferctly normal Windows NTFS
> partition.
>
> The installation process asked us a bunch of pointless
> questions (such as where we live) 嚙碾 why not just make a
> version for Americans since few other countries can
> afford or know how to use computers. Next we had to wait
> for almost an hour as the CD drive copied thousands of
> meaningless files to the computer嚙踝蕭s hard drive.
>
>
> As you may know, Ubunto are known for packaging their
> operating systems with hundreds of megabytes of
> bloatware with bizarre names such as Gnome, and Pidgin.
> Alas the documentation came with no freetard to English
> dictionary to allow me to make sense of this gibberish.
> How much simpler Apple嚙踝蕭s model which is to simple ship
> the device with everything pre-installed!
>
> A wasted hour later the system finally permitted me to
> login, boy what a disappointment. If we were under any
> doubts about the sanity of the developers before our
> suspicions were confirmed by the mass of swirling pink
> which is their excuse for a desktop.
>
>
> The disapointment was double since we could not find
> any means of installing software. The usual approach of
> browsing the web and then clicking on setup.exe did not
> work. Ubunto first complained that it did not have any
> Wine and then kept asking for me to type in 嚙踝蕭root
> password嚙踝蕭 嚙碾 this was a bizarre charade of security
> especially given that the user-name I had created was
> not even called root!
>
>
> Why should a computer require wine in order to run 嚙碾 we
> have no plans to test the effects of giving wine to a
> computer.
>
> After much research I figured that Ubunto intend us to
> use something called 嚙踝蕭Synaptic嚙踝蕭 to install programs:
> Compared to Apple嚙踝蕭s lively market this synaptic is like
> a store in pre-collapse communist Russia.
>
>
>
> The presentation is awful and it lacks any of the
> software brand you or I might find familiar. For example
> a search for Microsoft Office will yield nothing of use.
> So what are we supposed to use for our word-processing?
> Ubuntu actually provide a number of word-processors the
> most well-known being Open-Office:
>
>
>
> You may remember that the bankrupted computer company
> Sun were so unsuccessful selling this failed product
> that they had to give it away. Linux users are used to
> this kind of thing, it probably explains why they are
> such losers!
>
> Installing great Christian software on the iPad was a
> breeze: Simply activate Apple嚙踝蕭s easy to use market icon
> and type in the kind of software you want. A search for
> the word 嚙踝蕭bible嚙踝蕭 gave us an excellent selection of bible
> quizzes, reference and concordance. You can even
> download a spoken word bible for when you want some
> prayerful bedtime listening.
>
>
>
> Apple嚙踝蕭s iPad has everything that a Christian could ever
> need 嚙碾 simply the best selection of Bible related apps.
>
> Since there are no apps worth speaking of for Ubunto 嚙碾 I
> expect that most people will use it for little more than
> browsing the web. Here parents should take note. Unlike
> the iPad which includes excellent porn filtering
> software Ubunto ships with nothing at all. We wondered
> if any of these ubunto people have children? Most likely
> they have already been sacrificed a pagan African god
> since they are apparently unconcerned by the needs of
> typical American parents.
>
>
>
> We found that it was possible to browse pornographic
> sites for hours and hours without any form of
> obstruction. The danger of this should be immediately
> apparent to any parent who does not wish their children
> to become pornography addicts.
>
> "Once again, we are forced to conclude that not only is
> Linux not yet ready for the desktop 嚙碾 it has entirely
> missed the boat. The desktop PC is dead 嚙碾 nobody uses
> them any more. Ubunto should be consigned to the
> scrap-heap of Ghetto technology and never considered
> again.
>
> Yours in Christ,
>
> Jimmy Goddard"
Hi,
I always worked with Unix. What is wrong with Linux? It is free.
Name something you can't do using Linux.
My laptops, desktops are dual boot.
Nate Nagel
Probably my fault, when I mentioned that it wasn't *quite* as simple as
installing the appropriate packages through Synaptic.
Here's the whole "painful" procedure...
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RestrictedFormats/PlayingDVDs
You have to install a package *and* execute a command. which really
involves just copying and pasting two lines from the help page into a
terminal window. I don't recall needing to reboot, indications on the
page to the contrary. (I think the only time I've had to reboot was
after a kernel upgrade.)
Jerry
> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
What's hard about Ubuntu?
Here is an example of how easy Ubuntu is.
Every once in a while a notice pops up that there are some updates.
The Update Manager lists all the updates. Each update has name,
description, changes, and a checkbox. All the checkboxes are checked
by default. Click on the 'update' button. It asks for a password. You
can watch the progress report on the downloads. Then you can watch the
installation processes. You don't need to do anything, just watch.
That's it. Done. It doesn't get easier than that. After all the
updates are downloaded and installed, you never need to restart unless
the Linux kernel was updated.
Moshe
> Hi,
> I always worked with Unix. What is wrong with Linux? It is free.
So is dog shit when you step in it and it sticks to your
shoe.
> Name something you can't do using Linux.
Run ProTools or Nuendo the DAW's of choice for
professional recording studios.
> My laptops, desktops are dual boot.
If Linux is so great why the need to dual boot?
Moshe
Until you reboot and nothing works.........
Jerry
If that happens, it is because you did something wrong. If you are
upgrading Ubuntu itself, maybe first download the latest version of
Ubuntu, burn it to a CD, then backup all your own files, do all the
updates, before upgrading Ubuntu itself. But if you do everything
right, it is unlikely that there will be a problem. I usually wait
about a month after they announce the newest version of Ubuntu, to
avoid the stampede. The stampede makes the downloads slow and if they
take too long they time out.
Moshe
> On Jun 16, 9:07�pm, Moshe <goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:03:21 -0700 (PDT), Jerry wrote:
>>> On Jun 16, 7:59�pm, Tegger <inva...@invalid.inv> wrote:
>>
>>>> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
>>> What's hard about Ubuntu?
>>
>>> Here is an example of how easy Ubuntu is.
>>> Every once in a while a notice pops up that there are some updates.
>>> The Update Manager lists all the updates. Each update has name,
>>> description, changes, and a checkbox. All the checkboxes are checked
>>> by default. Click on the 'update' button. It asks for a password. You
>>> can watch the progress report on the downloads. Then you can watch the
>>> installation processes. You don't need to do anything, just watch.
>>> That's it. Done. It doesn't get easier than that. After all the
>>> updates are downloaded and installed, you never need to restart unless
>>> the Linux kernel was updated.
>>
>> Until you reboot and nothing works.........
> How often does that happen?
http://www.mail-archive.com/ubunt...@lists.ubuntu.com/mail13.html
> If that happens, it is because you did something wrong.
Classic Linux advocacy, blame the user......
http://www.mail-archive.com/ubunt...@lists.ubuntu.com/mail13.html
and that is only one days worth....
Have fun!
The Daring Dufas
> On Jun 15, 1:45 pm, "HeyBub"<hey...@NOSPAMgmail.com> wrote:
>> N8N wrote:
>>
>>> I don't really care, but how does this relate to home repair? I don't
>>> even read any Linux newsgroups anymore because of this shit.
>>
>> The Linux devotees discovered a knock-off of a 40-year old operating system
>> designed by a money-losing division of your local telephone company and
>> think it is swell. They, like others who proselytize, have their
>> questionable decision validated by getting others to sign on.
>>
>> South Boston, they are not detered from their daily rounds.
>
> I disagree, I *use* Linux daily and think that it is a great
> improvement over (pick your fave Windows distro here, i've used most
> of 'em.) Currently running Ubuntu 10.04 on three different machines,
> although I do have to admit that it has some problems, the issues with
> Intel video support being most crucial.
>
> That said, both the Linux fanatics and the Linux critics that inhabit
> your average Linux newsgroup are equally unpleasant, and if you
> killfile all the assholes, there isn't enough content left to be worth
> the trouble.
>
> nate
I'm on Windows because most of my customers use Windows. I am quite
fond of PC-BSD, it's almost bulletproof and plays nice with Flash
now.
TDD
Jerry
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:34:39 -0700 (PDT), Jerry wrote:
> > On Jun 16, 9:07 pm, Moshe <goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com> wrote:
> >> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:03:21 -0700 (PDT), Jerry wrote:
> >>> On Jun 16, 7:59 pm, Tegger <inva...@invalid.inv> wrote:
>
> >>>> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
> >>> What's hard about Ubuntu?
>
> >>> Here is an example of how easy Ubuntu is.
> >>> Every once in a while a notice pops up that there are some updates.
> >>> The Update Manager lists all the updates. Each update has name,
> >>> description, changes, and a checkbox. All the checkboxes are checked
> >>> by default. Click on the 'update' button. It asks for a password. You
> >>> can watch the progress report on the downloads. Then you can watch the
> >>> installation processes. You don't need to do anything, just watch.
> >>> That's it. Done. It doesn't get easier than that. After all the
> >>> updates are downloaded and installed, you never need to restart unless
> >>> the Linux kernel was updated.
>
> >> Until you reboot and nothing works.........
> > How often does that happen?
>
>
> > If that happens, it is because you did something wrong.
>
> Classic Linux advocacy, blame the user......
or never that an upgrade goes wrong if you follow all the
instructions.
In the worst case scenario, you can install from the CD that you have
prepared, and you don't need to worry about your project files that
you backed up on your external hard drive and/or on your flash drive,
and you don't need to worry about your passwords that you keep in your
paper notebook. So what's the problem?
Windows solves all the problems of upgrading online by not allowing
you to upgrade Windows online. What would happen if Microsoft had you
upgrade Windows online?
I think it is wonderful that I can update thousands of files and
upgrade Ubuntu itself, all without leaving my desk and all without
spending any money.
The one beef I have with the Ubuntu community is that they don't allow
an upgrade from CD. An upgrade is not the same as an install. I tried
to explain that to them but they seem to not understand. Some years
ago, Mandrake had a CD that I could install from or upgrade from.
Jerry
> If Linux is so great why the need to dual boot?
Do you know what 'dual boot' means? No you don't.
Dual boot means that when you boot, you have a choice which way to go:
Windows or Linux. Actually I prefer the term 'multiple boot' because
there could be more than 2 options.
AZ Nomad
>Hi,
>I always worked with Unix. What is wrong with Linux? It is free.
>Name something you can't do using Linux.
>My laptops, desktops are dual boot.
You needed to quote that entire 190 line turd just to add three lines?
Moshe
I ask again...
If Linux is so great, why the need to dual boot?
IOW aren't all Linux distributions the same?
Why the need to dual boot?
Jerry
For example I have Windows Vista on one hard drive, Ubuntu on a 2nd
hard drive. When I boot I have options. Why is that so hard to
understand?
> IOW aren't all Linux distributions the same?
Perhaps they are the same in having the same kernel, Linux. And they
are nearly the same in the applications. But there are differences.
Why do you see dual boot (or multiple boot) as a problem? It gives you
a list and you pick one. How is that a problem? Would you prefer that
you have multiple operating systems on your computer and you can't
pick which one?
Moshe
> On Jun 16, 10:47 pm, Moshe <goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 21:12:57 -0700 (PDT), Jerry wrote:
>>> On Jun 16, 9:07 pm, Moshe <goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>
>>>> If Linux is so great why the need to dual boot?
>>> Do you know what 'dual boot' means? No you don't.
>>
>>> Dual boot means that when you boot, you have a choice which way to go:
>>> Windows or Linux. Actually I prefer the term 'multiple boot' because
>>> there could be more than 2 options.
>>
>> I ask again...
>> If Linux is so great, why the need to dual boot?
>>
>> IOW aren't all Linux distributions the same?
>>
>> Why the need to dual boot?
> I already explained that.
>
> For example I have Windows Vista on one hard drive, Ubuntu on a 2nd
> hard drive. When I boot I have options. Why is that so hard to
> understand?
Again....
If Linux is so great, why do you need Windows.
>> IOW aren't all Linux distributions the same?
> Perhaps they are the same in having the same kernel, Linux. And they
> are nearly the same in the applications. But there are differences.
>
> Why do you see dual boot (or multiple boot) as a problem? It gives you
> a list and you pick one. How is that a problem? Would you prefer that
> you have multiple operating systems on your computer and you can't
> pick which one?
I see dual boot as a problem because you have to manage
and sync two sets of data.
It's a clusterfsck.
High Plains Thumper
> Moshe wrote:
>> Jerry wrote:
>>> Moshe wrote:
>>>> Jerry wrote:
>>>>> Tegger wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
>>>>>
>>>>> What's hard about Ubuntu?
>>>>>
>>>>> Here is an example of how easy Ubuntu is. Every once in a
>>>>> while a notice pops up that there are some updates. The
>>>>> Update Manager lists all the updates. Each update has name,
>>>>> description, changes, and a checkbox. All the checkboxes are
>>>>> checked by default. Click on the 'update' button. It asks
>>>>> for a password. You can watch the progress report on the
>>>>> downloads. Then you can watch the installation processes.
>>>>> You don't need to do anything, just watch. That's it. Done.
>>>>> It doesn't get easier than that. After all the updates are
>>>>> downloaded and installed, you never need to restart unless
>>>>> the Linux kernel was updated.
>>>>
>>>> Until you reboot and nothing works.........
>>>
>>> How often does that happen?
>>
>> http://www.mail-archive.com/ubuntu-b...@lists.ubuntu.com/mail13.html
>>
>>> If that happens, it is because you did something wrong.
>>
>> Classic Linux advocacy, blame the user......
>
> I don't have your problems. Why is that? And as I said, it is seldom
> or never that an upgrade goes wrong if you follow all the
> instructions.
I've been using Ubuntu for the past several years, have not had any
major problems with it. You have to consider the source. New poster to
comp.os.linux.advocacy tells the profound truth about Moshe
AKA Flatfish:
Newsgroups: comp.os.linux.advocacy, alt.os.linux.ubuntu
Subject: Re: [News] Red Hat Developer's Update on PulseAudio, Fedora
Live CDs Interview
Message-ID: Xns9A7D9779E7902th...@66.250.146.128
Date: 11 Apr 2008 18:53:55 GMT
[Quote]
> Dan, you're probably a nice guy, but we get a ton of "works for me"
> crap in COLA and most times it's just people telling lies.
Well sorry to dissapoint you, but I'm not in COLA. I'm reading these
posts in the Ubuntu group. The only reason they are going to COLA is
because whomever started the thread had it crossposted there...and to
Vista groups, which I removed because this has nothing to do with Vista.
I'm NOT a Linux pusher, I still use Windows most of the time since I'd
just installed Linux a few weeks ago, maybe a month+ ago, and still
checking out apps and learning Linux. There are things I like and things
I don't like.
Believe what you want to believe. It's painfully obvious that you are
completely anti-Linux, just like some are completely anti-MS, and have
such strong preconceived beliefs that it doesn't really matter what
anyone says about any particular Linux item, everyone's a liar, and
nothing works out-of-the-box.
[/Quote]
http://groups.google.com/group/comp.os.linux.advocacy/msg/24b1680a2d59746b
or
> In the worst case scenario, you can install from the CD that you have
> prepared, and you don't need to worry about your project files that
> you backed up on your external hard drive and/or on your flash drive,
> and you don't need to worry about your passwords that you keep in
> your paper notebook. So what's the problem?
>
> Windows solves all the problems of upgrading online by not allowing
> you to upgrade Windows online. What would happen if Microsoft had you
> upgrade Windows online?
I've had less luck with upgrading Windows from their CD, than to
completely blow away the system and install anew. But then, every OS
upgrade has required new faster hardware (motherboard, video, processor,
memory, etc.) IMHO, the OS is sloppily written.
> I think it is wonderful that I can update thousands of files and
> upgrade Ubuntu itself, all without leaving my desk and all without
> spending any money.
Agreed.
> The one beef I have with the Ubuntu community is that they don't
> allow an upgrade from CD. An upgrade is not the same as an install.
> I tried to explain that to them but they seem to not understand.
> Some years ago, Mandrake had a CD that I could install from or
> upgrade from.
I haven't tried upgrade from CD yet. The on-line upgrade works seamlessly.
--
HPT
Jerry
What are you talking about? Do you mean you want to run Windows and
Linux at the same time?
You can (imperfectly) run Windows programs on Linux, using wine. I
often play Age of Empires (a Windows program) on Ubuntu.
Linux can read and write on my Windows drive. Windows pretends the
Linux drive does not exist.
There is something called vmware, which enables you to run multiple
operating systems at the same time, but I never used that and am
unfamiliar with that.
Tony Hwang
So a human with lower IQ can do what they want to do, LOL!
Where do you think Windows before that DOS originate?
Tony Hwang
You trying to say 190 lines are better than 3 lines?
Hadron
> Tegger wrote:
>
>> "...easier to use". Hm. The phrase, "damning with faint praise", comes
>> to mind here...
>>
>> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
>
> Bullcrap. Nothing easy about recovering from a virus infestation, or
> even maintaining anti-virus and anti-malware applications. Linux is
> easier to install and much, much easier to maintain.
Of course WronG. Didn't you claim to have 30x crashes a day and spend
most of your working day "fighting malware"?
You're useless. Of course you did.
spi...@freenet.co.uk
> Again....
>
> If Linux is so great, why do you need Windows.
If fish is so great, why do you also eat beef?
If ice-cream is so great, why do you also eat apple pie?
If motorbikes are so great, why do you also drive a car?
etc etc etc
Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwn
You've truly lost it, this time, flatty.
--
| spi...@freenet.co.uk | |
| Andrew Halliwell BSc | "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
| in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
| Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |
Hadron
> And verily, didst Moshe <goldee_l...@gmail.com> hastily babble thusly:
>> Again....
>>
>> If Linux is so great, why do you need Windows.
>
> If fish is so great, why do you also eat beef?
> If ice-cream is so great, why do you also eat apple pie?
> If motorbikes are so great, why do you also drive a car?
> etc etc etc
>
> Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwn
>
> You've truly lost it, this time, flatty.
Then why do all the "advocates" keep insulting Windows users?
Indeed Peter thinks all Windows and Mac users are retards.
You can't start singing a different song now kid.
HeyBub
>
> Well, under Windows, my computer takes longer to boot,
Good point. Use "Hibernate" and your computer will boot in less than five
seconds.
> runs slower due to the anti-virus software that I have to install,
Another good point. Use a virus protector that has a small footprint (i.e.,
NOT Norton) and is efficient. There are many free ones, including Microsoft
Security Essentials, that are virtually invisible to the user.
> and Microsoft
> allows me to pay for the upgrade to the newest distro when it is
> released, as well as charging me extra for their office suite and
> other crucial pieces of software that one needs for day to day
> computing.
Yes, that's true. But there's a difference between brunch at the Ritz and
the Salvation Army soup kitchen. With the Ritz, you don't get preaching
during the meal.
> Also, it gets rid of those pesky file permissions which
> make it so difficult to write over or modify other people's files.
Heh! I'm sure the "other people" have an opinion on that.
>
> OTOH, if you have a fast Internet connection, with the exception of
> the items I listed above, you can have a Linux system up and running
> in a couple hours, with a FREE office suite (OpenOffice.org,) image
> editor (GIMP,) etc. and the whole file system was designed by
> paranoid geeks, so it's a lot harder to mess stuff up unless you
> deliberately log in as root and start screwing with stuff. Pretty
> much everything seems to run faster, as well. When the new distro
> comes out, whether or not I upgrade has nothing at all to do with
> finances, as it's simply a matter of pushing a button and waiting a
> couple hours. Also, Linux will read FAT32 and NTFS partitions
> natively, but Windows does not read ext* partitions without add-on
> drivers, and I don't believe that it reads ext4 (the latest Linux
> file system) at all, so if you have a mix of both, it makes sense to
> have Linux as your "main" OS.
All valid points except the "ext* partitions." Why would a Windows user WANT
to read a Linux file? That's like sending an inner-office memo in Esperanto.
>
> Really, the only big, gaping hole in the Linux world for me is the
> lack of a true competitor to AutoCAD for real, business-related CAD
> work, now that ProEngineer has dropped *nix support (why? makes no
> sense.)
So, you use a five thousand dollar bit of software on your PC and fuss about
the few hundred bucks the OS costs?
Don't get me wrong, I'd rather buy the HF MultiMiracle Tool for $35 than the
Fein for $400, but it's my money. For the business, I get the best tool and
price doesn't even make the top-10 list.
dgk
wrote:
...
>>
>> You're going to have to define this a bit further. I have no idea what
>> you mean.
>
>I mean that with Ubuntu, at least, most of the software that you could
>ever want is available through repositories and there's already
>utilities set up both command-line and GUI based to let you download and
>install literally anything with only a few lines or clicks. And it's
>all open-source and free. Windows? Need an office suite? Want to rip
>a song off a CD? Want to... do pretty much anything? Most software
>*ain't* free, and that that is, is likely a port of some GNU software
>that was originally written for *nix and runs better under a *nix
>operating system.
>
As someone who writes software for a living, I find that I don't
really want it to be free. Do you think the contractor will do my
cabinets for free because I write software and give it away? So you
get a bunch of college students writing software, undermining people
trying to make a living. Maybe you can get some college kids to make
my cabinets?
I use some free software and pay for some. Once in a while, something
(like EAC - exact audio copy) is every bit as good as something that I
pay for. Mostly though I find that freeware/shareware is about 95%
complete and then the authors got bored.
A year ago I was playing with Ubuntu. Several applications were pretty
good but they all had odd quirks. Like Pan as a newsgroup reader. The
editing panel for responding to a message just didn't scroll
correctly. I'd type and it wouldn't wrap as I got to the right side of
the window, instead it would continue for a few words (that I couldn't
see) and then wrap it all to the next line.
When I mentioned that in the Ubuntu forum, I'm told to try
Thunderbird, or some other 95% complete app.
Josh BD
>
> Nate Nagel <njn...@roosters.net> wrote in
> news:hv9bp...@news7.newsguy.com:
>
> > On 06/15/2010 09:00 PM, Tegger wrote:
> >> Nate Nagel<njn...@roosters.net> wrote in
> >> news:hv95t...@news6.newsguy.com:
> >>
> >>> On 06/15/2010 08:02 PM, Tegger wrote:
> >>
> >>>>
> >>>> Easy. Easy equals 93% market share.
> >>>>
> >>>
> >>> Linux has gotten WAY better.
> >>
> >>
> >>
> >> Aha! An admission.
> >>
> >> If Linux has gotten "WAY better", then it obviously was at one time
> >> WAY worse. And that is my point, quite precisely.
> >
> > Sure, 15 years ago or so, it really helped to be a techie.
> >
> > Today, with the improved user-friendliness of Linux, and the
> > availability of high-speed internet darn near everywhere (and better
> > search engines to help you find answers to questions) there's no
> > question in my mind that Linux is easier to use, at least for this
> > non-techie.
>
>
>
>
> "...easier to use". Hm. The phrase, "damning with faint praise", comes
> to mind here...
>
> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
>
>
>
> >
> >>
> >> but MS has very obviously spent untold hours making their system EASY
> >> for the end- user. And they have succeeded better than Linux has.
> >> The clueless non-techie end-user has a chance at success with Windows
> >> that he does not have with Linux. Market share tells all, here.
> >>
> >>
> >>> "shopping" for software under Ubuntu is
> >>> as simple as firing up Synaptic, and if you don't add any unofficial
> >>> repositories, pretty much everything works out of the box.
> >>
> >>
> >> Oh, there's a catch. I am unaware of any such "repository"
> >> restrictions in Windows.
> >
> > The "repository" for Windows is called a "store," and it does not come
> > with the OS, you pay extra.
>
>
>
> You're going to have to define this a bit further. I have no idea what
> you mean.
>
>
>
> >
> >>
> >>> thing that requires any cajoling at all is playing DVDs, but that's
> >>> more due to licensing issues with the DVD format itself than with
> >>> Linux.
> >>
> >>
> >> Except that with computers running Windows, all you do is put the DVD
> >> in, and...it plays. EASY.
> >
> > Not without third party software.
>
>
>
> With which all PCs ship, when they ship with DVD players. Even if you
> have to load it yourself, all you do is pop the software CD in, and
> Bob's your uncle.
but then mac is easier than windows. but mac are shit.
N8N
> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 22:08:21 -0400, Nate Nagel <njna...@roosters.net>
Thunderbird is 95% complete? I've been using it on both Linux and
Windows for years and have found it to be far superior to and less
annoying than Outhouse Express. The "Lightning" extension is nice
too, brings it close to the full functionality of the real Outlook
which is actually a somewhat useful email client (but, of course,
doesn't come with Windows...)
nate
N8N
> >> Again....
>
> >> If Linux is so great, why do you need Windows.
>
> > If fish is so great, why do you also eat beef?
> > If ice-cream is so great, why do you also eat apple pie?
> > If motorbikes are so great, why do you also drive a car?
> > etc etc etc
>
> > Yawwwwwwwwwwwwwn
>
> > You've truly lost it, this time, flatty.
>
> Then why do all the "advocates" keep insulting Windows users?
I don't mean to insult Windows users, nor am I trying to imply that
they're dumb. There's valid reasons for using Windows, the best
simply being that it's the OS that the vast majority of PCs ship with,
and most people don't like to be bothered changing. That, and due to
huge market penetration, most commercial software is written for
Windows first, Mac second, and *nix third, and if you *need* a
particular exact piece of software for whatever reason and it's not
available for *nix, well, you use Win or Mac.
I'm merely trying to point out that it is a (common, but still)
misconception that Linux in its current form is somehow inferior to
Windows, difficult to set up or maintain, or requires superior
computer knowledge to keep operating correctly. In fact, none of
those statements are true.
nate
RonB
You're talking about Windows, not Linux.
--
RonB
"There's a story there...somewhere"
RonB
> On Jun 16, 9:07 pm, Moshe <goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 20:03:21 -0700 (PDT), Jerry wrote:
>>> On Jun 16, 7:59 pm, Tegger <inva...@invalid.inv> wrote:
>>>> Windows is EASIER. In fact it's the easiest you can get.
>>> What's hard about Ubuntu?
>>> Here is an example of how easy Ubuntu is.
>>> Every once in a while a notice pops up that there are some updates.
>>> The Update Manager lists all the updates. Each update has name,
>>> description, changes, and a checkbox. All the checkboxes are checked
>>> by default. Click on the 'update' button. It asks for a password. You
>>> can watch the progress report on the downloads. Then you can watch the
>>> installation processes. You don't need to do anything, just watch.
>>> That's it. Done. It doesn't get easier than that. After all the
>>> updates are downloaded and installed, you never need to restart unless
>>> the Linux kernel was updated.
>> Until you reboot and nothing works.........
> How often does that happen?
For me, never in Linux. In Windows, a couple times. Usually just driver
conflicts, but still a pain in the butt.
N8N
> Nate Nagel wrote:
>
> > Well, under Windows, my computer takes longer to boot,
>
> Good point. Use "Hibernate" and your computer will boot in less than five
> seconds.
If it doesn't crash...
>
> > runs slower due to the anti-virus software that I have to install,
>
> Another good point. Use a virus protector that has a small footprint (i.e.,
> NOT Norton) and is efficient. There are many free ones, including Microsoft
> Security Essentials, that are virtually invisible to the user.
I have been using AVG free on Windows, don't know if it's the best or
not, but it seems to work...
I have a fundamental distrust of anything with "Microsoft" and
"security" in the same sentence...
> > and Microsoft
> > allows me to pay for the upgrade to the newest distro when it is
> > released, as well as charging me extra for their office suite and
> > other crucial pieces of software that one needs for day to day
> > computing.
>
> Yes, that's true. But there's a difference between brunch at the Ritz and
> the Salvation Army soup kitchen. With the Ritz, you don't get preaching
> during the meal.
Just don't read the *nix newsgroups, there's nothing installed with
the OS that preaches to you.
>
> > Also, it gets rid of those pesky file permissions which
> > make it so difficult to write over or modify other people's files.
>
> Heh! I'm sure the "other people" have an opinion on that.
>
>
>
> > OTOH, if you have a fast Internet connection, with the exception of
> > the items I listed above, you can have a Linux system up and running
> > in a couple hours, with a FREE office suite (OpenOffice.org,) image
> > editor (GIMP,) etc. and the whole file system was designed by
> > paranoid geeks, so it's a lot harder to mess stuff up unless you
> > deliberately log in as root and start screwing with stuff. Pretty
> > much everything seems to run faster, as well. When the new distro
> > comes out, whether or not I upgrade has nothing at all to do with
> > finances, as it's simply a matter of pushing a button and waiting a
> > couple hours. Also, Linux will read FAT32 and NTFS partitions
> > natively, but Windows does not read ext* partitions without add-on
> > drivers, and I don't believe that it reads ext4 (the latest Linux
> > file system) at all, so if you have a mix of both, it makes sense to
> > have Linux as your "main" OS.
>
> All valid points except the "ext* partitions." Why would a Windows user WANT
> to read a Linux file? That's like sending an inner-office memo in Esperanto.
It's not a matter of why you'd want to or not, but it does make sense
that you would want to keep your personal documents in an ext*
partition rather than a NTFS partition because of the file
permissions. If you dual boot and *did* choose to use the NTFS
partition as your main documents location, Linux will handle that
fine. If you on the other hand you dual boot and choose to keep your
docs in your ext* partition, Windows FDGB. Linux is also quite
tolerant of other OS's, Windows likes to overwrite them and install
itself over them.
> > Really, the only big, gaping hole in the Linux world for me is the
> > lack of a true competitor to AutoCAD for real, business-related CAD
> > work, now that ProEngineer has dropped *nix support (why? makes no
> > sense.)
>
> So, you use a five thousand dollar bit of software on your PC and fuss about
> the few hundred bucks the OS costs?
>
> Don't get me wrong, I'd rather buy the HF MultiMiracle Tool for $35 than the
> Fein for $400, but it's my money. For the business, I get the best tool and
> price doesn't even make the top-10 list.
It's not just the couple hundred bucks for the OS, it's the couple
hundred bucks for *this* software, and then *that* software, and then
*that other* piece of software... Really, I am not "into" computers
enough to spend a thousand dollars or more just to have a minimally
functional PC when I can have the exact same thing for free. I've
spent enough money on hardware... multiply that by two (because I
have both a desktop and a laptop...)
So basically, most of my day to day computing is done in Linux, then
if I *need* to use AutoCAD, or update the maps in my GPS, or something
that *requires* Windows, then I boot into Windows and switch back to
Linux when I'm done doing what I'm doing.
nate
Moshe
> Then why do all the "advocates" keep insulting Windows users?
>
> Indeed Peter thinks all Windows and Mac users are retards.
>
> You can't start singing a different song now kid.
They insult because they certainly can't debate the
advantages of Linux.
Once you get past the free part, it's all downhill.
A free operating system that has a 1 percent desktop
market is pathetic.
DFS
> [Followup set to comp.os.linux.advocacy]
>
> Op 16-06-10 17:50, Bob Villa wrote:
>
>> On Jun 16, 8:01 am, Moshe<goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On Wed, 16 Jun 2010 04:26:50 -0700 (PDT), Bob Villa
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On Jun 16, 6:08 am, Chris Ahlstrom<ahlstr...@launchmodem.com> wrote:
>>>>> N8N ululated:
>>>
>>>>> <snipped>
>>>
>>>>> Because of trolls, that's why. If you must respond, keep it in COLA.
>>>
>>>>> --
>>>>> Humor in the Court:
>>>>> Q. And who is this person you are speaking of?
>>>>> A. My ex-widow said it.
>>>
>>>> As in COLA RECTAL? ; )
>>>
>>> Kind of.
>>>
>>> COLA (comp.os.linux.advocacy) is considered the rectum
>>> of USENET.
>>>
>>> It's main purpose is to siphon off the bottom feeders,
>>> radical Linux loons, religious zealots and freaks of the
>>> Linux community so that they don't pollute the other
>>> legitimate groups.
>
> LOL stupid POS.
>
> You and only *you* are the radical religious (not so) "Christian" zealot
> who screams "God hates fagots" all over the place, because only you are
> that pathetic closet queer, who has a grudge against all Bi- and
> Homosexuals who - at least have - the balls to come out of the closet.
>
> You and only *you* are spamming GNU/Linux USENET groups 24/7
> Evangelizing your (un)holy church of Microsoft.
>
> You are a abomination to the rational thought!
Signed,
Marti
"Love is the only thing that matters"
>>> As you can tell it doesn't work too well.
>>
>> More to the point...anus. JK guys!
>
> Oh crap, now you've just got him started, since the troll is obsessed
> with genitals and especially the anus :-(
Signed,
Marti
"The only thing Flatso and co deserve is a huge horny cellmate with a
huge d*ck, that F*ck their butts at least 5 times a day :D"
Jerry
> They insult because they certainly can't debate the
> advantages of Linux.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
> Once you get past the free part, it's all downhill.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
> A free operating system that has a 1 percent desktop
> market is pathetic.
What would happen if when you bought a computer, Ubuntu was pre-
installed on it instead of Windows?
---
Think of Windows and GNU+Linux as being in a race. MSDOS was started
in 1975. Windows was originally made as a graphical wrapper for MSDOS.
So MSDOS+Windows has had 35 years of development. Richard Stallman
started GNU in 1983. Linus Torvalds released the first version of
Linux in 1991, barely working. The 2 came together, forming GNU+Linux,
which most people call Linux. GNU+Linux has had 27 years of
development. MSDOS+Windows had 8 years head start in the race.
MSDOS started with a bang, a whole company behind it, starting with
QDOS (Quick and Dirty Operating System, which Bill Gates bought full
rights to for $50,000). GNU and Linux started slow and later picked up
speed. Windows 3.1 (the first decent version of Windows) was released
in 1992 (according to wiki). In 1992, GNU+Linux was just starting to
get its act together, let alone graphical. Somehow GNU+Linux came from
behind and now may be the equal of Windows in some ways or even better
than Windows in some ways.
http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
> A free operating system that has a 1 percent desktop
> market [...]
I would like to know how this estimate is made. Ubuntu etc. are
usually not packaged and sold in stores. Usually you download them,
always for free. And you are free to make copies and give to your
friends. So you can't get an accurate estimate of number of Ubuntu
etc. users by counting sales. So how do you get an accurate estimate?
Also we should not assume that if a person has Windows that therefore
they don't have GNU+Linux. It is possible to have both on the same
computer. So you can't make an estimate of number of GNU+Linux users
by subtracting Windows users plus Mac users from the total.
Hadron
> On Jun 17, 9:44 am, Moshe <goldee_loxnbag...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> They insult because they certainly can't debate the
>> advantages of Linux.
> http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
>
>> Once you get past the free part, it's all downhill.
> http://www.whylinuxisbetter.net/
>
>> A free operating system that has a 1 percent desktop
>> market is pathetic.
> What would happen if when you bought a computer, Ubuntu was pre-
> installed on it instead of Windows?
Well, that was the problem. No one wanted the PCs with a free OS on
them. They wanted Windows. And the reasons are clear. Windows has these
advantages/pushes -
- herd mentality
- familiar
- works with the newer HW
- games
- existing sw
- all the good OSS runs on it.
Disadvantages:
- costs money
- less secure
- less flexible
Most people dont care about the small amount it costs.
Me? I dumped Windows. I started with Ubuntu but the low quality releases
and the fanboi element convinced me there was a better option. And there
was. With the things I had learnt from Ubuntu I decided to tackle
Debian. Not as friendly to install back then (video and sata and usb
issues) BUT the end product was much better and the support community
MUCH better than the wannabes running Ubuntu.
I now personally run Debian on 5 machines and have installed Testing for
4 friends with small businesses for things like cash books, audio, skype
and web/email access. They are more than happy.
N8N
If you're going to use the argumentum ad populum, then you'd have to
also agree that a Chevy is a better car than a Porsche or BMW? And
that a double-wide is a better dwelling than an old Victorian?
Most things that are popular are so thanks to marketing or price, not
intrinsic value.
nate
Evans Winner
| I would like to know how this estimate is made. Ubuntu
| etc. are usually not packaged and sold in
| stores. Usually you download them, always for free. And
| you are free to make copies and give to your friends. So
| you can't get an accurate estimate of number of Ubuntu
| etc. users by counting sales. So how do you get an
| accurate estimate?
User agent strings sent with HTTP requests, perhaps. Most
people using a "desktop operating system" surf the Internet
and most of them don't have any reason to bother spoofing
their user agent strings -- or even know what that would
mean. Where these statistics are gathered are significant,
though. The user agent strings sent to microsoft.com and to
slashdot.com are likely to have very different parameters.
In any case, statistics showing GNU/Linux systems at a
little over 1% are common. See for example,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Usage_share_of_operating_systems
Interestingly, that article also indicates that GNU/Linux
systems are used on over 90% of the 500 "most powerful"
(whatever that means) supercomputers.
The first time I installed a Linux system was in the late
1990s and it was quite difficult and time-consuming. The
last time I did it, it was quick and easy. I have not
installed a Windows system in years, in part because the
philosophy is more or less that computers are disposable.
People run the computer with the garbage OS that comes with
it, and when it has become sufficiently plagued by conflicts
and slow-down and malware, they simply give up and buy a new
computer. Support organizations (of which I have been a
member) no longer even bother to try to fix non-trivial
problems. They simply do what amounts to the same thing --
they re-image the drive, which means, in essence, that they
start over from a fresh OS, but they don't even bother to
install the OS, per se -- they do a literal data dump from
one disk to the other, which is quick and easy if and only
if you are in a large organization which uses large numbers
of machines that are essentially identical at the hardware
level. I believe that the "rescue partition" that many
Windows machines come with relates to a similar kind of
philosophy. Windows systems are very difficult to maintain,
and so the new method is to simply dump it and start over
when something goes wrong. This is, incidentally, analogous
to the similar philosophy about reboots. When some system
state changes, or the combined memory leaks of all the
garbage programs and daemons running on a Windows system
bring it to its knees, the solution is always the same:
re-boot it.
Linux systems have their idiosyncrasies, but by and large,
they work well. The newer systems have desktop-metaphor
type interfaces that are about as polished as any commercial
equivalent. If you are used to one, then transitioning to
the other will inevitably be irritating at first as you get
used to those idiosyncrasies. I am used to Linux systems
now, and in consequence find other systems uncomfortable to
work with because they constantly violate my expectations.
If you (that is, if one) only works with MS systems or Mac
systems, the converse will be true for you when you use a
Linux system. You will not be qualified to judge the user
interface until you have used both extensively and can judge
them on their actual merits. Simply trying one for a few
minutes and saying, "this doesn't do what I expect when I
right-click on foo" is not sufficient. And then, even, you
will still not be qualified to judge any of them as
operating systems, because what an operating system does is
much much more than the little things you click on as a
typical user and whether the desktop background is blue or
green.
Having said all that, Windows XP Pro, if it is set up
correctly, and when used for certain specific kinds of
things, can be quite useful and convenient. But that's a
lot of qualifications. On the other hand, GNU/Linux systems
are useful for a huge range of things, set up any way you
want, and they are generally more secure for typical
single-user use.
They are free, as they say, "as in beer," but more
importantly, GNU/Linux systems allow you the user to modify,
customize and extend them in any way you wish. If your only
need for a computer is to surf the Internet, then this may
not seem obviously important to you. If you want to use a
computer to do almost any kind of serious creative work (I
mean, work that is not simply performing mindless repetition
of the same exact task over and over) then this is a huge
benefit and would make Linux systems worth much more than MS
systems if you did have to pay for them.
Eric in North TX
> If you're going to use the argumentum ad populum, then you'd have to
> also agree that a Chevy is a better car than a Porsche or BMW? And
> that a double-wide is a better dwelling than an old Victorian?
>
> Most things that are popular are so thanks to marketing or price, not
> intrinsic value.
>
> nate
Having owned 3 BMWs and 3 Chevys I can comment that while the BMW is
more car in a lot of ways, however, after they are out of warranty,
you earn every bit of that ultimate driving experience. Bring More
Wallet isn't an exaggeration at all.
I haven't owned a double wide, but can assure you an big older house
can be a money pit. Like the BMW, the experience is better, but the
cost of that experience is proportional.
I have tried (KUBUNTU) Linux, it was acceptable as an OS easy enough
to install, superior at finding stuff for itself. Surfing and office
tasks were at least as good as the Windows experience, but that was
it. I couldn't use my vast pile of windows based software and games. I
couldn't find Linux equivalents, in short it was driving a Chevy and
living in a double wide. There is nothing wrong with that, and in many
ways it is less trying and stressful. I however have come to expect a
lot more from my PC than that, so I'm back & on the latest version
(Windows 7 64bit).
Moshe
BMW aren't free.
If they were, GM, Mercedes, Ford etc would be out of
business in a month.
The Daring Dufas
I just setup a new wireless network for a customer so his wife could
wander about the house with her new Asus laptop loaded with Windows 7
and an interesting feature. The laptop has an instant on embedded light
weight Linux OS called "Splashtop". You can get on the Web, watch
movies, make VoIP calls and Email. I like Asus stuff, I've been using
their motherboards and cards for years and have always had good luck
with them. I may buy an Asus laptop the next time I have a little mad money.
TDD
The Daring Dufas
I look at it as speaking more than one language. I own both PC and
Apple computers and I run Linux and BSD on occasion. I like learning
different things and playing around with software and hardware. I'm
not strictly an appliance person, I want to dig into the guts and
learn how it works. Why should I look upon anyone with scorn because
of their OS preference? Some people like cats, some like dogs, I get
along with both...... and the people. 8-)
TDD
Nate Nagel
I agree. Except for those snobby Mac owners :P
nate
(I keed. I actually don't think I know anyone who has a Mac except for
my next door neighbors, and they're cool.)
--
replace "roosters" with "cox" to reply.
http://members.cox.net/njnagel
Nate Nagel
Yes. Which just proves how good Microsoft's marketing has been.
(although I don't see Mercedes-Benz as being inferior to BMW, but that's
neither here nor there)
nate
The Daring Dufas
My friend J. was a service manager for an Apple store years ago and
he usually has the newest Mac. If he or a member of his family has
a problem with a PC, he gives me a call, if I have a problem with a
Mac, guess who I call. It's all about knowing who to call and when.
Apple makes a fine easy to use computer/appliance that's wonderful
for those who don't care what's under the hood. I like to tinker
and if I blow up a PC, I'm not going to jump off a bridge because I
just lost a couple of thousand dollars worth of machine.
TDD
N8N
And that may be an example of something good for one person but not
for another. My PC is basically used for email, web stuff, general
office tasks, maintaining my web site, occasionally watching movies.
For that Ubuntu is perfect. I don't play computer games, nor do I
have any particularly great store of Windows software other than a
copy of AutoCAD and a few other things. For me, a dual-boot makes a
lot of sense, and for the day-to-day stuff Ubuntu is way better, as I
always have the latest and greatest OS and software and just don't
have to worry about it, and it seems to be more stable and faster.
(Caveat: I accept all recommended updates *except* for full distro
upgrades; after getting burned on 10.04 I will now be installing all
new versions in parallel with the older version to test before
committing to them.)
nate
Tony Hwang
Linux is not for dumb people.
N8N
>
> > If you're going to use the argumentum ad populum, then you'd have to
> > also agree that a Chevy is a better car than a Porsche or BMW? And
> > that a double-wide is a better dwelling than an old Victorian?
>
> > Most things that are popular are so thanks to marketing or price, not
> > intrinsic value.
>
> > nate
>
> Having owned 3 BMWs and 3 Chevys I can comment that while the BMW is
> more car in a lot of ways, however, after they are out of warranty,
> you earn every bit of that ultimate driving experience. Bring More
> Wallet isn't an exaggeration at all.
> I haven't owned a double wide, but can assure you an big older house
> can be a money pit. Like the BMW, the experience is better, but the
> cost of that experience is proportional.
It wasn't an exact comparison... and I agree. I don't know how it is
these days, but the last BMY I owned was an '86, at at least at that
time, the "recommended maintenance" in the book that came with the car
could have easily been titled "how to maintain your car so that it
will last indefinitely." Of course, if you actually DO all the
scheduled maintenance, your TCO goes up. If you *don't* do the
recommended maintenance, the repairs will kill ya. Nature of the
beast. My '88 Porsche has similar maintenance "requirements."
Basically, you either have to be reasonably handy and/or be willing to
pay the price to have someone maintain it for you.
I don't really see Linux as being like that... at least as far as
Ubuntu goes, you basically have to be computer literate enough to
download the installer .iso and burn it, most of the time it'll take
it from there. (and there's an example of something that's way easier
under Ubuntu than Windows... not so much true now, but in older
versions of Windows often even if you had a CD burner on your PC, you
sometimes didn't have the software necessary to properly deal
with .isos, nor did you have a download manager that would gracefully
handle large downloads that might be interrupted due to connectivity
problems or a slow server on the other end unless you'd sought one out
and installed it, e.g. FlashGot.)
nate
Moshe
The public have spoken.
Take netbooks for example.
Linux was first to have netbooks for sale. Once Windows
versions were released the sales of Linux based netbooks
tanked.
People, average desktop users, just aren't interested in
Linux even though it's free. They would rather pay for
Windows.
Moshe
Classic Linux advocacy tactic of blaming the user.
BTW by your line of thought, 95 percent + of users are
dumb.
Pure idiocy direct from the world of the Linux religion.
ray
Jerry
> People, average desktop users, just aren't interested in
> Linux even though it's free. They would rather pay for
> Windows.
Most computers have Windows preinstalled on them. You probably would
have a hard time finding a new computer that does not have Windows
already installed on it.
If Windows is already on the computer, you pay for Windows whether you
want it or not. In order to install Ubuntu (or other distro) on the
computer, you have the following options:
1. Wipe out Windows (which you paid for) in order to make room for
Ubuntu.
2. Make space for Ubuntu on the drive. On my computer, Vista didn't
allow enough space; it insisted on hogging almost the whole 500 gigs
even tho it didn't need more than a small portion of it.
3. Buy an additional hard drive to put Ubuntu on it. (This is what I
did.)
The simplest way is to just run with Windows and forget about GNU
+Linux. I suspect that most people figure they already have an OS, why
bother with another one? Perhaps many people don't even know that
there is such a thing as an alternative to Windows.
What would happen if people typically had the following options?
1. Computer with Windows installed. The price of Windows is added to
the price of the computer.
2. Computer with Ubuntu installed. Ubuntu is zero price. Maybe add the
price of installation. Same computer, less total price.
3. Computer with no OS. Pay for only the computer.
I'm not saying GNU+Linux is better. I'm not trying to promote GNU
+Linux. I'm merely saying it is questionable whether people would
choose to pay for Windows if they had options.
Megabyte
Actually I think the situation that occurred was unfortunate and I
still go back to an arguement I raised a long time ago here that Linux
should have shipped with a full distribution rather than the versions
they in fact shipped with. Why is it that Dell has continued to make
Linux based Netbooks available but other OEM's have not? Could it be
because they used and continue to use a full distribution of Ubuntu
rather than the supposed simplified Linux other OEM's used? Of course
I was labelled a troll for even suggesting that the restricted versions
the Linux Netbooks shipped with would make Linux appear inferior to
Windows because many of the capabilities like installing and removing
software were not readily apparent to someone new to Linux and required
the command line in order to access. The Netbook was a platform that
Linux had an opportunity to make huge in roads with but the dumbed down
interfaces OEM's chose to use killed that. I'm sure there is a segment
that wanted Windows because that is what they were familiar with and
had the software that they normally use. Of course there was also the
price dumping that MS did dropping the price of XP Home to mere peanuts
to compete.
DFS
> Of course there was also the price
> dumping that MS did dropping the price of XP Home to mere peanuts to
> compete.
What price dumping? Oh, you mean Linux devs giving away their stuff for
far less than the cost to produce it.