folklore indeed
Mike Noxaura
8th b-day. damn that thing seems sooooo ancient now. and all i learned
from the first 3 months was how to do a damn goto loop. Pathetic! oh
well, we live and learn, right?
Tired of giving to a church that doesn't give back to you?
Tired of hatred and homophobia? Or sexism?
Tired of not feeling good about you? And your talents?
It's time to do something about that!
Visit us at The Reformed Church Of Satan!
We'll help you network and build net worth!
We're doing something about the environment and our community!
http://www.positivesatanism.org/friendsforlife.html
Visit here to find out how we can help you! ^
Charles Richmond
> Being an old phart (not terribly) i remeber getting a vic 20 for my
> 8th b-day. damn that thing seems sooooo ancient now. and all i learned
> from the first 3 months was how to do a damn goto loop. Pathetic! oh
> well, we live and learn, right?
>
The VIC-20 is the *last* computer you will ever have to
buy. Why??? Because it's expandable!!!
--
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
| Charles and Francis Richmond richmond at plano dot net |
+----------------------------------------------------------------+
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> Mike Noxaura wrote:
> > Being an old phart (not terribly) i remeber getting a vic 20 for my
> > 8th b-day. damn that thing seems sooooo ancient now. and all i learned
> > from the first 3 months was how to do a damn goto loop. Pathetic! oh
> > well, we live and learn, right?
> >
>
> The VIC-20 is the *last* computer you will ever have to
> buy. Why??? Because it's expandable!!!
Hmm, remember the advert - The Last One, the last program you will
ever need to buy.
--
C:>WIN | Directable Mirror Arrays
The computer obeys and wins. | A better way to focus the sun
You lose and Bill collects. | licences available see
| http://www.sohara.org/
jmfb...@aol.com
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>Mike Noxaura wrote:
>> Being an old phart (not terribly) i remeber getting a vic 20 for my
>> 8th b-day. damn that thing seems sooooo ancient now. and all i learned
>> from the first 3 months was how to do a damn goto loop. Pathetic! oh
>> well, we live and learn, right?
>>
>
>The VIC-20 is the *last* computer you will ever have to
>buy. Why??? Because it's expandable!!!
If a solid expands enough, it becomes a poof of smoke. :-)
/BAH
Charles Richmond
That must be what happened to most of the old VIC-20's... ;-)
kkt
> On Thu, 29 Nov 2007 16:48:56 -0600
> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>
> > Mike Noxaura wrote:
> > > Being an old phart (not terribly) i remeber getting a vic 20 for my
> > > 8th b-day. damn that thing seems sooooo ancient now. and all i learned
> > > from the first 3 months was how to do a damn goto loop. Pathetic! oh
> > > well, we live and learn, right?
> > >
> >
> > The VIC-20 is the *last* computer you will ever have to
> > buy. Why??? Because it's expandable!!!
>
> Hmm, remember the advert - The Last One, the last program you will
> ever need to buy.
I remember seeing it demoed. It might not have been a bad product for
its time except for the ridiculously arrogant name.
-- Patrick
Charlie Gibbs
Indeed. Besides, Everybody Knows [tm] that the Last One is Windows.
Except that you have to buy Windows again and again and again...
--
/~\ cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
CBFalconer
> k...@zipcon.net (kkt) writes:
>> Steve O'Hara-Smith <ste...@eircom.net> writes:
>>
>>> Hmm, remember the advert - The Last One, the last program you
>>> will ever need to buy.
>>
>> I remember seeing it demoed. It might not have been a bad
>> product for its time except for the ridiculously arrogant name.
>
> Indeed. Besides, Everybody Knows [tm] that the Last One is Windows.
>
> Except that you have to buy Windows again and again and again...
No you don't. As proof, I am running W98 First Edition. Also
Ubuntu 6.06. My Windows expenditures are minimized. :-)
--
Chuck F (cbfalconer at maineline dot net)
<http://cbfalconer.home.att.net>
Try the download section.
--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com
Steve O'Hara-Smith
kkt <k...@zipcon.net> wrote:
It got to sound silly when they released "The Last One, Mark 2".
Charles Richmond
> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>> k...@zipcon.net (kkt) writes:
>>> Steve O'Hara-Smith <ste...@eircom.net> writes:
>>>
>>>> Hmm, remember the advert - The Last One, the last program you
>>>> will ever need to buy.
>>> I remember seeing it demoed. It might not have been a bad
>>> product for its time except for the ridiculously arrogant name.
>> Indeed. Besides, Everybody Knows [tm] that the Last One is Windows.
>>
>> Except that you have to buy Windows again and again and again...
>
> No you don't. As proof, I am running W98 First Edition. Also
> Ubuntu 6.06. My Windows expenditures are minimized. :-)
>
It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
Gune
Probably old-hat here but:
I read that it was to be called "Vixen" originally but that meant
something obscene in German.
So, it was shortened to "Vic" which, ironically, means something
worse.
CBFalconer
> CBFalconer wrote:
>> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>
>>
>>> Besides, Everybody Knows [tm] that the Last One is Windows.
>>
>>> Except that you have to buy Windows again and again and again...
>>
>> No you don't. As proof, I am running W98 First Edition. Also
>> Ubuntu 6.06. My Windows expenditures are minimized. :-)
>
> It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
> Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
Shhh. But, if you promise never to tell anyone, I _never_ bought
Winders. I inherited a CD from someone, installed that about 8
years ago, and have just copied the working system over multiple
times. Never even reinstalled. If the Microsofties discovered
this capability they would surround me with black helicopters etc.
Works fine for my uses. Doesn't even get between me and ports,
etc.
jmfb...@aol.com
Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>CBFalconer wrote:
>> Charlie Gibbs wrote:
>>> k...@zipcon.net (kkt) writes:
>>>> Steve O'Hara-Smith <ste...@eircom.net> writes:
>>>>
>>>>> Hmm, remember the advert - The Last One, the last program you
>>>>> will ever need to buy.
>>>> I remember seeing it demoed. It might not have been a bad
>>>> product for its time except for the ridiculously arrogant name.
>>> Indeed. Besides, Everybody Knows [tm] that the Last One is Windows.
>>>
>>> Except that you have to buy Windows again and again and again...
>>
>> No you don't. As proof, I am running W98 First Edition. Also
>> Ubuntu 6.06. My Windows expenditures are minimized. :-)
>>
>
>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
Sigh! Now try to do that.
/BAH
krw
jmfb...@aol.com says...
I only bought it (XP) once, and that from eBay to try to wean my
wife's laptop off Vista and my son bought me a copy of W2K back when
it was new (a path to get off OS/2, while waiting for Linux to
mature). I "bought" three more copies that came on my laptops; no
choice.
I don't see much choice for most users, in any case. The hardware to
run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find. Same
for the Mac and other *IXs.
--
Keith
Walter Bushell
krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> The hardware to
> run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find.
??????
I though Linux ran fine on 486en.
Steve O'Hara-Smith
krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> I don't see much choice for most users, in any case. The hardware to
> run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find. Same
> for the Mac and other *IXs.
Huh ? That does not make sense. Suitable hardware for Linux or any
of the BSDs is likely to be "the spare old machine mouldering in the corner
not fit to run XP on". Apart from specialist low power kit I don't think
you can buy PC class hardware as low spec as my main two DragonFlyBSD
workstations, and yet I feel no urge to seek newer hardware in pursuit of
performance.
Michael Black
I don't get the comment, either.
I wouldn't run it on a 486, for the simple reason that far better
computers are available for nothing or next to nothing at this point,
which will run Linux.
If I didn't already have a computer for Linux (that 200MHz Pentium with
32megs of RAM and a 2gig hard drive that I bought used in 2001, and then
a couple of years later I was given this 1GHz Pentium with 256megs of RAM
and a 20gig hard drive), there would have been plenty of computers I've found
since 2001 that would serve the purpose, just lying there on the sidewalk
waiting for the garbage truck. Or I could actually spend money, and buy
something somewhat older so the price is low (like that 200MHz Pentium
in 2001) but still more than useable.
Michael
Walter Bushell
et...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black) wrote:
A lot of my friends run Windows XP on computers picked up off the
sidewalk or out of the dumpsters. So they should run Linux just fine.
Stan Barr
>On Sun, 2 Dec 2007 12:31:54 -0500
>krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>
>> I don't see much choice for most users, in any case. The hardware to
>> run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find. Same
>> for the Mac and other *IXs.
>
> Huh ? That does not make sense. Suitable hardware for Linux or any
>of the BSDs is likely to be "the spare old machine mouldering in the corner
>not fit to run XP on". Apart from specialist low power kit I don't think
>you can buy PC class hardware as low spec as my main two DragonFlyBSD
>workstations, and yet I feel no urge to seek newer hardware in pursuit of
>performance.
All my Linux (and BSD) machines are other people's cast-offs ranging from
486s to Pentia, PowerPC Macs and 64-bit Ultra-SPARC, although I did have
to pay a small sum for a couple of them.
This one is a 200MHz Pentium Pro Dell, fine for email, news and occasional
web-browsing.
--
Cheers,
Stan Barr stanb .at. dial .dot. pipex .dot. com
(Remove any digits from the addresses when mailing me.)
The future was never like this!
Roland Hutchinson
It works for me.
I do own a Windows 95 license that came with a hand-me-down computer that
became my second Linux box. I can check if its transferable if anybody
wants it.
--
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
krw
pr...@oanix.com says...
There is a *lot* more to a system than a CPU. Finding hardware that
is Linux friendly at Wallyworld or even Staples/OfficeDespot is
impossible. Sorry, but Linus is not user friendly, for mom-n-pop.
It may be fine for geeks who like digging for comparability
information.
--
Keith
Morten Reistad
Walter Bushell <pr...@oanix.com> wrote:
>In article <MPG.21bcb6122...@news.individual.net>,
> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>
>> The hardware to
>> run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find.
>I though Linux ran fine on 486en.
It does, but slowly. But it runs very well on second hand
laptops you get cheap from returned leases.
The only issues with Linux and hardware nowadays are
the places where the hardware makers insist on controlling
the drivers. This applies to some radio comms cards,
WiFi included, some graphics accelerators (the cards
work fine in "degraded" mode), and some "winmodems", which
aren't modems at all, and some "windows raids" which aren't
raids at all. This hardware is, furthermore, easy to avoid.
All of these have severe problems between windows versions
too. And the built in software volumes (lvm/pvm etc) on linux
is a lot better than the "windowsraids" anyway.
There was a turning point 2-3 years ago when Linux had
less driver issues than windows. So, finding adequate
hardware for a self install is now a _smaller_ problem
on Linux than on windows.
So, I have to conclude that your statment is total baloney.
Personal experience does not bear this out either.
My last Linux laptop was a store bought el-cheapo one from
HP (they had the best offer that week). The install came
right up; I had to google for 15 minutes to find a wifi
driver (again, a card with multiple personalities, the
main problem was finding the optimal personality).
Also, support for the graphics chipset required a software
update from HP. The install took around 8 hours including
updates, but only about an hour of human presence was needed.
-- mrr
Larry Elmore
I think that's wildly incorrect. The only real issue I can think of are
so-called "Windows printers" (the ultra-low budget ones that omit some
hardware and depend solely upon Windows to be able to print), and
leading edge graphics cards with proprietary drivers. That last one is
hardly ever a Mom-&-Pop concern.
Have you had /any/ recent experience with Linux??
Richard Steiner
sta...@dial.pipex.com (Stan Barr) spake unto us, saying:
>All my Linux (and BSD) machines are other people's cast-offs ranging from
>486s to Pentia, PowerPC Macs and 64-bit Ultra-SPARC, although I did have
>to pay a small sum for a couple of them.
>
>This one is a 200MHz Pentium Pro Dell, fine for email, news and occasional
>web-browsing.
This box is a 200MHz Pentium Pro from Micron, and while it's running a
different OS (OS/2 Warp 4), it's more than fine for web surfing unless
it involves heavy animation.
I run Linux on hardware of similar vintage from IBM and Compaq with the
same results.
People tend to overestimate the amount of machine needed for mundane
tasks because Windows XP and friends are so resource-hungry.
--
-Rich Steiner >>>---> http://www.visi.com/~rsteiner >>>---> Mableton, GA USA
Mainframe/Unix bit twiddler by day, OS/2+Linux+DOS hobbyist by night.
WARNING: I've seen FIELDATA FORTRAN V and I know how to use it!
The Theorem Theorem: If If, Then Then.
Richard Steiner
It's actually not that hard.
The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
accessible areas of the net, and with the advent of Linux live CDs, one
doesn't even have to formally install the OS in the traditional sense
in order to effectively use it every day. Just drop in a CD and boot.
Also, the Mac has always been relatively friendly to new users (and
nontechnical users), moreso than Windows, and many popular software
applications and games are found in stores for the Mac.
Charles Richmond
Joe Pfeiffer
> pr...@oanix.com says...
>> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>> > The hardware to
>> > run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find.
>>
>
> There is a *lot* more to a system than a CPU. Finding hardware that
> is Linux friendly at Wallyworld or even Staples/OfficeDespot is
> impossible. Sorry, but Linus is not user friendly, for mom-n-pop.
> It may be fine for geeks who like digging for comparability
> information.
You've raised two different points here, one valid and one nonsense.
The valid one is that yes, you still have to know what you're doing to
run Linux. You characterize that as not user-friendly while I'd
characterize it as *very* friendly if you do indeed know what you're
doing; it's true that it's still not for mom-n-pop.
The claim that it doesn't work on Wal-Mart hardware is just nuts. The
most recent machine I put it on was an Averatec laptop bought at Sam's
Club; yes, I did have to track down the wireless drivers (I already
conceded the point that you have to know what you're doing), but it
works just fine on that hardware. And on the previous Sam's Club
Averatec (different model). And on two different Sony Vaio laptops.
And on all the machines I've built by sorting directron.com's parts
listings by price, and picking the cheapest (I had no idea you could
now buy a case -- with power supply -- for $25.00).
No, I haven't bought a machine at Wal-Mart (Sam's yes, Wal-Mart no)
and put Linux on it. Those machines are more expensive than several
of the ones I've put Linux on. I note that some Wal-Marts are now
selling a $199 computer with Ubuntu Linux pre-installed.
So you can tell me about needing some expertise, and I'll be forced to
agree. But don't waste my time claiming that Linux hardware is
expensive.
CBFalconer
> pr...@oanix.com says...
>> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>>
>>> The hardware to
>>> run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find.
>>
>
> There is a *lot* more to a system than a CPU. Finding hardware
> that is Linux friendly at Wallyworld or even Staples/OfficeDespot
> is impossible. Sorry, but Linus is not user friendly, for
> mom-n-pop. It may be fine for geeks who like digging for
> comparability information.
Funny. Most reports from actual Linux installers these days
(including me) go something like:
Placed CD in drive.
Selected "Full Install"
Hit return.
entered Password.
all done in about 1/2 to 1 hour. Everything works. Nothing to buy.
Morten Reistad
CBFalconer <cbfal...@maineline.net> wrote:
>krw wrote:
>> pr...@oanix.com says...
>>> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>>>
>>>> The hardware to
>>>> run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find.
>>>
>>> I though Linux ran fine on 486en.
>>
>> There is a *lot* more to a system than a CPU. Finding hardware
>> that is Linux friendly at Wallyworld or even Staples/OfficeDespot
>> is impossible. Sorry, but Linus is not user friendly, for
>> mom-n-pop. It may be fine for geeks who like digging for
>> comparability information.
>
>Funny. Most reports from actual Linux installers these days
>(including me) go something like:
>
> Placed CD in drive.
> Selected "Full Install"
> Hit return.
> entered Password.
You forgot, after Install :
Plug into network (if dhcp supported, no configuration necessary),
start some graphical yum/apt front end, and click "update all";
and an updated version of everything is downloaded.
Also, you can choose from some 10k+ applications not present on
the original media.
>all done in about 1/2 to 1 hour. Everything works. Nothing to buy.
-- mrr
jmfb...@aol.com
rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>
>>In article <4752218...@tx.rr.com>,
>> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>
>>>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
>>>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
>>
>>Sigh! Now try to do that.
>
>It's actually not that hard.
>
>The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
>
>Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
>accessible areas of the net,
Sigh! The subject was about buying a system. That implies retail and
not scrounging dumpsters or the nets.
Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
are going to have more.
/BAH
Christian Brunschen
<jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <1Y2UHpHp...@visi.com>,
> rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>>
>>>In article <4752218...@tx.rr.com>,
>>> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
>>>>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
>>>
>>>Sigh! Now try to do that.
>>
>>It's actually not that hard.
>>
>>The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
>>
>>Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
>>accessible areas of the net,
>
>Sigh! The subject was about buying a system. That implies retail and
>not scrounging dumpsters or the nets.
Macs (one of the options if you want to avoid buying Windows) are easily
available through retail, both through Apple's own Aple Stores, and
through other eletronics / computer retailers.
Furthermore, buying computers on the net is not exactly difficult these
days, and there's little need to 'scrounge around'. Even Dell sell PCs
with Linux preinstalled, see
<http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/ubuntu>, which one can
easily purchase by visiting the Dell website from a public library, for
instance.
And in many places, there are little local computer stores where people
will gladly suggest and assemble components and install an operating
system for you.
>Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
>won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
>are going to have more.
You continue to see problems where there aren't any, and where they are
you often see them as much harder than they are. Moms and Pops are not
going to have any problems buying a Mac, which already satisfies the
requirement (buying a system without Windows). Buying a Linux computer is
similarly straightforward, especially since inexpensive computers are
beginning to turn up in places like Wal-Mart with Linux preinstalled, see
<http://www.desktoplinux.com/news/NS8642294935.html> , and let's not
forget the Asus eeePC, <http://eeepc.asus.com/> , which is both widely
publicised and available. And still, Moms and Pops will have no problems
buying them and using them.
>/BAH
// Christian Brunschen
Morten Reistad
> rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>>
>>>In article <4752218...@tx.rr.com>,
>>> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
>>>>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
>>>
>>>Sigh! Now try to do that.
>>
>>It's actually not that hard.
>>
>>The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
>>
>>Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
>>accessible areas of the net,
>
>Sigh! The subject was about buying a system. That implies retail and
>not scrounging dumpsters or the nets.
New systems work just fine. That was not the point. The point is
that linux runs with _fewer_ hardware issues than windows. Any
windows; unless that windows arrived with the machine.
I even bring along a Linux boot CD when buying PCs that are
supposed to run Windows; because I can see exactly what kind of
hardware is inside the machine.
>Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
>won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
>are going to have more.
If he has problems doing a linux install on commodity hardware
then he is not a specialist in PC operations.
My wife does this, and she has no such training whatsoever. After
she saw how easy it was she helps others.
Perhaps we should arrange more installfests ? This was an
event from the early days of Linux, when hardware problems
and installations were _not_ trivial. Now they are, but the
image remains.
Another solution could be to get hold of those laptops back
from leasing, and arrange for a Linux full install, and sell
them as refurbished.
Normal buyback for a decent, three year old laptop in good
condition is around $250. How much can the market bear for
a refurbished, pre-installed Linux with all the items ?
$750 plus freight ? In which case there is a business case for it.
-- mrr
Stan Barr
>Here in alt.folklore.computers,
>sta...@dial.pipex.com (Stan Barr) spake unto us, saying:
>>This one is a 200MHz Pentium Pro Dell, fine for email, news and occasional
>>web-browsing.
>
>This box is a 200MHz Pentium Pro from Micron, and while it's running a
>different OS (OS/2 Warp 4), it's more than fine for web surfing unless
>it involves heavy animation.
Windows users seem to be amazed that I can play MP3s in the background while
surfing with Opera and no glitches on a 200MHz machine... :-)
(Good processors the PPro, noticeably faster tham the equivalent MMX.)
Andrew Swallow
[snip]
>
> People tend to overestimate the amount of machine needed for mundane
> tasks because Windows XP and friends are so resource-hungry.
>
If Linux is resource light it should be able to run games faster than
Windows.
Andrew Swallow
Joe Pfeiffer
> Perhaps we should arrange more installfests ? This was an
> event from the early days of Linux, when hardware problems
> and installations were _not_ trivial. Now they are, but the
> image remains.
The department ACM chapter and the local LUG do this every semester --
after years of very good turnout from people needing assistance, this
semester we had something like three people. My guess is that the
process has gotten so easy that, indeed, there's no need for the
installfests any more. We're going to give it another try next
semester, and see what happens...
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Resource light is not the same thing as having a vendor supported
high performance sound and graphics interface (aka DirectX). It is the
presence of DirectX and the manufacturers sure knowledge that their card
will be judged on the performance of their DirectX code by people who care
and talk about it (gamers) that provides high performance gaming under
Windows.
Stan Barr
wrote:
>
>And in many places, there are little local computer stores where people
>will gladly suggest and assemble components and install an operating
>system for you.
Indeed. In our little town, population ~6000, we have two such stores
who will build whatever you want and install whatever you want (and
maintain it for you at a flat hourly rate). Of course they'd rather
sell you Windows, it's what they're used to, but if you want something
different they'll happily oblige. They both sell used machines too.
I think every town in Britain has something similar.
Charlie Gibbs
sta...@dial.pipex.com (Stan Barr) writes:
> On Sun, 02 Dec 2007 21:17:25 -0500, Richard Steiner
> <rste...@visi.com> wrote:
>
>> Here in alt.folklore.computers,
>> sta...@dial.pipex.com (Stan Barr) spake unto us, saying:
>>
>>> This one is a 200MHz Pentium Pro Dell, fine for email, news and
>>> occasional web-browsing.
>>
>> This box is a 200MHz Pentium Pro from Micron, and while it's running
>> a different OS (OS/2 Warp 4), it's more than fine for web surfing
>> unless it involves heavy animation.
>
> Windows users seem to be amazed that I can play MP3s in the background
> while surfing with Opera and no glitches on a 200MHz machine... :-)
A friend's employer was selling off old laptops for $200 apiece;
I picked up a Toshiba Satellite 4100XDVD (400 MHz, 192MB) on which
I normally run Win2k, but I can swap in another hard drive on which
I installed Slackware. It starts to sweat a bit when playing videos,
but aside from that it's a great little machine; before I got my big
Linux box I used it to download many gigs from the alt.binaries groups.
I just recently removed from active service an AcerNote 370 laptop
(133 MHz, 48MB RAM, 1.3GB hard drive) which was running Slack 7; I used
it daily, compiling Linux versions of our software. A real trooper.
Basically, I've had very little trouble getting Linux up and running
on any box I've tried. Same goes for OpenBSD - I put that on an old
box which became my firewall, and when the power supply went up in
smoke I junked the box (the power supply wasn't ATX), moved the hard
drive and NICs to another spare box, and it came right up without
any reconfiguration.
Now _that's_ what I call plug 'n' play.
--
/~\ cgi...@kltpzyxm.invalid (Charlie Gibbs)
\ / I'm really at ac.dekanfrus if you read it the right way.
X Top-posted messages will probably be ignored. See RFC1855.
/ \ HTML will DEFINITELY be ignored. Join the ASCII ribbon campaign!
Richard Steiner
>rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>>jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>>>Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>>
>>>>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
>>>>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
>>>
>>>Sigh! Now try to do that.
>>
>>It's actually not that hard.
>>
>>The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
>>
>>Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
>>accessible areas of the net,
>
>Sigh! The subject was about buying a system. That implies retail and
>not scrounging dumpsters or the nets.
Sigh! back to you, I'm afraid.
Normally I respect your opinions, but in this case you are showing your
inexperience. Since I think you're worth educating, I will try. :-)
The subject was about buying a system which doesn't come with Windows.
How hard is it to walk into a Walmart and buy a PC that says it comes
with Linux?
How hard is it to purchase a computer from Dell preloaded with Linux?
I question your outdated assumption that "retail" disqualifies the
internet. Most average computer users these days know what the web is
and can tell the difference between Google and eBay. Even my Mom is
thinking about buying some christmas presents over the net this year.
How hard is it to purchase a Mac? As I said in the last part of my
message (which you conveniently left off):
>>Also, the Mac has always been relatively friendly to new users (and
>>nontechnical users), moreso than Windows, and many popular software
>>applications and games are found in stores for the Mac.
Macs are a perfect solution for mom and pop types. Those are its main
target audience, and that has been true since what? 1984?
Want games? Family software? That Quicken checkbook thing your friend
told you about? Don't want Windows?
Get a Mac. Simple.
>Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
>won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
>are going to have more.
The problem isn't the lack of solutions, Barb -- the problem is people
like you who continue to ignore the existing alternatives even though
some (like Apple's Macintosh) have been around for over 20 years now.
Does it have to be folklore for people like you to pay attention?
People have problems with Linux.
People have problems with Macs.
People have problems with Windows.
Welcome to the world of commodity components and third-party software.
Richard Steiner
Andrew Swallow <am.sw...@btinternet.com> spake unto us, saying:
>Richard Steiner wrote:
>
>> People tend to overestimate the amount of machine needed for mundane
>> tasks because Windows XP and friends are so resource-hungry.
>
>If Linux is resource light it should be able to run games faster than
>Windows.
I said mundane tasks, not gaming
Games are a fairly specialized type of software which have tested the
limits of computing hardware (and have thus been resource-intensive by
their very nature) for most of that software category's existence, at
least if one attempts to keep up with modern titles.
The fact that I can boot a Linux firewall distribution from a single
1.44MB flippy diskette and run it on a 486 machine with 8MB of RAM and
cannot do the same with Windows XP says something about the ability of
Linux to run under restricted conditions, at least relative to Windows.
krw
says...
> In article <47539BCD...@yahoo.com>,
> CBFalconer <cbfal...@maineline.net> wrote:
> >krw wrote:
> >> pr...@oanix.com says...
> >>> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>> The hardware to
> >>>> run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find.
> >>>
> >>> I though Linux ran fine on 486en.
> >>
> >> There is a *lot* more to a system than a CPU. Finding hardware
> >> that is Linux friendly at Wallyworld or even Staples/OfficeDespot
> >> is impossible. Sorry, but Linus is not user friendly, for
> >> mom-n-pop. It may be fine for geeks who like digging for
> >> comparability information.
> >
> >Funny. Most reports from actual Linux installers these days
> >(including me) go something like:
You've now heard from one with very different experience. Try a
random sample of WallyWorld customers.
> > Placed CD in drive.
> > Selected "Full Install"
> > Hit return.
> > entered Password.
They must have boringly vanilla systems.
> You forgot, after Install :
>
> Plug into network (if dhcp supported, no configuration necessary),
> start some graphical yum/apt front end, and click "update all";
> and an updated version of everything is downloaded.
>
> Also, you can choose from some 10k+ applications not present on
> the original media.
And after waiting that few hours, trying to figure out why dual-
display doesn't work, printer doesn't work, USB sticks don't work,
networking doesn't work...
> >all done in about 1/2 to 1 hour. Everything works. Nothing to buy.
I guess my "half hours" are a couple of years longer than most.
Winblows takes no time. It's on the systems and works (as well as it
is ever going to).
All of this ignores that all my tools are Win-only. Understand, I do
not like Winblows and would dump it in a heartbeat if I could, which
I once pretended was possible. I don't much like being painted in
the corner by Vista either.
--
Keith
krw
pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...
> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> writes:
> > pr...@oanix.com says...
> >> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> >> > The hardware to
> >> > run Linux is still too costly, for most, and not easy to find.
> >>
> >> I though Linux ran fine on 486en.
> >
> > There is a *lot* more to a system than a CPU. Finding hardware that
> > is Linux friendly at Wallyworld or even Staples/OfficeDespot is
> > impossible. Sorry, but Linus is not user friendly, for mom-n-pop.
> > It may be fine for geeks who like digging for comparability
> > information.
Hang on folks, I have to dig through all these posts again to answer
adequately. I had composed a long list of my grievances and it
vanished in a cloud of blue pixels. I have something going on with
my laptop that I have to get fixed before I give it to my son (my new
one is here, but has a bad preload - yes a bad Winblows preload).
> You've raised two different points here, one valid and one nonsense.
>
> The valid one is that yes, you still have to know what you're doing to
> run Linux. You characterize that as not user-friendly while I'd
> characterize it as *very* friendly if you do indeed know what you're
> doing; it's true that it's still not for mom-n-pop.
No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that one has to
understand hardware compatibility. Linux compatibility is *NOT*
printed on the box, where mom-n-pop expect it to be.
> The claim that it doesn't work on Wal-Mart hardware is just nuts. The
> most recent machine I put it on was an Averatec laptop bought at Sam's
> Club; yes, I did have to track down the wireless drivers (I already
You're already *way* past mon-n-pop. I've done it, but not always
with success. This crap isn't needed with Win. It's all there (or
it's taken back as defective). No one is going to listen if you say
it doesn't work under Linux. Too bad, it wasn't advertised to work
with Linux.
> conceded the point that you have to know what you're doing), but it
> works just fine on that hardware. And on the previous Sam's Club
> Averatec (different model). And on two different Sony Vaio laptops.
> And on all the machines I've built by sorting directron.com's parts
> listings by price, and picking the cheapest (I had no idea you could
> now buy a case -- with power supply -- for $25.00).
Always could. Crappy case and even crappier power supply, but
they've been available at that price point for years (when I was
working in x86 processor development at IBM, if that tells you
anything).
> No, I haven't bought a machine at Wal-Mart (Sam's yes, Wal-Mart no)
> and put Linux on it. Those machines are more expensive than several
> of the ones I've put Linux on. I note that some Wal-Marts are now
> selling a $199 computer with Ubuntu Linux pre-installed.
>
> So you can tell me about needing some expertise, and I'll be forced to
> agree. But don't waste my time claiming that Linux hardware is
> expensive.
It is. It cannot be bought across the counter. Find me a graphics
card at BestBuy that says it supports Linux. Hell, find me one at
NewEgg.com.
--
Keith
CBFalconer
>
... snip ...
>
> Another solution could be to get hold of those laptops back
> from leasing, and arrange for a Linux full install, and sell
> them as refurbished.
>
> Normal buyback for a decent, three year old laptop in good
> condition is around $250. How much can the market bear for
> a refurbished, pre-installed Linux with all the items ?
>
> $750 plus freight ? In which case there is a business case for it.
The overhead should be small. Probably just copy a Ubuntu CD and
install. The availability of such cheap quality laptops should
help spread the linux gospel. Cut the selling price to about 500
and you will still make money, assuming you can get the raw beasts
for 250. For 750 you should add a warranty.
krw
says...
> In article <fj0njs$8qk...@s781.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
> <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
> >In article <1Y2UHpHp...@visi.com>,
> > rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
> >>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
> >>
> >>>In article <4752218...@tx.rr.com>,
> >>> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
> >>>
> >>>>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
> >>>>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
> >>>
> >>>Sigh! Now try to do that.
> >>
> >>It's actually not that hard.
> >>
> >>The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
> >>
> >>Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
> >>accessible areas of the net,
> >
> >Sigh! The subject was about buying a system. That implies retail and
> >not scrounging dumpsters or the nets.
>
> New systems work just fine. That was not the point. The point is
> that linux runs with _fewer_ hardware issues than windows. Any
> windows; unless that windows arrived with the machine.
I don't believe that for a minute. Hardware *has* to run under
Windows or it won't sell (they'll get an RMA in a nanosecond). No
one cares about Linux. Really.
> I even bring along a Linux boot CD when buying PCs that are
> supposed to run Windows; because I can see exactly what kind of
> hardware is inside the machine.
...and you expect Joe Sixpack to do that?
> >Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
> >won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
> >are going to have more.
>
> If he has problems doing a linux install on commodity hardware
> then he is not a specialist in PC operations.
You're wrong, on both counts.
> My wife does this, and she has no such training whatsoever. After
> she saw how easy it was she helps others.
After you already have hardware purchased with the specific purpose
of running Linux. You've already done all the work.
> Perhaps we should arrange more installfests ? This was an
> event from the early days of Linux, when hardware problems
> and installations were _not_ trivial. Now they are, but the
> image remains.
OS/2 developers tried it. It was reasonably successful, though they
were a bit over-zealous, perhaps. I'd certainly attend one.
> Another solution could be to get hold of those laptops back
> from leasing, and arrange for a Linux full install, and sell
> them as refurbished.
>
> Normal buyback for a decent, three year old laptop in good
> condition is around $250. How much can the market bear for
> a refurbished, pre-installed Linux with all the items ?
I'll cost you that much do buy a battery, which will no doubt be bad.
> $750 plus freight ? In which case there is a business case for it.
Too rich for me. One can buy a new laptop for that. I've paid about
$1200 for new, decked-out, wide-screen ThinkPad T6xs. Stripped they
can be had for $900ish.
--
Keith
Joe Pfeiffer
> In article <1bir3gw...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
> pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...
>> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> writes:
>
>> You've raised two different points here, one valid and one nonsense.
>>
>> The valid one is that yes, you still have to know what you're doing to
>> run Linux. You characterize that as not user-friendly while I'd
>> characterize it as *very* friendly if you do indeed know what you're
>> doing; it's true that it's still not for mom-n-pop.
>
> No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that one has to
> understand hardware compatibility. Linux compatibility is *NOT*
> printed on the box, where mom-n-pop expect it to be.
You're going to have to tell me how my statement (you need expertise)
is materially different from yours (mom-and-pop don't know anything
beyond what's printed on the box -- if that).
<snip>
>> So you can tell me about needing some expertise, and I'll be forced to
>> agree. But don't waste my time claiming that Linux hardware is
>> expensive.
>
> It is. It cannot be bought across the counter. Find me a graphics
> card at BestBuy that says it supports Linux. Hell, find me one at
> NewEgg.com.
Read what I said again. Sure, the graphics card at Best Buy doesn't
*claim* to run with Linux. But it does anyway (except for high-end
gaming cards). So you can buy the same cheap hardware for Linux that
you can for Windows; but you *have to know what you're doing*.
You seem to be making mom-n-pop's mistake: if the box doesn't say it
works, it doesn't. Yes it does; you just need to know what you're
doing (which mom-n-pop don't).
The amusing thing about this, by the way, is that my college-age
daughter calls mom-n-pop (i.e. my wife and I) on the phone regularly
to get tech support. Pop, of course, got his CS PhD in 1986, and Mom
finished hers this semester. Finally!
But I recognize we aren't the mom-n-pop who are being discussed here.
Joe Pfeiffer
That doesn't follow at all. First, the game has to not be
Windows-only (knocking out virtually non-console games); second, you
have to be able to access all the resources in both cases. As long as
vendors keep the real specs on their high-end graphics cards locked in
a vault, that won't happen (of course, in my interchange with krw, I'm
acknowledging high-end graphics cards as the one hardware issue Linux
really has, for this exact reason. Hopefully, as ATI is releasing
their specs, this problem will go away too).
Morten Reistad
krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>In article <7pa0jf....@eden.reistad.name>, fi...@last.name
>says...
>> In article <47539BCD...@yahoo.com>,
>> CBFalconer <cbfal...@maineline.net> wrote:
>> >krw wrote:
>> >> pr...@oanix.com says...
>You've now heard from one with very different experience. Try a
>random sample of WallyWorld customers.
>
>> > Placed CD in drive.
>> > Selected "Full Install"
>> > Hit return.
>> > entered Password.
>
>They must have boringly vanilla systems.
>
>> You forgot, after Install :
>>
>> Plug into network (if dhcp supported, no configuration necessary),
>> start some graphical yum/apt front end, and click "update all";
>> and an updated version of everything is downloaded.
>>
>> Also, you can choose from some 10k+ applications not present on
>> the original media.
>
>And after waiting that few hours, trying to figure out why dual-
>display doesn't work, printer doesn't work, USB sticks don't work,
>networking doesn't work...
You are using windows, I see.
I do this auto-upgrade all the time. It very seldom breaks something,
but there are new addons all the time. Suddenly your wifi has better
signal processing code. Your drivers supports another mode of the graphics
card.
I use Fedora, Ubuntu, CentOS, and "plain" debian all the time.
Fedora can be a little bleeding egde at times (it is supposed to be),
but the others are rock steady.
>> >all done in about 1/2 to 1 hour. Everything works. Nothing to buy.
>
>I guess my "half hours" are a couple of years longer than most.
>Winblows takes no time. It's on the systems and works (as well as it
>is ever going to).
This is "baking bread time", i.e. you have to be present for the
beeps when your action is needed, but you don't have to actually
do very much beyond an initial 20 minutes or so.
The one thing we haven't talked about is backups, and restores; and
the recreation of a system. This still does not work at all in
windows. You have to do reinstalls, and more reinstalls.
I have lost two loptops due to hardware failures the last few
years (one was run over by a car). I keep good backups, so the
recreation of a new system is
Obtain new hardware.
insert boot disk (can be another distribution, even, I have
recreated a fedora from an Ubuntu rescue disk)
Intercept the boot, and go into rescue mode.
Format the disk, just like the one you want to recreate.
Drop into a shell.
Plug in USB disk with backup.
Restore the backup
Run lilo or grub again from the restored disk, so you get
the right boot image from the restored system
Reboot.
If the hardware has changed a lot you may need to do a
"yum/apt" update to fix software dependencies that arise from
the hardware, plus another reboot.
I have done this twice the last three years. Works wonders.
I get my old environment back on a new machine.
>All of this ignores that all my tools are Win-only. Understand, I do
>not like Winblows and would dump it in a heartbeat if I could, which
>I once pretended was possible. I don't much like being painted in
>the corner by Vista either.
Getting rid of the old toolset can be painful. It took me
nearly two years.
I initially got myself a used laptop, installed linux there,
made it well networked with the old system, even with vnc so
I could run Windows from the Linux side, and an X-server on
windows so I could run Linux from the Windows side.
I then migrated. You can run surprisingly many small 3rd party
windows utilities under wine, but they have to be migrated.
When you are ready, you get a new "main" machine. I took
a decent laptop, and migrated the whole environment from the
old to the new system using the backup method above.
I still have one Windows app that is too good to go
without. Seapro, from Euronav. It has it's own mini-itx
with w2k.
-- mrr
Morten Reistad
CBFalconer <cbfal...@maineline.net> wrote:
>Morten Reistad wrote:
>>
>... snip ...
>>
>> Another solution could be to get hold of those laptops back
>> from leasing, and arrange for a Linux full install, and sell
>> them as refurbished.
>>
>> Normal buyback for a decent, three year old laptop in good
>> condition is around $250. How much can the market bear for
>> a refurbished, pre-installed Linux with all the items ?
>>
>> $750 plus freight ? In which case there is a business case for it.
>
>The overhead should be small. Probably just copy a Ubuntu CD and
>install. The availability of such cheap quality laptops should
>help spread the linux gospel. Cut the selling price to about 500
>and you will still make money, assuming you can get the raw beasts
>for 250. For 750 you should add a warranty.
I checked. Depending on model, $240-$330, back from IBM leasing
or $260-$320 from their main competitor here. We may have to
upgrade RAM and blank disks. I discovered two companies actually
selling these "raw"; with a hardware test cycle applied. This
assumes a machine in good condition, and it has been washed.
When doing this, we should make a full software install. Bring
in full openoffice, gaim, video editing etc. It takes around
8G with a _complete_ ubuntu install. It can be done over a local
network easily and fast, and deliver the latest, fastest from
a mirror on the local LAN.
This is easy to do with both Debian and RedHat, haven't
looked too much at Ubuntu, but it shouldn't be too hard.
Add $50 in RAM on the lowest models, let run in benck for
install/hardware test overnight; and ship. The handling cost
should be around 2-3 hours per box for a junior tech.
$495 for Linux should be doable with a decent profit.
I'll go talk to these guys doing refurb without OS.
-- mrr
Morten Reistad
krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>In article <jms0jf....@eden.reistad.name>, fi...@last.name
>says...
>> In article <fj0njs$8qk...@s781.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
>> <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>> >In article <1Y2UHpHp...@visi.com>,
>> > rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>> >>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>> New systems work just fine. That was not the point. The point is
>> that linux runs with _fewer_ hardware issues than windows. Any
>> windows; unless that windows arrived with the machine.
>
>I don't believe that for a minute. Hardware *has* to run under
>Windows or it won't sell (they'll get an RMA in a nanosecond). No
>one cares about Linux. Really.
How many times haven't you heard about needing SP1, and not
working under SP1 needing SP2, and not Vista ready, and not XP
compliant ? Having worked for support organisations for networks,
telephony, monitoring, relatime vendors etc for the last 25
years I have my ears full of that noise.
>> I even bring along a Linux boot CD when buying PCs that are
>> supposed to run Windows; because I can see exactly what kind of
>> hardware is inside the machine.
>
>...and you expect Joe Sixpack to do that?
With a suitable graphics display, why not ?
"Here is the CD that tells you _exactly_ what the hardware is.
Full diags. Does not interfere with installed system."
Sold at $5.95 in stores ? I cannot see why this shouldn't be
a Joe Sixpack product. Joe Sixpack knows that the PC hardware
is sold by someone less honest than a car salesman, and a
personal check would be in order. Just like kicking the cars
on display to check bumpers and painted-over rust. He may
not actually :have: a clue, and knows it, but he wants to
:appear: to have a clue.
>> >Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
>> >won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
>> >are going to have more.
>>
>> If he has problems doing a linux install on commodity hardware
>> then he is not a specialist in PC operations.
>
>You're wrong, on both counts.
If you don't believe me, try Dagbladet. Tabloid newspaper,
trying to be "consumer friendly". They try out all kinds of
products. They test computer OSes as well. Vista gets bottom
marks, still after SP1. They did an "alternate OS" test, and
let a couple of plain front-desk journalists install a couple
of Linux distros on random hardware. Everyone got to a
commercially useful setup within an evening, although there
were some driver issues. _fewer_ driver issues than they
had recorded on windows reinstalls since the heyday of w2k.
On their test on reinstalling windows, everyone did NOT
get to a commercially useful config without external help.
I.e. they would be able to work well on the machine even if
some features were missing. 5-channel surround sound (on a pc!)
was missing without a driver, some graphics modes needed drivers.
All of the network stuff Just Worked. Ditto all software
dependencies and USB devices.
Ubuntu came out on top, no surprise. The software installer
got rave reviews.
>> My wife does this, and she has no such training whatsoever. After
>> she saw how easy it was she helps others.
>
>After you already have hardware purchased with the specific purpose
>of running Linux. You've already done all the work.
No. The normal setting is someone buying/getting a new computer
and letting the old one have Linux.
>> Perhaps we should arrange more installfests ? This was an
>> event from the early days of Linux, when hardware problems
>> and installations were _not_ trivial. Now they are, but the
>> image remains.
>
>OS/2 developers tried it. It was reasonably successful, though they
>were a bit over-zealous, perhaps. I'd certainly attend one.
>
>> Another solution could be to get hold of those laptops back
>> from leasing, and arrange for a Linux full install, and sell
>> them as refurbished.
>>
>> Normal buyback for a decent, three year old laptop in good
>> condition is around $250. How much can the market bear for
>> a refurbished, pre-installed Linux with all the items ?
>
>I'll cost you that much do buy a battery, which will no doubt be bad.
>
>> $750 plus freight ? In which case there is a business case for it.
>
>Too rich for me. One can buy a new laptop for that. I've paid about
>$1200 for new, decked-out, wide-screen ThinkPad T6xs. Stripped they
>can be had for $900ish.
I'll go check the refurb vendors anyway.
-- mrr
jmfb...@aol.com
c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
>In article <fj0njs$8qk...@s781.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
> <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>In article <1Y2UHpHp...@visi.com>,
>> rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>>>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>>>
>>>>In article <4752218...@tx.rr.com>,
>>>> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>
>>>>>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
>>>>>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
>>>>
>>>>Sigh! Now try to do that.
>>>
>>>It's actually not that hard.
>>>
>>>The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
>>>
>>>Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
>>>accessible areas of the net,
>>
>>Sigh! The subject was about buying a system. That implies retail and
>>not scrounging dumpsters or the nets.
>
>Macs (one of the options if you want to avoid buying Windows) are easily
>available through retail, both through Apple's own Aple Stores, and
>through other eletronics / computer retailers.
I just did that. I still haven't been able to access the net.
>
>Furthermore, buying computers on the net
Wrong. People's first computer cannot be bought on the net since
they don't have access to the net. Even if they do have access,
a lot of people still don't trust giving out financial data.
<snip>
/BAH
Christian Brunschen
<jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <fj1688$a6u$1...@news.lth.se>,
> c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
>>In article <fj0njs$8qk...@s781.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
>> <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>In article <1Y2UHpHp...@visi.com>,
>>> rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
>>>>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>>>>
>>>>>In article <4752218...@tx.rr.com>,
>>>>> Charles Richmond <fri...@tx.rr.com> wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>>It's even easier if you *never* buy Windows the *first* time.
>>>>>>Stick with Mac, Linux, and FreeBSD.
>>>>>
>>>>>Sigh! Now try to do that.
>>>>
>>>>It's actually not that hard.
>>>>
>>>>The hard part is learning that it's possble, not actually doing it.
>>>>
>>>>Used PCs sans software are found all over on eBay and in other easily
>>>>accessible areas of the net,
>>>
>>>Sigh! The subject was about buying a system. That implies retail and
>>>not scrounging dumpsters or the nets.
>>
>>Macs (one of the options if you want to avoid buying Windows) are easily
>>available through retail, both through Apple's own Aple Stores, and
>>through other eletronics / computer retailers.
>
>I just did that. I still haven't been able to access the net.
How are you trying to access the net? If by Dial-up, then you will likely
need to buy a telephone modem, as Macs no longer ship with telephone
modems built in:
<http://store.apple.com/1-800-MY-APPLE/WebObjects/AppleStore.woa/wa/RSLID?mco=7E4EB91E&nplm=MA034Z/A>
Once you have a modem, configuring the dialup internet connection should
be straightforward.
If you're trying to connect through something that gives you an ethernet
connection with TCP/IP running over it and DHCP server somewhere on the
net (which is the usual setup if you have a DSL or Cable connection), then
it should be quite simple and straightforward - simply connect the
ethernet cable and the connection should automatically configure (using
DHCP).
What precisely is your setup, and what precisely are the problems you are
having, i.e., what precisely are the instructions you have to connect to
your ISP, what precisely is it that you do, what precisely is it that
happens, and how precisely does this differ from what should happen?
Please provide as much pertinent detail as possible.
>>Furthermore, buying computers on the net
>
>Wrong. People's first computer cannot be bought on the net since
>they don't have access to the net.
The full paragraph of which you quoted just the beginning was:
<quote>
Furthermore, buying computers on the net is not exactly difficult these
days, and there's little need to 'scrounge around'. Even Dell sell PCs
with Linux preinstalled, see
<http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/ubuntu>, which one can
easily purchase by visiting the Dell website from a public library, for
instance.
</quote>
where you can see that I am explicitly referring to people accessing web
sites "from a public library, for instance". Just because someone does not
own a computer or have an internet connection of their own, doesn't mean
in this day and age that they cannot access the Internet. So simply saying
'wrong' doesn't do you much good, in particular when I've _already_
presented a counterexample (which you snipped from the quote).
Yes, there are people who have no internet access at all; but most people
in the US and western Europe have access to places like libraries or
'Internet Cafes' where they can, for a small or sometimes even no fee at
all, access the internet. And this is without even mentioning that they
might have friends or acquaintances who can and would let them access the
internet. And of course, many people can access the internet at work, and
may thus be able to buy a computer over the internet from there.
Basically, owning a computer is in no way a prerequisite for being able to
buy a computer over the internet. On this point, at least, it is your
proclamation that I am wrong that is, in fact, wrong.
All this is of course in the context of how easy or difficult it is to buy
a first computer without Windows. Considering that we've already seen that
Macs are readily available in brick-and-mortar stores, and that even
Wal-Mart sells cheap PCs with Linux preinstalled - again, in
brick-and-mortar stores - the fact that some people don't have internet
access is not exactly a show-stopper.
>Even if they do have access,
>a lot of people still don't trust giving out financial data.
This is a separate issue. Those people will likely deal in cash. There's
nothing that says someone couldn't provide internet sales of computers
with a 'cash-on-delivery' payment option. Since I was using Dell as an
example, Dell's web site states
<quote src="http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/policy/en/policy?c=us&l=en&s=gen&~section=012">
Payment Terms; Orders; Quotes; Interest. Terms of payment are within
Dell's sole discretion, and unless otherwise agreed to by Dell, payment
must be received by Dell prior to Dell's acceptance of an order. Payment
for the products will be made by credit card, wire transfer, or some other
prearranged payment method unless credit terms have been agreed to by
Dell.
</quote>
So there are other payment options available than credit cards. You might
also note that there are places where you can buy 'pre-paid credit cards':
For a fee, you will get a credit card with a fixed amount of money on it.
It has no connection to your bank account or anything else, ad you can't
overspend. (I gave one of those as an early holiday gift just a few days
ago.) They can be used wherever credit cards are accepted.
And still, that is an issue of what people _choose_ to do, not what people
_can_ do (which was the original issue being discussed).
><snip>
>
>/BAH
// Christian Brunschen
Steve O'Hara-Smith
c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
> where you can see that I am explicitly referring to people accessing web
> sites "from a public library, for instance".
Hmm just one point here - a public library or other public machine
is about the worst place I can think of to make an online purchase.
Al Balmer
>> New systems work just fine. That was not the point. The point is
>> that linux runs with _fewer_ hardware issues than windows. Any
>> windows; unless that windows arrived with the machine.
>
>I don't believe that for a minute. Hardware *has* to run under
>Windows or it won't sell (they'll get an RMA in a nanosecond). No
>one cares about Linux. Really.
*New* hardware has to run under Windows, perhaps, but too often old
hardware won't run under new Windows. Vista won't handle my HP
LaserJet 4 printer properly, for example. The HP Scanjet I use isn't
fully supported, and it's not very old. Both work nicely under the
three Linux distributions I've tried in the last year.
In my experience, modern Linux installs are smoother than Windows
installs.
--
Al Balmer
Sun City, AZ
Andrew Swallow
> Here in alt.folklore.computers,
> Andrew Swallow <am.sw...@btinternet.com> spake unto us, saying:
>
>> Richard Steiner wrote:
>>
>>> People tend to overestimate the amount of machine needed for mundane
>>> tasks because Windows XP and friends are so resource-hungry.
>> If Linux is resource light it should be able to run games faster than
>> Windows.
>
> I said mundane tasks, not gaming
>
> Games are a fairly specialized type of software which have tested the
> limits of computing hardware (and have thus been resource-intensive by
> their very nature) for most of that software category's existence, at
> least if one attempts to keep up with modern titles.
Being resource intensive the game uses everything that the OS does
not. OS1 uses say 60% of the computer leaving 40% for the game.
OS2 uses 25% of the computer leaving 75% for the game. So the
game should be nearly twice as fast on the same hardware.
As for the video card, if games switched to Linux the video card
manufactures would have to issue Linus drivers.
Andrew Swallow
Dave Garland
wrote:
>Wal-Mart sells cheap PCs with Linux preinstalled - again, in
>brick-and-mortar stores
Is this now the case? When WalMart first did this, the Linux PCs were
only available from their online store.
Dave
John Varela
(in article <fj3r1l$30t$1...@news.lth.se>):
> Yes, there are people who have no internet access at all; but most people in
> the US and western Europe have access to places like libraries or 'Internet
> Cafes' where they can, for a small or sometimes even no fee at all, access
> the internet. And this is without even mentioning that they might have
> friends or acquaintances who can and would let them access the internet. And
> of course, many people can access the internet at work, and may thus be able
> to buy a computer over the internet from there.
I have no need to use a public computer except when traveling, and then I'm
afraid to do anything -- such as read email on my ISP's web site -- that
involves a password for fear of spyware. I would really be leery of sending
my credit card number through a public computer.
Am I being overly cautious? I don't think so.
--
John Varela
Trade NEW lamps for OLD for email.
Christian Brunschen
I _thought_ that they were available in stores, but I can't find anything
to back that up. I'm probably wrong on this point, then.
Thanks for the correction,
>Dave
Best wishes,
// Christian Brunschen
Christian Brunschen
Christian Brunschen <c...@df.lth.se> wrote:
>In article <668bl3l1hqq3spavc...@4ax.com>,
>Dave Garland <dave.g...@wizinfo.com> wrote:
>>It was a dark and stormy night when c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen)
>>wrote:
>>
>>>Wal-Mart sells cheap PCs with Linux preinstalled - again, in
>>>brick-and-mortar stores
>>
>>Is this now the case? When WalMart first did this, the Linux PCs were
>>only available from their online store.
>
>I _thought_ that they were available in stores, but I can't find anything
>to back that up. I'm probably wrong on this point, then.
... and I obviously find this right _after_ I send the message above.
According to this Wired article,
<http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2007/10/200-everex-gree.html>, titled "$200
Ubuntu Linux PC Now Available at Wal-Mart", you can see towards the
bottom:
<quote>
Update: Here's a bumper list of the 630 Wal-Marts that'll have these in
stock:
</quote>
... followed by a lost of US place names. So at least that particular
Ubunti Linux PC is/was indeed available in brick-and-mortar Wal-Mart
shops; not all of them perhaps, but certainly a fair amount.
Dave Garland
wrote:
>So at least that particular
>Ubunti Linux PC is/was indeed available in brick-and-mortar Wal-Mart
>shops; not all of them perhaps, but certainly a fair amount.
That's good news.
Dave
krw
> In article <MPG.21bdda10f...@news.individual.net>,
> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> >In article <7pa0jf....@eden.reistad.name>, fi...@last.name
> >says...
<snip>
> >> You forgot, after Install :
> >>
> >> Plug into network (if dhcp supported, no configuration necessary),
> >> start some graphical yum/apt front end, and click "update all";
> >> and an updated version of everything is downloaded.
> >>
> >> Also, you can choose from some 10k+ applications not present on
> >> the original media.
> >
> >And after waiting that few hours, trying to figure out why dual-
> >display doesn't work, printer doesn't work, USB sticks don't work,
> >networking doesn't work...
>
> You are using windows, I see.
Yes, and those are the primary reason, along with the software for
the work I do is Windows based.
> I do this auto-upgrade all the time. It very seldom breaks something,
> but there are new addons all the time. Suddenly your wifi has better
> signal processing code. Your drivers supports another mode of the graphics
> card.
The system crashes at the worst possible time.
> I use Fedora, Ubuntu, CentOS, and "plain" debian all the time.
> Fedora can be a little bleeding egde at times (it is supposed to be),
> but the others are rock steady.
Rocks don't do much work,though.
> >> >all done in about 1/2 to 1 hour. Everything works. Nothing to buy.
> >
> >I guess my "half hours" are a couple of years longer than most.
> >Winblows takes no time. It's on the systems and works (as well as it
> >is ever going to).
>
> This is "baking bread time", i.e. you have to be present for the
> beeps when your action is needed, but you don't have to actually
> do very much beyond an initial 20 minutes or so.
That is *NOT* my experience with SuSE. I never go everything working
right in any version. SuSE 10.0 decided to have a pissing contest
with my graphics card and would never consider that there was a
second monitor attached.
> The one thing we haven't talked about is backups, and restores; and
> the recreation of a system. This still does not work at all in
> windows. You have to do reinstalls, and more reinstalls.
ThinkVantage backup and restore works perfectly on my ThinkPad (had
to use it recently to recover from a munged wireless driver install).
> I have lost two loptops due to hardware failures the last few
> years (one was run over by a car). I keep good backups, so the
> recreation of a new system is
No, even Windows won't protect the system from being run over. ;-)
> Obtain new hardware.
> insert boot disk (can be another distribution, even, I have
> recreated a fedora from an Ubuntu rescue disk)
> Intercept the boot, and go into rescue mode.
> Format the disk, just like the one you want to recreate.
> Drop into a shell.
> Plug in USB disk with backup.
> Restore the backup
> Run lilo or grub again from the restored disk, so you get
> the right boot image from the restored system
> Reboot.
You're not convincing me. Windows doesn't even need all that rot.
Simply boot from the USB drive and restore from there. I'e done it a
few times, once to prove to myself that it worked (bought spare
disk), once to clone the system to another (only problem was the
security device), and once because of the above munged driver install
that left it with no connectivity. I've tried recovering single
files too; works like a charm.
> If the hardware has changed a lot you may need to do a
> "yum/apt" update to fix software dependencies that arise from
> the hardware, plus another reboot.
>
> I have done this twice the last three years. Works wonders.
> I get my old environment back on a new machine.
Windows can be done, but a little more planning is required. OS/2
was trivial to clone a system to even different hardware.
> >All of this ignores that all my tools are Win-only. Understand, I do
> >not like Winblows and would dump it in a heartbeat if I could, which
> >I once pretended was possible. I don't much like being painted in
> >the corner by Vista either.
>
> Getting rid of the old toolset can be painful. It took me
> nearly two years.
It's impossible when that's all that's available or your employer has
chosen the toolset for you.
> I initially got myself a used laptop, installed linux there,
> made it well networked with the old system, even with vnc so
> I could run Windows from the Linux side, and an X-server on
> windows so I could run Linux from the Windows side.
That's my next move. I bought a system a couple of years ago
(Opteron with all the trimmings) with the intention of moving to
Linux (SuSE). I had all sorts of hardware issues with the display an
USB, so kinda shelved it when I got my laptop. When I get a little
more settled in (though we're only here for another six months so
there are a lot of boxes that won't be opened) I plan on setting the
Linux machine back up and do the same. My hope is that I'll gain a
third display that I can't get the laptop to recognize directly.
> I then migrated. You can run surprisingly many small 3rd party
> windows utilities under wine, but they have to be migrated.
One day, when I have an infinite amount of time, maybe I'll go there.
I've made no progress trying in the past.
> When you are ready, you get a new "main" machine. I took
> a decent laptop, and migrated the whole environment from the
> old to the new system using the backup method above.
I'll run dual-boot on my main laptops, if I can get Linux to work for
me. Like I said, I *really* want to move off Win, but so far have
been frustrated in my attempts.
> I still have one Windows app that is too good to go
> without. Seapro, from Euronav. It has it's own mini-itx
> with w2k.
I'm collecting parts for a HTPC (have case, board, drives, and memory
on order - still need the CPU but haven't decided on which). I'm
going to try to get that working with Linux too, but also have W2K
laying around that I'm not using if that goes nowhere.
--
Keith
krw
> In article <MPG.21be9c9fe...@news.individual.net>,
> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
> >In article <jms0jf....@eden.reistad.name>, fi...@last.name
> >says...
> >> In article <fj0njs$8qk...@s781.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
> >> <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
> >> >In article <1Y2UHpHp...@visi.com>,
> >> > rste...@visi.com (Richard Steiner) wrote:
> >> >>Here in alt.folklore.computers, jmfb...@aol.com spake unto us, saying:
>
> >> New systems work just fine. That was not the point. The point is
> >> that linux runs with _fewer_ hardware issues than windows. Any
> >> windows; unless that windows arrived with the machine.
> >
> >I don't believe that for a minute. Hardware *has* to run under
> >Windows or it won't sell (they'll get an RMA in a nanosecond). No
> >one cares about Linux. Really.
>
> How many times haven't you heard about needing SP1, and not
> working under SP1 needing SP2, and not Vista ready, and not XP
> compliant ? Having worked for support organisations for networks,
> telephony, monitoring, relatime vendors etc for the last 25
> years I have my ears full of that noise.
The service pack issue is a red herring. They're updated online, if
necessary. Yes, there are differences in OSs. Yes, Vista is a
disaster. What's that got to do with the price of oats. People buy a
computer and it comes with the OS they "need".
> >> I even bring along a Linux boot CD when buying PCs that are
> >> supposed to run Windows; because I can see exactly what kind of
> >> hardware is inside the machine.
> >
> >...and you expect Joe Sixpack to do that?
>
> With a suitable graphics display, why not ?
You live in a fantasy world. Joe sixpack chucks the machine rather
than even attempting to repair the OS, much less install a new one.
> "Here is the CD that tells you _exactly_ what the hardware is.
> Full diags. Does not interfere with installed system."
...and doesn't tell everything.
> Sold at $5.95 in stores ? I cannot see why this shouldn't be
> a Joe Sixpack product. Joe Sixpack knows that the PC hardware
> is sold by someone less honest than a car salesman, and a
> personal check would be in order. Just like kicking the cars
> on display to check bumpers and painted-over rust. He may
> not actually :have: a clue, and knows it, but he wants to
> :appear: to have a clue.
No, he really doesn't want to have a clue. He really just wants to
get email, hook up his new digital camera, and perhaps print a few
photos. He does *NOT* want to muck around with the OS. The proof of
this is in Linux' penetration into this market; zero.
> >> >Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
> >> >won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
> >> >are going to have more.
> >>
> >> If he has problems doing a linux install on commodity hardware
> >> then he is not a specialist in PC operations.
> >
> >You're wrong, on both counts.
>
> If you don't believe me, try Dagbladet. Tabloid newspaper,
> trying to be "consumer friendly". They try out all kinds of
> products. They test computer OSes as well. Vista gets bottom
> marks, still after SP1. They did an "alternate OS" test, and
> let a couple of plain front-desk journalists install a couple
> of Linux distros on random hardware. Everyone got to a
> commercially useful setup within an evening, although there
> were some driver issues. _fewer_ driver issues than they
> had recorded on windows reinstalls since the heyday of w2k.
Of course Vista is a disaster. That's not news to anyone. Joe
Sixpack doesn't install Vista though. He doesn't care about most
drivers. Stuff works or the whole shebang goes back to WallyWorld.
> On their test on reinstalling windows, everyone did NOT
> get to a commercially useful config without external help.
BUT NO ONE INSTALLS WINDOWS! Your argument is silly!
<snipped more irrelevant stuff>
> >> My wife does this, and she has no such training whatsoever. After
> >> she saw how easy it was she helps others.
> >
> >After you already have hardware purchased with the specific purpose
> >of running Linux. You've already done all the work.
>
> No. The normal setting is someone buying/getting a new computer
> and letting the old one have Linux.
Hardly Joe Sixpack territory. If the old computer isn't simply
handed own as-is, it's thrown in the landfill.
> >> Perhaps we should arrange more installfests ? This was an
> >> event from the early days of Linux, when hardware problems
> >> and installations were _not_ trivial. Now they are, but the
> >> image remains.
> >
> >OS/2 developers tried it. It was reasonably successful, though they
> >were a bit over-zealous, perhaps. I'd certainly attend one.
...though my problems were never with the initial install, rather
getting all the bits working after.
> >
> >> Another solution could be to get hold of those laptops back
> >> from leasing, and arrange for a Linux full install, and sell
> >> them as refurbished.
> >>
> >> Normal buyback for a decent, three year old laptop in good
> >> condition is around $250. How much can the market bear for
> >> a refurbished, pre-installed Linux with all the items ?
> >
> >I'll cost you that much do buy a battery, which will no doubt be bad.
> >
> >> $750 plus freight ? In which case there is a business case for it.
> >
> >Too rich for me. One can buy a new laptop for that. I've paid about
> >$1200 for new, decked-out, wide-screen ThinkPad T6xs. Stripped they
> >can be had for $900ish.
>
> I'll go check the refurb vendors anyway.
Good luck. It might be a winner, but there is a lot of competition
from Moore.
--
Keith
krw
> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> writes:
> > In article <1bir3gw...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
> > pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...
> >> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> writes:
> >
> >> You've raised two different points here, one valid and one nonsense.
> >>
> >> The valid one is that yes, you still have to know what you're doing to
> >> run Linux. You characterize that as not user-friendly while I'd
> >> characterize it as *very* friendly if you do indeed know what you're
> >> doing; it's true that it's still not for mom-n-pop.
> >
> > No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that one has to
> > understand hardware compatibility. Linux compatibility is *NOT*
> > printed on the box, where mom-n-pop expect it to be.
>
> You're going to have to tell me how my statement (you need expertise)
> is materially different from yours (mom-and-pop don't know anything
> beyond what's printed on the box -- if that).
It's hardly "friendly" to not have information.
> <snip>
>
> >> So you can tell me about needing some expertise, and I'll be forced to
> >> agree. But don't waste my time claiming that Linux hardware is
> >> expensive.
> >
> > It is. It cannot be bought across the counter. Find me a graphics
> > card at BestBuy that says it supports Linux. Hell, find me one at
> > NewEgg.com.
>
> Read what I said again. Sure, the graphics card at Best Buy doesn't
> *claim* to run with Linux. But it does anyway (except for high-end
> gaming cards). So you can buy the same cheap hardware for Linux that
> you can for Windows; but you *have to know what you're doing*.
...except for all the gotchas. ...and don't call the manufacturer
for help if it doesn't. "The secretary will disavow all
knowledge..." <smoke billowing out of system>
> You seem to be making mom-n-pop's mistake: if the box doesn't say it
> works, it doesn't. Yes it does; you just need to know what you're
> doing (which mom-n-pop don't).
Which is why Linux is going no further.
> The amusing thing about this, by the way, is that my college-age
> daughter calls mom-n-pop (i.e. my wife and I) on the phone regularly
> to get tech support. Pop, of course, got his CS PhD in 1986, and Mom
> finished hers this semester. Finally!
You prove my point. Linux is a geeks OS. It always will be with the
attitudes I see here. Hell, I'm a geek too and have been utterly
frustrated by it.
> But I recognize we aren't the mom-n-pop who are being discussed here.
It was part of the "Linux is not ready for prime time" undercurrent,
which Linux geeks will never understand.
--
Keith
Larry Elmore
>
> You live in a fantasy world. Joe sixpack chucks the machine rather
> than even attempting to repair the OS, much less install a new one.
In what world? Most aren't going to invest another several hundred
dollars at the drop of a hat into exactly the same thing that just died
on them.
>> "Here is the CD that tells you _exactly_ what the hardware is.
>> Full diags. Does not interfere with installed system."
>
> ...and doesn't tell everything.
>
>> Sold at $5.95 in stores ? I cannot see why this shouldn't be
>> a Joe Sixpack product. Joe Sixpack knows that the PC hardware
>> is sold by someone less honest than a car salesman, and a
>> personal check would be in order. Just like kicking the cars
>> on display to check bumpers and painted-over rust. He may
>> not actually :have: a clue, and knows it, but he wants to
>> :appear: to have a clue.
>
> No, he really doesn't want to have a clue. He really just wants to
> get email, hook up his new digital camera, and perhaps print a few
> photos. He does *NOT* want to muck around with the OS. The proof of
> this is in Linux' penetration into this market; zero.
>
>>>>> Will you people listen to the complaints of a specialist if you
>>>>> won't listen to mine? If he's got problems, the moms and pops
>>>>> are going to have more.
>>>> If he has problems doing a linux install on commodity hardware
>>>> then he is not a specialist in PC operations.
>>> You're wrong, on both counts.
Well, that's your opinion. Based on your other statements about Linux,
I'm not sure that's worth anything.
>> If you don't believe me, try Dagbladet. Tabloid newspaper,
>> trying to be "consumer friendly". They try out all kinds of
>> products. They test computer OSes as well. Vista gets bottom
>> marks, still after SP1. They did an "alternate OS" test, and
>> let a couple of plain front-desk journalists install a couple
>> of Linux distros on random hardware. Everyone got to a
>> commercially useful setup within an evening, although there
>> were some driver issues. _fewer_ driver issues than they
>> had recorded on windows reinstalls since the heyday of w2k.
>
> Of course Vista is a disaster. That's not news to anyone. Joe
> Sixpack doesn't install Vista though. He doesn't care about most
> drivers. Stuff works or the whole shebang goes back to WallyWorld.
>
>> On their test on reinstalling windows, everyone did NOT
>> get to a commercially useful config without external help.
>
> BUT NO ONE INSTALLS WINDOWS! Your argument is silly!
I guess that's why Microsoft doesn't sell Windows upgrade versions then,
huh? Oh wait, they do and lots of them...
Of course Windows eventually will hang itself by it's own nuts,
probability of which approaches 1 over a couple of years without careful
management. Of course, they usually call someone who knows what they're
doing to come save them. Lord knows I've done it enough times for
friends and relatives. You must live in a bearded Spock universe.
The Ubuntu Linux install on my wife's (stock) computer was just as easy
as Windows XP. She's quite happy to be away from Windows OS, but there
are some things she needs from Windows. For that, I installed XP in a
VirtualBox VM, and she can run iTunes and a couple of other things from
that just fine. XP actually seems to run better in the VM than on the
real hardware. Lord knows real backups of XP in a VM are much easier.
Larry
Joe Pfeiffer
> In article <1bir3ff...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
> pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...
>> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> writes:
>> > In article <1bir3gw...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
>> > pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...
>> >> krw <k...@att.bizzzz> writes:
>> >
>> >> You've raised two different points here, one valid and one nonsense.
>> >>
>> >> The valid one is that yes, you still have to know what you're doing to
>> >> run Linux. You characterize that as not user-friendly while I'd
>> >> characterize it as *very* friendly if you do indeed know what you're
>> >> doing; it's true that it's still not for mom-n-pop.
>> >
>> > No, I'm not saying that at all. I'm saying that one has to
>> > understand hardware compatibility. Linux compatibility is *NOT*
>> > printed on the box, where mom-n-pop expect it to be.
>>
>> You're going to have to tell me how my statement (you need expertise)
>> is materially different from yours (mom-and-pop don't know anything
>> beyond what's printed on the box -- if that).
>
> It's hardly "friendly" to not have information.
Come on, read what I wrote. I'm acknowledging it's not for mom-n-pop,
OK?
>> <snip>
>> Read what I said again. Sure, the graphics card at Best Buy doesn't
>> *claim* to run with Linux. But it does anyway (except for high-end
>> gaming cards). So you can buy the same cheap hardware for Linux that
>> you can for Windows; but you *have to know what you're doing*.
>
> ...except for all the gotchas. ...and don't call the manufacturer
> for help if it doesn't. "The secretary will disavow all
> knowledge..." <smoke billowing out of system>
Gotchas? I haven't run into them.
<snip>
>> The amusing thing about this, by the way, is that my college-age
>> daughter calls mom-n-pop (i.e. my wife and I) on the phone regularly
>> to get tech support. Pop, of course, got his CS PhD in 1986, and Mom
>> finished hers this semester. Finally!
>
> You prove my point. Linux is a geeks OS. It always will be with the
> attitudes I see here. Hell, I'm a geek too and have been utterly
> frustrated by it.
>
>> But I recognize we aren't the mom-n-pop who are being discussed here.
>
> It was part of the "Linux is not ready for prime time" undercurrent,
> which Linux geeks will never understand.
Right, I'm not arguing against the point you make that I acknowledged
in my first response. From the fact that you aren't still claiming
that Linux hardware is more expensive than Windows, can I infer that
you are acknowledging that point? If so, we're in agreement.
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Andrew Swallow <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
> Richard Steiner wrote:
> > Here in alt.folklore.computers,
> > Andrew Swallow <am.sw...@btinternet.com> spake unto us, saying:
> >
> >> If Linux is resource light it should be able to run games faster than
> >> Windows.
> As for the video card, if games switched to Linux the video card
> manufactures would have to issue Linus drivers.
Right - but to date there are few Linux drivers for high end
graphics cards and so as a result 3D games appear slow on Linux because
they wind up using the CPU to do more of the work that could in principle
be handed off to the graphics card.
Roland Hutchinson
> *New* hardware has to run under Windows, perhaps, but too often old
> hardware won't run under new Windows. Vista won't handle my HP
> LaserJet 4 printer properly, for example.
That surprises me. What are the issues?
--
Roland Hutchinson Will play viola da gamba for food.
NB mail to my.spamtrap [at] verizon.net is heavily filtered to
remove spam. If your message looks like spam I may not see it.
Roland Hutchinson
> The service pack issue is a red herring. They're updated online, if
> necessary. Yes, there are differences in OSs. Yes, Vista is a
> disaster. What's that got to do with the price of oats. People buy a
> computer and it comes with the OS they "need".
Where "need" is defined as "get".
Peter Flass
Wonderful list, too. I finally figured out it was alpha by town withing
state, but without the states indicated. At least one of my local
W-matrts will have them. Maybe after Christmas I'll stop by for a look.
By the time I get done upgrading my play system with more memory and
disk, it's probably cheaper just to buy a new system.
jmfb...@aol.com
Joe Pfeiffer <pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu> wrote:
<snip>
>The amusing thing about this, by the way, is that my college-age
>daughter calls mom-n-pop (i.e. my wife and I) on the phone regularly
>to get tech support. Pop, of course, got his CS PhD in 1986, and Mom
>finished hers this semester. Finally!
Good for her. :-)
<snip>
/BAH
jmfb...@aol.com
Steve O'Hara-Smith <ste...@eircom.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 15:17:09 +0000 (UTC)
>c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
>
>> where you can see that I am explicitly referring to people accessing web
>> sites "from a public library, for instance".
>
> Hmm just one point here - a public library or other public machine
>is about the worst place I can think of to make an online purchase.
Definitely. I won't even login to AOL to read my mail there because
I'd have to type my password.
/BAH
>
jmfb...@aol.com
c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
>In article <fj3ean$8qk...@s826.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
> <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>In article <fj1688$a6u$1...@news.lth.se>,
>> c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
>>>Macs (one of the options if you want to avoid buying Windows) are easily
>>>available through retail, both through Apple's own Aple Stores, and
>>>through other eletronics / computer retailers.
>>
>>I just did that. I still haven't been able to access the net.
>
>How are you trying to access the net? If by Dial-up, then you will likely
>need to buy a telephone modem,
It has a telephone modem.
>Once you have a modem, configuring the dialup internet connection should
>be straightforward.
Nope.
>What precisely is your setup,
I haven't figured it out it.
> and what precisely are the problems you are
>having,
Authenticaltion errors.
> i.e., what precisely are the instructions you have to connect to
>your ISP,
There are none.
>what precisely is it that you do, what precisely is it that
>happens, and how precisely does this differ from what should happen?
>Please provide as much pertinent detail as possible.
You are asking for too much detail for this forum. I am not going to
retype everything I see on the tty screen because 1. it's impossible
to do and 2. it would have typos.
>
>>>Furthermore, buying computers on the net
>>
>>Wrong. People's first computer cannot be bought on the net since
>>they don't have access to the net.
>
>The full paragraph of which you quoted just the beginning was:
>
><quote>
>Furthermore, buying computers on the net is not exactly difficult these
>days, and there's little need to 'scrounge around'. Even Dell sell PCs
>with Linux preinstalled, see
><http://www.dell.com/content/topics/segtopic.aspx/ubuntu>, which one can
>easily purchase by visiting the Dell website from a public library, for
>instance.
></quote>
>
>where you can see that I am explicitly referring to people accessing web
>sites "from a public library, for instance". Just because someone does not
>own a computer or have an internet connection of their own, doesn't mean
>in this day and age that they cannot access the Internet. So simply saying
>'wrong' doesn't do you much good, in particular when I've _already_
>presented a counterexample (which you snipped from the quote).
You think buying online using public library equipment is a good idea?
You need to take a few more paranoia lessons.
>
>Yes, there are people who have no internet access at all; but most people
>in the US and western Europe have access to places like libraries or
>'Internet Cafes' where they can, for a small or sometimes even no fee at
>all, access the internet. And this is without even mentioning that they
>might have friends or acquaintances who can and would let them access the
>internet. And of course, many people can access the internet at work, and
>may thus be able to buy a computer over the internet from there.
>
>Basically, owning a computer is in no way a prerequisite for being able to
>buy a computer over the internet. On this point, at least, it is your
>proclamation that I am wrong that is, in fact, wrong.
You are still wrong.
>
>
>All this is of course in the context of how easy or difficult it is to buy
>a first computer without Windows. Considering that we've already seen that
>Macs are readily available in brick-and-mortar stores,
Now go to store that isn't owned by Apple.
> and that even
>Wal-Mart sells cheap PCs with Linux preinstalled
I will check again. The last time I looked there was no unix
of any flavor. Where's me horse?
>- again, in
>brick-and-mortar stores - the fact that some people don't have internet
>access is not exactly a show-stopper.
Have you considered the possibility that "no internet access" might
also mean no computer experience at all? I know people
who are still rabidly afraid of computers. This was a serious
problem in the 1960s and 1970s. I can imagine that you are
unaware of this kind of phobia.
>
>>Even if they do have access,
>>a lot of people still don't trust giving out financial data.
>
>This is a separate issue. Those people will likely deal in cash. There's
>nothing that says someone couldn't provide internet sales of computers
>with a 'cash-on-delivery' payment option. Since I was using Dell as an
>example, Dell's web site states
>
><quote
src="http://www.dell.com/content/topics/global.aspx/policy/en/policy?c=us&l=en
&s=gen&~section=012">
>Payment Terms; Orders; Quotes; Interest. Terms of payment are within
>Dell's sole discretion, and unless otherwise agreed to by Dell, payment
>must be received by Dell prior to Dell's acceptance of an order. Payment
>for the products will be made by credit card, wire transfer, or some other
>prearranged payment method unless credit terms have been agreed to by
>Dell.
></quote>
>
>So there are other payment options available than credit cards. You might
>also note that there are places where you can buy 'pre-paid credit cards':
>For a fee, you will get a credit card with a fixed amount of money on it.
>It has no connection to your bank account or anything else, ad you can't
>overspend. (I gave one of those as an early holiday gift just a few days
>ago.) They can be used wherever credit cards are accepted.
They are credit cards? It sounds more like debit cards.
>
>And still, that is an issue of what people _choose_ to do, not what people
>_can_ do (which was the original issue being discussed).
Well, people won't have a choice soon.
I don't want to do this topic again. We just finished a long one
two months ago.
/BAH
jmfb...@aol.com
Oh, good. I can put the horse away (Walmarts require a horse to
get around their stores and find the exit.)
/BAH
jmfb...@aol.com
Only if it's not in a box and left as an exercise for the system owner.
/BAH
jmfb...@aol.com
krw <k...@att.bizzzz> wrote:
>In article <1bir3ff...@snowball.wb.pfeifferfamily.net>,
>pfei...@cs.nmsu.edu says...
>> Read what I said again. Sure, the graphics card at Best Buy doesn't
>> *claim* to run with Linux. But it does anyway (except for high-end
>> gaming cards). So you can buy the same cheap hardware for Linux that
>> you can for Windows; but you *have to know what you're doing*.
>
>....except for all the gotchas. ...and don't call the manufacturer
>for help if it doesn't. "The secretary will disavow all
>knowledge..." <smoke billowing out of system>
>
>> You seem to be making mom-n-pop's mistake: if the box doesn't say it
>> works, it doesn't. Yes it does; you just need to know what you're
>> doing (which mom-n-pop don't).
>
>Which is why Linux is going no further.
Kieth, Ubutu appears to be headed in a correct direction. I read
the installation guide at Barnes&Noble. But I did not get to
the system's and users's guides.
>
>> The amusing thing about this, by the way, is that my college-age
>> daughter calls mom-n-pop (i.e. my wife and I) on the phone regularly
>> to get tech support. Pop, of course, got his CS PhD in 1986, and Mom
>> finished hers this semester. Finally!
>
>You prove my point. Linux is a geeks OS. It always will be with the
>attitudes I see here. Hell, I'm a geek too and have been utterly
>frustrated by it.
I'm not a geek. It was part of my job to find out all the problems
users and system owners would have with our documentation and soft/
hardware systems. I am an expert at this. I used to be able to
figure out how to use a system within a few hours. It was my job
to rampup instantaneously with no training. Now, it is true that
my brain is decomposing but I don't think it's gone that far.
Even if it has disintegrated that far, the obnoxious attitude
I got from "stop being so stupid" to "you don't want to learn"
commentary is not the way to get moms and pops to use a system.
>
>> But I recognize we aren't the mom-n-pop who are being discussed here.
>
>It was part of the "Linux is not ready for prime time" undercurrent,
>which Linux geeks will never understand.
At least you're used to using these fucking gui thingies which
only a rat can find. :-)
/BAH
jmfb...@aol.com
>Andrew Swallow <am.sw...@btinternet.com> wrote:
>
>> Richard Steiner wrote:
>> > Here in alt.folklore.computers,
>> > Andrew Swallow <am.sw...@btinternet.com> spake unto us, saying:
>> >
>
>> >> If Linux is resource light it should be able to run games faster than
>> >> Windows.
>
>> As for the video card, if games switched to Linux the video card
>> manufactures would have to issue Linus drivers.
>
> Right - but to date there are few Linux drivers for high end
>graphics cards and so as a result 3D games appear slow on Linux because
>they wind up using the CPU to do more of the work that could in principle
>be handed off to the graphics card.
Wouldn't engineers of the hard variety need graphics for circuit
designing ...or whatever they do do?
/BAH
Christian Brunschen
Almost anything you buy comes in a box (or more than one box); I can only
presume that you intend to convey something alone the line of 'only if it
doesn't come in a box, incomplete, with assemply and/or software
installation left as an exercise for the system owner'. Please indicate
whether this is a correct or incorrect interpretation of your rather terse
sentence.
[ I am proceeding on the presumption that my interpretation is reasonably
accurate. ]
Alas, you are once more jumping ahead and suggesting problems where there
are none, when simply checking the facts, rather than simply presuming the
worst, would have provided the answer. To quote from the same Wired
article to which I've already provided the link,
<http://blog.wired.com/gadgets/2007/10/200-everex-gree.html> :
<quote>
"It's almost like a Google PC," Liu says, pointing to the desktop's rack
of pre-configured links to all of Google's online applications. It is, he
says, the mass-market Linux PC we've all been waiting for. "That's our
dream. ... we go the final step to make it work out the box, to go the
whole nine yards."
</quote>
Let me repeat one pertinent sentence fragment: "we go the final step to
make it work out of the box, to go the whole nine yards".
In other words, the machine is intended to come out of the box in a fully
working state, no assembly required, no OS installation required. Much
like any other computer with its OS and other software preinstalled.
So your fears are unfounded.
>/BAH
// Christian Brunschen
Peter Flass
I just had a couple of thoughts on this.
Who is the target audience for this system? I suspect it will be
youngsters getting their first "own" computer for "schoolwork." This
will raise a number of kids whose first computing experience is Linux.
I'd love to see their recations later when they have to use winblows.
Second, this should create a market for Linux games and educational
software. If I were a manufacturer I'd take a look at porting some
stuff, maybe older stuff, to test the waters. It might give you an in
to a new market, and you *might* be able to convince Walmart to carry
your sturr. If you could do something without investing boatloads of
money, you might make a few dollars. Hire some kid fresh out of college
(or college kids part-time) to do your port.
Peter Flass
Many of the high-end cards have "accelerated" graphics, which use a
dedicated CPU and, apparently, proprietary APIs. You can do all the
same stuff non-accelerated, only slower.
Seeing what 3D games do today, I can't imagine that engineers would
stress current systems too much. It used to be high-end to rotate a
wire-frame model on a 2250.
jmfb...@aol.com
Installation is only the first step that a sysetm owner
is required to do. We shipped 18 Notebooks worth of documetation
for the rest of it.
/BAH
Michael Black
graphics in a very short period of time.
Merely displaying something is not an issue, because the lag is relatively
unnoticeable.
Michael
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Sure but supporting what they need is not a problem, even rotating
a 3D shaded representation of a complex object under lights is OK without
using the fancy hardware in the graphics card[1]. Doing so fast enough for
games[2] is another problem - that is where using the fancy dedicated
processors on the graphics card to their fullest is essential.
1: The interface makes it possible for the application and the user to see
the same thing modulo performance whether or not the hardware acceleration
on the card is being used fully. Even the fancy 3D games will run - but too
slowly to be nice.
2: Where the complex object being rotated is a passing falling object seen
from a fast moving vehicle and is only one of many such on the screen all
of which have to be rendered correctly in real time.
Steve O'Hara-Smith
Peter Flass <Peter...@Yahoo.com> wrote:
> Who is the target audience for this system? I suspect it will be
> youngsters getting their first "own" computer for "schoolwork." This
> will raise a number of kids whose first computing experience is Linux.
> I'd love to see their recations later when they have to use winblows.
I have a data point on that. My mother-in-law's first computing
experience was FreeBSD (which I had pre-configured with a simple desktop
with the applications needed all set up and configured ready to use). While
I was away the laptop it was on died (hard disc failed in warranty) and was
repaired - it came back with the standard Windows install on it and of
course I was not available to reinstall FreeBSD and set it up (nor had I
prepared a recovery boot disc to make it simple).
Result, she had to set up Windows 98 with some help over the phone
to connect to the internet, browse the web and email. that wasn't too bad.
She was cursing the clumsiness of Windows for weeks afterwards though, one
day I really should migrate her back.
Christian Brunschen
<jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <fj3r1l$30t$1...@news.lth.se>,
> c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
>>In article <fj3ean$8qk...@s826.apx1.sbo.ma.dialup.rcn.com>,
>> <jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>>>In article <fj1688$a6u$1...@news.lth.se>,
>>> c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
><snip>
>
>
>>>>Macs (one of the options if you want to avoid buying Windows) are easily
>>>>available through retail, both through Apple's own Aple Stores, and
>>>>through other eletronics / computer retailers.
>>>
>>>I just did that. I still haven't been able to access the net.
>>
>>How are you trying to access the net? If by Dial-up, then you will likely
>>need to buy a telephone modem,
>
>It has a telephone modem.
OK (so it's an older model Mac of some sort).
>>Once you have a modem, configuring the dialup internet connection should
>>be straightforward.
>
>Nope.
It should be. In your case, it evidently isn't.
>>What precisely is your setup,
>
>I haven't figured it out it.
Knowing the situation you are in is usualy a good starting point for
trying to solve any problems you are experiencing.
>> and what precisely are the problems you are having,
>
>Authenticaltion errors.
That is only a description of a _class_ of problems, not of the precise
problem(s).
>> i.e., what precisely are the instructions you have to connect to
>>your ISP,
>
>There are none.
They must surely have provided at least a phone number, a username and a
password? Which ISP is this, if I may ask (they might have some pertinent
documentation on their web site).
>>what precisely is it that you do, what precisely is it that
>>happens, and how precisely does this differ from what should happen?
>>Please provide as much pertinent detail as possible.
>
>You are asking for too much detail for this forum.
I am asking for the necessary amount of detail to try to help to solve
your problem.
>I am not going to
>retype everything I see on the tty screen because 1. it's impossible
>to do and 2. it would have typos.
In such situations, screenshots are usually a good solution. On a Mac,
the key combination 'Command + Shift + 3' will take a picture of the
entire screen and store it on the Desktop as a PNG file named
'Picture x.png', where 'x' is an increasing number starting at 1. If you
want to take a more detailed screenshot, 'Command + Shift + 4' brings up a
cross-hair cursor that allows you to selet an arbitrary rectangular area
on screen to save as a picture; if, instead, you press the space bar, you
can then select an arbitrary window to take a screenshot of.
You should be able to deduce my email address from my posts in this forum.
>>>>Furthermore, buying computers on the net
>>>
>>>Wrong. People's first computer cannot be bought on the net since
>>>they don't have access to the net.
[ snippage ]
>>where you can see that I am explicitly referring to people accessing web
>>sites "from a public library, for instance". Just because someone does not
>>own a computer or have an internet connection of their own, doesn't mean
>>in this day and age that they cannot access the Internet. So simply saying
>>'wrong' doesn't do you much good, in particular when I've _already_
>>presented a counterexample (which you snipped from the quote).
>
>You think buying online using public library equipment is a good idea?
>You need to take a few more paranoia lessons.
Just because something is not a good idea doesn't take away the
possibiity. The counterexample stands - in particular because a public
library is not, by far, the only possible way to acess the internet even
for someone who doesn't own their own computer. For another example,
consider having a trusted friend who has a computer and internet access.
>>Basically, owning a computer is in no way a prerequisite for being able to
>>buy a computer over the internet. On this point, at least, it is your
>>proclamation that I am wrong that is, in fact, wrong.
>
>You are still wrong.
Please support this claim of yours with facts.
>>All this is of course in the context of how easy or difficult it is to buy
>>a first computer without Windows. Considering that we've already seen that
>>Macs are readily available in brick-and-mortar stores,
>
>Now go to store that isn't owned by Apple.
First of all, why? Just because the shops are owned by Apple doesn't make
them any less accessible; it seems you are trying to shift the goalposts.
Apple stores are becoming very widespread, and buying a computer (or
something else - a Sony or Canon printer perhaps?) from an Apple store is
not fundamentally different from buying a Windows PC made by Gateway from
a Gateway store (back when those existed).
Secondly, in the UK, the largest chain of high-street electronics stores,
the Dixons Group <http://dixons-group-plc.co.uk/> , sells Apple computers
in their Dixons and PC World shops, both online and brick-and-mortar.
There are also other, independent retailers such as Micro Anvika
<http://www.microanvika.com/> who sell Macs (and accessories) as well as
PCs.
While I don't live in the US, Best Buy and Apple have a cooperation where
Best Buy sell Apple Macs in their brick-and-mortar shops through a
'store-in-store' setup:
<http://www.macobserver.com/columns/freeonitunes/2007/09/01.1.shtml> .
Apple also have a web page where you can find brick-and-mortar shops
that sell Macs, <http://www.apple.com/buy/> .
So, again, I think it's been firmly established that Macs are indeed
readily available in brick-and-mortar stores, even ones that are not owned
by Apple.
>> and that even
>>Wal-Mart sells cheap PCs with Linux preinstalled
>
>I will check again. The last time I looked there was no unix
>of any flavor. Where's me horse?
>
>>- again, in
>>brick-and-mortar stores - the fact that some people don't have internet
>>access is not exactly a show-stopper.
>
>Have you considered the possibility that "no internet access" might
>also mean no computer experience at all?
So? If they get online using someone else's computer (such as a friend's),
then that someone else will likely be available to help them with the
initial purchase.
And again, both Macs and PCs with Linux preinstalled are available to buy
in brick-and-mortar stores. So not having internet access is not something
that blocks you from buying, as your first computer, one that runs an OS
other than Windows, and which still offers a turn-key experience.
>I know people
>who are still rabidly afraid of computers. This was a serious
>problem in the 1960s and 1970s. I can imagine that you are
>unaware of this kind of phobia.
Those people are unlikely to be in the market to buy a computer, aren't
they? If they do decide to, they'll probably ask for support from someone
they trust, in which case that person can help them with any necessary
scary technology. And still there's the option of going to a
brick-and-mortar store. In fact, an Apple Store might not be a bad choice,
since their layout and design are generally very friendly, and the staff
is generally knowledgeable and helpful.
[ snippage ]
>>You might
>>also note that there are places where you can buy 'pre-paid credit cards':
>>For a fee, you will get a credit card with a fixed amount of money on it.
>>It has no connection to your bank account or anything else, ad you can't
>>overspend. (I gave one of those as an early holiday gift just a few days
>>ago.) They can be used wherever credit cards are accepted.
>
>They are credit cards? It sounds more like debit cards.
Both credit and debit cards fundamentally work the same way. Places that
take credit cards almost invariably also take debit cards. The term
'credit card', when used to refer to payment method (as in, 'do you accept
credit cards?'), seems to generally include both credit cards and debit
cards in all usage that I have come across. Certainly, when I purchased
the card in question just a couple of weeks ago, everyone referred to it
as a 'prepaid credit card', even though technically it may not be a
_credit_ card.
Interestingly enough, when I use my UK debit card (Visa) in the US, I have
to use it as a credit card (i.e., if a cashier has a choice between
'credit' a 'debit' transactions, they have to choose credit').
But, again, the issue of method of payment is orthogonal to whether or not
the computers are available, since people can just walk into an Apple
Store or a Best Buy and buy a Mac, or Walmart and buy a Linux PC, using
cash.
>>And still, that is an issue of what people _choose_ to do, not what people
>>_can_ do (which was the original issue being discussed).
>
>Well, people won't have a choice soon.
Once more, that is an issue that is orthogonal to whether or not it is
possible to easily buy your first computer with an operating system other
than Windows.
>I don't want to do this topic again. We just finished a long one
>two months ago.
Then why did you bring it up?
>/BAH
// Christian Brunschen
Charlton Wilbur
LE> krw wrote:
>> You live in a fantasy world. Joe sixpack chucks the machine
>> rather than even attempting to repair the OS, much less install
>> a new one.
LE> In what world? Most aren't going to invest another several
LE> hundred dollars at the drop of a hat into exactly the same
LE> thing that just died on them.
But they do, they do! I've acquired several perfectly good computers
this way, because Joe Sixpack saw that Windows was screwed up, decided
the computer was broken, and bought a replacement. He was only too
happy to let the useless hardware go, and couldn't grasp why I might
want a nonfunctional computer.
Except it's more like $400, nowadays, and can be as little as $250.
Charlton
--
Charlton Wilbur
cwi...@chromatico.net
Christian Brunschen
<jmfb...@aol.com> wrote:
>In article <fj6e22$pb4$1...@news.lth.se>,
> c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
[ snippage ]
>>In other words, the machine is intended to come out of the box in a fully
>>working state, no assembly required, no OS installation required. Much
>>like any other computer with its OS and other software preinstalled.
>>
>>So your fears are unfounded.
>
>Installation is only the first step that a sysetm owner
>is required to do. We shipped 18 Notebooks worth of documetation
>for the rest of it.
And if you were to read what's on the web pages whose links I have been
sending, you'd see that Wal-Mart's Linux PC ships with documentation
supplied on the insalled system itself, in electronic formt (less
expensive that way).
Regardless, the fundamental need for the system to work and for there to
be enough and god enough documentation that the system's owner can use it,
is no different for a Linux system than for a Mac or a Windows PC; thus,
your comment applies equally to any system that anyone buys.
The origin of this discussion was the suggestion that the best way to
avoid using Windows is to 'never buy Windows the first time', i.e., to
avoid Windows completely, and your denial that this was possible. It has
been shown that this is possible, and with an overall experience (i.e.,
being able to buy it retail in a brick-and-mortar shop, as a turnkey
system that will have all necessary parts assembled and the OS and other
software preinstalled) that is similar to (or better than) buying a
Windows PC. The fact that the owner of a system then needs to maintain
their system, and so on, is again similar for Windows, Linux, Macs; and
different people have different experiences of how easy or difficult this
is, depending on the OS, but generally (and depending on your use
pattern) all three OS:es can handle the tasks that a computer newbie might
use it for (email, web, word processing, etc).
>/BAH
Best wishes,
// Christian Brunschen
Joe Pfeiffer
> Wouldn't engineers of the hard variety need graphics for circuit
> designing ...or whatever they do do?
Yes, but not the sort of high-speed 3D rendering that takes a modern
graphics card. Plain ol' unaccelerated VESA does this sort of thing
just fine.
Charlton Wilbur
>> How are you trying to access the net? If by Dial-up, then you
>> will likely need to buy a telephone modem,
BAH> It has a telephone modem.
You bought a separate modem? The last iMac that had an internal modem
was the G5 model that shipped in May 2005.
BAH> You are asking for too much detail for this forum. I am not
BAH> going to retype everything I see on the tty screen because
BAH> 1. it's impossible to do and 2. it would have typos.
Do you want help, or do you just want to piss and moan?
Charlton Wilbur
CB> Alas, you are once more jumping ahead and suggesting problems
CB> where there are none, when simply checking the facts, rather
CB> than simply presuming the worst, would have provided the
CB> answer.
Wow, you figured out Barb in record time.
Michael Black
>>>>>> "LE" == Larry Elmore <ljel...@verizon.spammenot.net> writes:
>
> LE> krw wrote:
>
> >> You live in a fantasy world. Joe sixpack chucks the machine
> >> rather than even attempting to repair the OS, much less install
> >> a new one.
>
> LE> In what world? Most aren't going to invest another several
> LE> hundred dollars at the drop of a hat into exactly the same
> LE> thing that just died on them.
>
> But they do, they do! I've acquired several perfectly good computers
> this way, because Joe Sixpack saw that Windows was screwed up, decided
> the computer was broken, and bought a replacement. He was only too
> happy to let the useless hardware go, and couldn't grasp why I might
> want a nonfunctional computer.
>
prices, they see that it's better than what they have, so it's easy for
them to make a decision. It's likely not merely that "the computer is
broken" but that a replacement is seen as a good thing for them.
Of course, do people that have "broken computers" really define the
problem, or is it merely "it doesn't work" and so they assume it's
a hardware problem, which is likely going to cost much to repair?
Micahel
k
Richard F. Drushel
[Re: /BAH]
: Do you want help, or do you just want to piss and moan?
If this is what /BAH was like when she worked for DEC, then
I can easily see someone being ticked off enough at her to make sure
that everything she worked so hard to archive, was destroyed on
purpose, out of spite, after she left.
*Rich*
--
Richard F. Drushel, Ph.D. | "They fell: for Heaven to them no hope
Instructor and Executive Officer | imparts / Who hear not for the beating
Department of Biology, CWRU | of their hearts."
Cleveland, Ohio 44106-7080 U.S.A. | -- Edgar Allan Poe, "Al-Aaraaf"
Eugene Miya
John Varela <OLDl...@verizon.net> wrote:
>On Tue, 4 Dec 2007 10:17:09 -0500, Christian Brunschen wrote
>(in article <fj3r1l$30t$1...@news.lth.se>):
>> Yes, there are people who have no internet access at all;
>> of course, many people can access the internet at work, and may thus be able
>I have no need to use a public computer except when traveling, and then I'm
>afraid to do anything -- such as read email on my ISP's web site -- that
>involves a password for fear of spyware. I would really be leery of sending
>my credit card number through a public computer.
>
>Am I being overly cautious? I don't think so.
You are probably at the right level for the average person.
But I'm surprised that you admit to using an ISP based email.
I carry my communication software. I have to make a decision about
taking the full laptop or is my Treo enough, and so far my Treo appears
to be enough for note taking, SMS, web searches, and for other things I
do stop in Internet Cafes. But I've also resorted to buying a paper
note book for my last European vacation.
I've seen the Community Memory machines of old (Berkeley, those were
progressive days) and I still have friends with accounts on the Well.
But I think that right now we are living in the Golden area of the net
and computers, still. Biometrics are just around the corner, some of us
dip into those areas, or carry RSA frobbs, etc. I've certainly encountered
the criminal element on line. Friends who do espionage for firms like
SUN have told me the size of their budgets.
You ain't seen nothing yet.
--
Eugene Miya
Richard F. Drushel <r...@cwru.edu> wrote:
>Charlton Wilbur <cwi...@chromatico.net> wrote:
>[Re: /BAH]
>: Do you want help, or do you just want to piss and moan?
>
> If this is what /BAH was like when she worked for DEC, then
>I can easily see someone being ticked off enough at her to make sure
>that everything she worked so hard to archive, was destroyed on
>purpose, out of spite, after she left.
DEC was a firm with lots of people like Barb.
You only really start to engage their brains, for instance, when they start
cussing. Now, many came from the IBM vein of professional courtesty
and the Watson school, but that only motivated the DECees more.
It's just passion. IBM people have had it, too. And it's not unique to
industry.
--
Walter Bushell
et...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA (Michael Black) wrote:
> But games are coming at you real fast. They want to send you a lot of
> graphics in a very short period of time.
An amazing part the personal computing revolution and internet has been
paid for with games and p0rn.
Walter Bushell
c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
> Both credit and debit cards fundamentally work the same way. Places that
> take credit cards almost invariably also take debit cards. The term
> 'credit card', when used to refer to payment method (as in, 'do you accept
> credit cards?'), seems to generally include both credit cards and debit
> cards in all usage that I have come across. Certainly, when I purchased
> the card in question just a couple of weeks ago, everyone referred to it
> as a 'prepaid credit card', even though technically it may not be a
> _credit_ card.
Doesn't it make a difference when one wants to rent a car?
Charlton Wilbur
MB> Of course, do people that have "broken computers" really
MB> define the problem, or is it merely "it doesn't work" and so
MB> they assume it's a hardware problem, which is likely going to
MB> cost much to repair?
The sorts of people who were only too happy to give me their "broken"
computers didn't bother defining it past "it didn't work"; if they
had, they might have seen their way to a less expensive solution.
Christian Brunschen
Michael Black <et...@FreeNet.Carleton.CA> wrote:
>I suspect there may be a little more to factor in. They see the cheap
>prices, they see that it's better than what they have, so it's easy for
>them to make a decision. It's likely not merely that "the computer is
>broken" but that a replacement is seen as a good thing for them.
There's also the fact that there is an unknown (to them) amount of time,
effort and money that would have to be invested in repair the system.
So we have the options of repairing the existing system, with unknown cost
and hassle involved, which will result in, at best, a system that runs as
well as it did when it was once purchased; or alternatively, spend a
known amount of money, only a small amount of time and almost no hassle,
and get a new system that runs at its best and will perform significantly
better than the old one.
It can seem a simple choice.
>Of course, do people that have "broken computers" really define the
>problem, or is it merely "it doesn't work" and so they assume it's
>a hardware problem, which is likely going to cost much to repair?
<http://www.df.lth.se/~cb/mu/wesmonocable.mov>
[ starting at 6min 0sec into the video ]
"Oh and Beth - look, um, if I were you, the next time your daddy tells you
his computer isnt 'working', tell him it's broken. OK? And tell him to
give it to you to play with, and send him out to buy an iMac. OK? That's a
computer especially built for idi- um ... for Mommys and Daddys."
> Micahel
// Christian Brunschen
Anne & Lynn Wheeler
> Interestingly enough, when I use my UK debit card (Visa) in the US, I have
> to use it as a credit card (i.e., if a cashier has a choice between
> 'credit' a 'debit' transactions, they have to choose credit').
some of this could be related to the walmart (joined by other merchants)
class action antitrust suit against the card associations ...
a few web references:
http://www.transactionworld.com/articles/2003/July/industryTalksBack3.asp
http://www.prnewswire.com/cgi-bin/stories.pl?ACCT=104&STORY=/www/story/07-22-2003/0001987111&EDATE
http://www.classactionrefund.com/VisaInfo.html
http://www.inrevisacheckmastermoneyantitrustlitigation.com/history.php3
misc. recent posts mentioning class-action anti-trust and/or interchange fees
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007.html#27 Securing financial transactions a high priority for 2007
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007c.html#38 Securing financial transactions a high priority for 2007
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007i.html#17 John W. Backus, 82, Fortran developer, dies
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007i.html#47 John W. Backus, 82, Fortran developer, dies
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007i.html#59 John W. Backus, 82, Fortran developer, dies
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007i.html#72 Free Checking
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007l.html#35 My Dream PC -- Chip-Based
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007n.html#68 Poll: oldest computer thing you still use
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007r.html#31 Is the media letting banks off the hook on payment card security
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007r.html#40 Is the media letting banks off the hook on payment card security
http://www.garlic.com/~lynn/2007s.html#64 Is the media letting banks off the hook on payment card security
Christian Brunschen
Car rental places, I think, want a credit card in order to have something
more than just the contents of your bank account to get hold of in case
you do something horribly stupid with their car (since there may be
insurance implications, third-party liabilities, etc). But this is mainly
my conjecture, so I'd be happy if someone could provide more actual facts.
Interestingly enough, my UK debit cards have worked perfectly fine when
collecting rental cars in the US - which meshes well with the fact
(mentioned in a previous post) that, when using my UK debit cards for
purchases in the US, they have to be handled as a 'credit cards' rather
than debit cards by the cashier.
(Of course, this doesn't change anything about using pre-paid cards or
debit cards for purchasing computers.)
Walter Bushell
c...@df.lth.se (Christian Brunschen) wrote:
>
> "Oh and Beth - look, um, if I were you, the next time your daddy tells you
> his computer isnt 'working', tell him it's broken. OK? And tell him to
> give it to you to play with, and send him out to buy an iMac. OK? That's a
> computer especially built for idi- um ... for Mommys and Daddys."
Or people who don't want trouble. Life is hard enough without having to
fight with your computer.
Peter Flass
Actually, I symphatize with them. I had (have) an HP Laserjet-6 that
stopped working. The manual says that sequence of lights means "have
the printer servived," so I too it on down to ye old computer store
which, I believe, is an HP authorized service provider or whatever.
They charged me $50 just to look at it, any work done over 1/2 horr or
supplies needed extra. After a week they called and said it had a
couple of problems and, with parts, etc., would cost more to fix than a
new printer. Unfortunately, all the new printers thaty aren't junk[1]
cost a couple of hunderd $.
[1] "junk" printers are any that aren't networkable.