Seriously, thinking of dual booting 7 and Linux. How long to set up? hint: 'about two weeks'
RayLopez99
speak for all of us--are really here to promote Linux (or even oppose
it). We just want to bash each other, like Rex says about Little
League baseball and Pop Warner football.
But once in a while, despite our best intentions, a serious question
arises. This is one of them.
So for the THIRD time I'm thinking of trying Linux out--the last two
times, using old hardware about 15 and 2 years ago, ended in time-
wasting disasters. I'm trying Linux out for the ONE feature it
SUPPOSEDLY is good at: safe web surfing. Despite the fact I've never
caught a virus running Windows online, one of these days one of those
free porn sites I visit might get me. Consequently, inspired by a
post by Doofus, who claims that he was infected by a virus running
Windows (though he did not have an antivirus program running in the
background, which is a negative in my mind), I might try installing
Linux dual boot so I can surf the net safely (though I have a feeling
the Linux web browser offering will be crippled, probably lacking
Flash, though I could be pleasantly surprised). Or a virtualization
system, using Windows free program that John Williamson mentioned in
another thread, though I want it to run under Windows not under Linux
(the sandbox that is). Dual boot (I'm guessing) will be easier to set
up, while virtualization will be long run more convenient, as you
don't have to reboot (last time I had dual boot--this was in the 1990s
and Redhat 5 if memory serves, you could not 'hot swap' between OSes--
you had either one or the other running at any given time, selected on
startup--have things changed? Probably not).
But before I do that, I need (or else I'm not going to even try) a de
facto *serious* answer about how long, DE FACTO, it will take to dual
boot given the below system.
Let me define DE FACTO, so we don't end up talking past each other
like we usually do. By defacto I mean somebody skilled like me, a
PhD, who has installed a number of systems from scratch (in Windows),
who has in the past (using BootMagic) dual booted NT and Linux, who
has the following hardware, *BUT NOT* a professional IT guy like some
here.
Hardware:
Latest Intel dual core pc chip, 200+GB HD, 64 bit Windows 7 OS with 6+
GB RAM, all the latest accessories. And yes, a floppy drive reader
(never know when you need them). Ethernet card that supports the
latest speed--what is it now, 100 MB/s?
Linux distro: unknown, but I'm only going to be surfing the web. No
OpenOffice B.S. ("99% compatible to Windows! yeah right. 99% != 100%
mister) No games. Just web surfing using Konqueror or whatever c rap
ware Linux has for a browser.
Given the above, how long (in days--and I expect something along the
lines of "about two weeks" as an answer) will it take to either
virtualize (I prefer to have WIndows, not linux, as the "controlling"
OS outside the virtual sandbox) or to (probably best) dual boot the
above system, with Windows 7 being in the primary partition? What
distro to use that plays nice with 7?
I don't want facile answers, like "20 minutes". It might take you, a
hobbyist who installs Linux distros for fun, or an IT professional who
does dozens of installations a week if not a day, "20 minutes", but
for me, who does this once every few years and last did it over 15
years ago, it's not 20 minutes. I expect, as a serious answer, "about
two weeks: one week to study the following links: abcde (list) and
one week to iron out the bugs".
I will only accept serious answers in this thread. If you reply "20
minutes" you're not doing me or your cause, Linux advocacy, any
favors. In fact, the opposite.
Thanks in advance.
RL
Peter Köhlmann
< snip cretinouis drivel >
.:\:/:.
.:\:\:/:/:.
:.:\:\:/:/:.: DO
:=.' - - '.=: NOT
'=(\ 9 9 /)=' FEED
( (_) ) THE
/-vvv-'\ TROLLS!
/ \
/ /|,,,,,|\ \
/_// /^\ \\_\
WW( ( ) )WW
__\,,\ /,,/__
(______Y______)
Norman Peelman
https://www.vmware.com/products/player/
http://www.virtualbox.org/wiki/Downloads
Virtualbox may be less of a hassle download-wise. VMWare wants alot
of info about you. Stop wasting time being so negative - and don't worry
about dual booting with a system like that. So you can run both at the
same time. Give the virtual machine a fair amount of memory (1 GIG) and
make sure you install the extensions and you'll be fine. 1-2 weeks to
feel yourself around.
--
Norman
Registered Linux user #461062
Chris Ahlstrom
> .:\:/:.
> .:\:\:/:/:.
> :.:\:\:/:/:.: DO
> :=.' - - '.=: NOT
> '=(\ 9 9 /)=' FEED
> ( (_) ) THE
> /-vvv-'\ TROLLS!
> / \
> / /|,,,,,|\ \
> /_// /^\ \\_\
> WW( ( ) )WW
> __\,,\ /,,/__
> (______Y______)
That little ASCII troll always reminds me of Albert Einstein.
--
Excellent day to have a rotten day.
Alex Stubbins
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Seriously. You do free porn.
Rick
> Let's get serious for a moment. None of us here at C.O.L.A.--and I
> speak for all of us--are really here to promote Linux (or even oppose
> it). (snip)
You are not serious and you don't speak for all of us in COLA.
--
Rick
chrisv
>RayLopez99 wrote:
*plonk*
DFS
> I will only accept serious answers in this thread. If you reply "20
> minutes" you're not doing me or your cause, Linux advocacy, any
> favors. In fact, the opposite.
Easiest dual-boot setup is probably Wubi.
terryc
> So for the THIRD time I'm thinking of trying Linux out--the last two
> times, using old hardware about 15 and 2 years ago, ended in time-
> wasting disasters.
You will have the same problems on old hardware that any OS will have.
> I'm trying Linux out for the ONE feature it
> SUPPOSEDLY is good at: safe web surfing.
Choose a light Xwindows, likee ice and a light browser.
IME P3 will handle iceape. P2 will also, but you most definitely need to
stay away from any site with scripts. YMMV
ray
You're not seriously considering it at all. And you're certainly not
'seriously thinking'. This is just one more thinly veiled troll attempt.
Unfortunately, many will bite on it.
TomB
Approx. 20 minutes.
--
BOFH excuse #370:
Virus due to computers having unsafe sex.
bbgruff
> I might try installing
> Linux dual boot so I can surf the net safely
That's very silly.
First, it's beyond you - you have shown yourself incapable of doing anything
when it comes to installing Linux. If you try again, it will just end in
tears - yours.
It's not your fault - you are simply too thick to do it.
There are three better solutions for you, given that you state that you just
want a dual boot to browse safely:-
1. Get yourself a machine with one of the various "instant on" Linux set
ups. Several to choose from.
2. Use a Live CD for your browsing. Even you ought to be able to manage
that. Use it for your on-line financial transactions as well - we wouldn't
want you losing all those millions of yours.
3. Buy, or get somebody to set up for you "Linux on a stick", and use that.
owl
> Or a virtualization
> system, using Windows free program that John Williamson mentioned in
> another thread, though I want it to run under Windows not under Linux
> (the sandbox that is).
Sounds like you're confused as to which OS needs to be sandboxed.
Just stick with Windows and reinstall as necessary.
Aragorn
identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
> Let's get serious for a moment. None of us here at C.O.L.A.--and I
> speak for all of us--are really here to promote Linux (or even oppose
> it).
That is why I left C.O.L.A. many years ago already. Despite the group's
name, it's all about Microsoft Windows advocacy and personal attacks,
harassment, et al.
> We just want to bash each other, like Rex says about Little
> League baseball and Pop Warner football.
Definitely.
> But once in a while, despite our best intentions, a serious question
> arises. This is one of them.
>
> So for the THIRD time I'm thinking of trying Linux out--the last two
> times, using old hardware about 15 and 2 years ago, ended in time-
> wasting disasters.
Choosing deliberately old hardware - 15 years old? - will most
definitely be a recipe for failure, whether you're installing GNU/Linux
or Microsoft Windows. If I were to install, say, Windows 7 - I believe
that's the latest iteration, right? (I don't do Windows, see...) - on
that old Pentium MMX 200 MHz with 32 MB of RAM in it and a 1 MB
videocard, then I probably won't get anywhere either.
A machine that is two years old on the other hand would suffice
perfectly for a modern GNU/Linux distribution.
> I'm trying Linux out for the ONE feature it SUPPOSEDLY is good at:
> safe web surfing.
That very sentence already bulks with prejudice and bias. GNU/Linux is
a UNIX system and UNIX has been the choice of true professionals in the
scientific, medical and engineering fields for decades already.
The problem however is that most Microsoft Windows users are of a
category of computer users - whether amateur or professional - who uses
their computers for typical home and office work, and who are thus not
familiar with the more technical aspects of information technology,
aspects at which Microsoft Windows has always failed terribly. Even on
account of multimedia, Microsoft Windows was very late to catch up with
UNIX, Atari, Amiga and pre-OS X Apple MacIntoshes.
Microsoft Windows is also a platform which comes together with a very
Microsoft-specific way of looking at computer technology - a specific
way which works in an indoctrinating and conditioning manner due to the
vendor lock-in and exclusion of non-proprietary software - and
Microsoft Windows users therefore cannot accept anything of a different
paradigm. Thus, Microsoft Windows users tend to blame GNU/Linux for
their own failure at accepting it, while the real problem is situated
between the keyboard and the chair.
> Despite the fact I've never caught a virus running Windows online, one
> of these days one of those free porn sites I visit might get me.
> Consequently, inspired by a post by Doofus, who claims that he was
> infected by a virus running Windows (though he did not have an
> antivirus program running in the background, which is a negative in my
> mind), [...
Antivirus software is only required in Microsoft Windows, because first
of all, virus makers focus on Microsoft Windows due to the fact that
it's the most prevalent desktop platform, and secondly because UNIX
operating systems are by design so different from Microsoft Windows
that there are no UNIX viruses in the wild. So the problem is
Windows-specific, and thus, a Windows user should always use antivirus
software when connecting their computers to an untrusted network such
as the internet.
> ...] I might try installing Linux dual boot so I can surf the net
> safely (though I have a feeling the Linux web browser offering will be
> crippled, probably lacking Flash, though I could be pleasantly
> surprised).
Strangely enough, any typical GNU/Linux distribution comes with a whole
bunch of different webbrowsers. The favorite webbrowser in the
GNU/Linux community has for a large number of years already been
Firefox, but the relatively new Google Chrome browser is also
available. The latest Flash plugins are available, and other
multimedia formats are generally handled by Mplayer or another media
player.
> Or a virtualization system, using Windows free program that John
> Williamson mentioned in another thread, though I want it to run under
> Windows not under Linux (the sandbox that is).
Virtualization requires more horsepower from your hardware, so your
15-year old machine will by definition not work, and it all depends on
what the specifications are of your 2-year old machine.
That said, there are different approaches to virtualization. VirtualBox
seems quite favored among both GNU/Linux and Microsoft Windows users -
there are versions for each.
> Dual boot (I'm guessing) will be easier to set up, while
> virtualization will be long run more convenient, as you don't have to
> reboot (last time I had dual boot--this was in the 1990s and Redhat 5
> if memory serves, you could not 'hot swap' between OSes--
> you had either one or the other running at any given time, selected on
> startup--have things changed? Probably not).
Running two operating systems concurrently requires virtualization, and
the x86 platform has always been notoriously hard to virtualize. For a
number of years already, good virtualizations solutions have been
available - some of which are free of charge, others being commercially
available only.
The typical approach to virtualization favored by desktop users is to
have a host operating system - which could be any of the supported
ones, and in the event of VirtualBox, you could use GNU/Linux, Windows
or Solaris - with a virtual machine monitor running in it as a regular
process - and this could then be VirtualBox or VMWare - and then a
guest operating system running inside the virtual machine created by
the virtual machine monitor.
Another approach, less popular among desktop users, is to use a bare
metal hypervisor such as Xen, in which case there is no host operating
system, but instead there is a privileged guest. However, in this
case, the privileged guest must be a modified UNIX operating system,
and currently only three such modified UNIX operating systems exist,
i.e. GNU/Linux, NetBSD and (Open)Solaris - NexentaOS will also do,
because that's basically the GNU userland on top of the OpenSolaris
kernel.
As unprivileged guests, you can only run Microsoft Windows on top of Xen
if the hardware has virtualization extensions, and although I suspect
that these may already be present on your 2-year old machine, I'm not
willing to bet on that.
Without those hardware virtualization extensions, Xen will only support
paravirtualization, which requires that the unprivileged guests run
modified kernels and are aware of the virtualization. As such, you'd
be limited to GNU/Linux, NetBSD and (Open)Solaris again. Experimental
support for FreeBSD and OpenBSD as unprivileged guests also exists, but
this is not part of these respective systems' official repositories.
> But before I do that, I need (or else I'm not going to even try) a de
> facto *serious* answer about how long, DE FACTO, it will take to dual
> boot given the below system.
Dualbooting does not prolong the boot process. You are simply presented
with a boot manager menu at machine boot time, from which you select
either GNU/Linux, Microsoft Windows or anything else you have
installed, and from there on the boot process takes just as long or as
short as if the booted operating system were the only operating system
on the machine.
> Let me define DE FACTO, so we don't end up talking past each other
> like we usually do. By defacto I mean somebody skilled like me, a
> PhD, who has installed a number of systems from scratch (in Windows),
> who has in the past (using BootMagic) dual booted NT and Linux, who
> has the following hardware, *BUT NOT* a professional IT guy like some
> here.
>
> Hardware:
>
> Latest Intel dual core pc chip, 200+GB HD, 64 bit Windows 7 OS with 6+
> GB RAM, all the latest accessories. And yes, a floppy drive reader
> (never know when you need them). Ethernet card that supports the
> latest speed--what is it now, 100 MB/s?
Gigabit Ethernet has been around for many years already, even as
on-board adapters. And there are faster connectors still. 10/100 Mbit
is the typical connection you'd get from a regular residential ISP
contract, but that's just the type of connection. For instance, if
your ISP offers 20 Mbit/sec download speed, then your Ethernet adapter
will be in 100 Mbit/sec mode, but that doesn't mean that you'd get
*either* 100 Mbit/sec or 20 Mbit/sec. It all depends on how they
throttle your speed.
> Linux distro: unknown, but I'm only going to be surfing the web. No
> OpenOffice B.S. ("99% compatible to Windows! yeah right. 99% != 100%
> mister)
OpenOffice on GNU/Linux is 100% compatible with OpenOffice on Microsoft
Windows or OpenOffice on Solaris. I take it you mean "99% compatible
with Microsoft Office" instead. There's a difference there, and this
compatibility with Microsoft Office is - in my humble opinion - not
required in order for OpenOffice to establish itself as a valid and
valuable office suite. It is a product of its own, and it's compatible
with all internationally agreed upon standards, which is more than
anyone could say of any Microsoft product.
Again, your bias is showing, and if you're biased, then you're already
looking at a recipe for failure, because that means that you won't be
willing to give it a fair chance and that you'll be measuring either
success or failure with double standards.
> No games. Just web surfing using Konqueror or whatever c rap
> ware Linux has for a browser.
Konqueror is a good browser, and certainly better/safer than that
Internet Explorer junk that comes with Windows, but even then still, as
I said earlier, most GNU/Linux users prefer Firefox, Mozilla Seamonkey
or Google Chrome, all of which are also available to Windows users.
> Given the above, how long (in days--and I expect something along the
> lines of "about two weeks" as an answer) will it take to either
> virtualize (I prefer to have WIndows, not linux, as the "controlling"
> OS outside the virtual sandbox) or to (probably best) dual boot the
> above system, with Windows 7 being in the primary partition? What
> distro to use that plays nice with 7?
Windows *always* requires being in the "active" primary partition, or at
the very least to have an "active" primary partition to house its
bootloader files in. That's the DOS legacy that it carries with it.
UNIX systems don't care about what partition type they are installed
in.
I would not recommend virtualization if your hardware does not have the
horsepower to back it up, but if you must have it, then I recommend
*not* using Windows as the host. Windows is notoriously unstable and
as such, if the host fails, so will the guest. Using GNU/Linux as the
host would be a much better choice.
I know you don't want it that way, and I know that despite of what I'm
saying here, you'll go with the other way nevertheless, because your
bias is showing more and more - which leads me to suspect that, since
you've crossposted this to other groups than C.O.L.A., you're actually
trolling.
I'll still be trying to seriously answer your questions, but the very
fact that you're already biased and throwing in derogatory terms
towards GNU/Linux suggests that your question is in fact not quite so
serious as you purported it to be at the start of your post.
> I don't want facile answers, like "20 minutes". It might take you, a
> hobbyist who installs Linux distros for fun, or an IT professional who
> does dozens of installations a week if not a day, "20 minutes", but
> for me, who does this once every few years and last did it over 15
> years ago, it's not 20 minutes. I expect, as a serious answer, "about
> two weeks: one week to study the following links: abcde (list) and
> one week to iron out the bugs".
Well, truth be told, if you pick one of the "less technical"
distributions like Ubuntu - and considering that you're only installing
it with the purpose of doing some browsing, you won't need a fully
fledged installation with all the whistles and bells - then I'd
say "about 10 minutes to install GNU/Linux, after about two weeks of
installing Windows, with all the reboots, additional software loading,
downloading of virus updates, setting up the firewall and installing
whatever else you need on it."
Just be sure to install Windows *first* and GNU/Linux *second* because
dualbooting GNU/Linux and Windows requires a bootloader to be installed
in the master boot record of your hard disk, and Windows always
overwrites the master boot record with a real mode BIOS-/DOS-legacy
bootloader, so it's imperative that Windows gets installed first.
In addition, the presence of an existing Windows installation on your
hard disk will be picked up by the GNU/Linux installer, which will then
automatically add it to your bootloader configuration and set
up "/etc/fstab" so that you have read and - depending on the chosen
driver, but this is distribution-dependent - possibly write access to
your Windows partition(s).
> I will only accept serious answers in this thread. If you reply "20
> minutes" you're not doing me or your cause, Linux advocacy, any
> favors. In fact, the opposite.
My reply to your post was far more serious than your post itself, and
far more honest than the biased drivel you've sent off to newsgroups
outside of comp.os.linux.advocacy. And yes, you will be running into
trouble while setting up your computer like that, simply because you'll
be *looking* for trouble. That's what bias does.
--
*Aragorn*
(registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
philo
The other day you made a post which showed that you have an encyclopedic
ignorance of all things related to operating systems.
Hard to believe you have a PhD.
On second thought...not so hard to believe.
Anyway...stick with Windows.
Linux is not for everyone you know.
terryc
>> So for the THIRD time I'm thinking of trying Linux out--the last two
>> times, using old hardware about 15 and 2 years ago, ended in time-
>> wasting disasters.
>
> Choosing deliberately old hardware - 15 years old? - will most
> definitely be a recipe for failure, whether you're installing GNU/Linux
> or Microsoft Windows. If I were to install, say, Windows 7 - I believe
> that's the latest iteration, right? (I don't do Windows, see...) - on
> that old Pentium MMX 200 MHz with 32 MB of RAM in it and a 1 MB
> videocard, then I probably won't get anywhere either.
That is RH5.0/1/2 vintage. If you can get the ram up, it will function as
a lightly loaded server for something like static pages. Drags under tvm
and the browser of the period if you want to web browse on it.
Marti van Lin
What an excellent post. Yet I'm afraid you are waisting your time and
bandwidth.
RayLopez99 will now probably start name-calling and insulting you,
simply because you are clearly an experienced user.
This person is only trolling and crossposts to the technical GNU/Linux
groups to cause maximum disruption.
For the sake of the group you are posting from, please killfile the troll.
Take care ;-)
--
|_|0|_| Marti van Lin
|_|_|0| http://osgeex.blogspot.com
|0|0|0| Microsoft: Who will we blame today?
Aragorn
identifying as Marti van Lin wrote...
> Op 02-04-10 23:17, Aragorn schreef:
Ah, iemand die ook Nederlands spreekt, zie ik. :p
>>> [...]
>>>
>>> I will only accept serious answers in this thread. If you reply "20
>>> minutes" you're not doing me or your cause, Linux advocacy, any
>>> favors. In fact, the opposite.
>>
>> My reply to your post was far more serious than your post itself, and
>> far more honest than the biased drivel you've sent off to newsgroups
>> outside of comp.os.linux.advocacy. And yes, you will be running into
>> trouble while setting up your computer like that, simply because
>> you'll be *looking* for trouble. That's what bias does.
>
> What an excellent post. Yet I'm afraid you are waisting your time and
> bandwidth.
I already had a feeling that this would be the case, but I wrote it
anyway, and in all earnest, so that the trolls could at the very least
not accuse the GNU/Linux community of being unwilling to help or not
knowing what we're talking about.
My reply to him was sincere and gave him all the information
he "requested", and thus, if any failure in his endeavor occurs, it'll
be his fault, not mine. ;-)
> RayLopez99 will now probably start name-calling and insulting you,
> simply because you are clearly an experienced user.
That is quite possible, and it has happened to me before, both when I
was on C.O.L.A. and when I had already left that group. Sometimes, the
trolls pick up on a reply of mine in a thread that was crossposted -
like this one here - and will then continue to stalk me for an extended
period. At one stage, they even went so far as to set up some
nymshifting bot that posted follow-ups to my posts in which none of the
quoted text attributed to me was actually written by me.
Very mature behavior... <grin>
> This person is only trolling and crossposts to the technical GNU/Linux
> groups to cause maximum disruption.
Yes, we've been seeing a lot of that lately, but for those of us not
subscribed to C.O.L.A., some of the newer nyms the trolls are using are
unknown to us.
> For the sake of the group you are posting from, please killfile the
> troll.
I might eventually end up doing that. ;-)
> Take care ;-)
Likewise. ;-)
Vaughn Bode
> Let's get serious for a moment. None of us here at C.O.L.A.--and I
> speak for all of us--are really here to promote Linux (or even oppose
> it). We just want to bash each other, like Rex says about Little
> League baseball and Pop Warner football.
>
> But once in a while, despite our best intentions, a serious question
> arises. This is one of them.
[...]
> I will only accept serious answers in this thread. If you reply "20
> minutes" you're not doing me or your cause, Linux advocacy, any
> favors. In fact, the opposite.
Hi Ray,
I have been considering the same thing, but in the opposite
direction. I would like to dual boot a system that already has Linux
on it. The possibilities are a Linux hosted VM, or installing Windows
direct to disk.
Rex claims that the Windows 7 EULA forbids running Windows 7 under a
non-Windows VM. Is that true? Will Microsoft activate a setup like
that?
On the other hand, as a native install, has Microsoft come out with a
Windows install package that will not totally trash my Linux
partitions? Last time I tried that (a long time ago) Microsoft had
the psycopathic attitude of "That's MY computer. You are using MY
computer." Has that been fixed yet?
Oh, and Ray, why are you assuming that all problems with multibooting
Windows/Linux are exclusively problems with Linux?
Rick
(snip)
>
> On the other hand, as a native install, has Microsoft come out with a
> Windows install package that will not totally trash my Linux partitions?
> Last time I tried that (a long time ago) Microsoft had the psycopathic
> attitude of "That's MY computer. You are using MY computer." Has that
> been fixed yet?
As far as I have seen, installing Windows on a disk that already contains
a Linux system will only remove, or trash, the Linux partitions if you
tell it to use the whole disk at install. Otherwise it will just
overwrite the MBR. It might look like the Linux partitions are gone at
boot up, but Grub, or another boot loader, can be sued to fix things.
>
> Oh, and Ray, why are you assuming that all problems with multibooting
> Windows/Linux are exclusively problems with Linux?
Because he is a very effective troll. He posts tripe to rile people up,
and they respond the way he wants.
--
Rick
bbgruff
> As far as I have seen......
Hi Rick -
No offence, but I don't think that you are best-qualified to answer Vaughn's
questions. You will note that they are specifically addressed to Ray,
Vaughn having recognised from Ray's posting to this group that Ray is an
expert on "things Microsoft", and also having been told by Ray just how
much better MS is that FOSS stuff.....
I must admit, the questions that Vaughn raises have been worrying me too,
and I'll be very interested in Ray's response ;-)
RayLopez99
> Op 02-04-10 23:17, Aragorn schreef:
>
> What an excellent post. Yet I'm afraid you are waisting your time and
> bandwidth.
>
> RayLopez99 will now probably start name-calling and insulting you,
> simply because you are clearly an experienced user.
No, I will insult you, moron, since you add nothing to the
conversation except crying wolf.
As for the Aragorn schreef fellow, your countryman apparently, though
his English is excellent, and I commend you for learning English at
such an early age, as clearly non-English languages such as Dutch or
Greek or Chinese for that matter are not going to cut it in the global
economy, he completely misread my question and as a consequence nearly
his entire reply was worthless. English is like that, as word order
adds meaning as opposed to case ending. A primitive but effective
language. Thus he assumed I am trying to install Linux on a 2 year
old or a 15 year old machine (the sentence was a bit ambiguous, but a
native English speaker would have understood it). In fact, it's to be
installed (if at all) on a machine I will build this year.
The most useful reply--and I did save it for future reference--was the
second post in this thread by Norman, advocating VirtualBox.
One reply that's useful out of 50 or so attempts. Consider that a
victory for groups like this, with their obvious bias.
RL
RayLopez99
> Hi Ray,
>
Hi Vaughn. For once a seemingly civil reply...unless it's a trap.
> I have been considering the same thing, but in the opposite
> direction. I would like to dual boot a system that already has Linux
> on it. The possibilities are a Linux hosted VM, or installing Windows
> direct to disk.
>
> Rex claims that the Windows 7 EULA forbids running Windows 7 under a
> non-Windows VM. Is that true? Will Microsoft activate a setup like
> that?
I don't trust Rex. Anybody who writes the equivalent of War and Peace
on every post, with numerous factual mistakes ("Jack of all trades,
master of none") is suspect in my book. I once read that head
injuries cause people to be prolix (verbose) so, if Rex is mentally
ill or suffers from some head injury, that explains it. In which case
I must say that for a person in his condition he's remarkably lucid,
and I commend him.
>
> On the other hand, as a native install, has Microsoft come out with a
> Windows install package that will not totally trash my Linux
> partitions? Last time I tried that (a long time ago) Microsoft had
> the psycopathic attitude of "That's MY computer. You are using MY
> computer." Has that been fixed yet?
Nope. I bet Windows wants to be in Partition 0 (primary).
>
> Oh, and Ray, why are you assuming that all problems with multibooting
> Windows/Linux are exclusively problems with Linux?
Never said that, and I apologize if that's what was understood. I
always assumed Windows caused the problems since it wants to be top
dog. But supposedly Unix/Linux does not mind being in a secondary
partition.
Good luck and let us know how it goes. I might try Norman's
"VirtualBox" idea.
RL
RayLopez99
>
> Because he is a very effective troll. He posts tripe to rile people up,
> and they respond the way he wants.
>
An effective troll adds value to a conversation. Contrast with an
ineffective...
Which are you?
What's that chant again Linux cultard?
Hare Krishna, Hare Krishna
Krishna Krishna, Hare Hare
Hare Rama, Hare Rama
Rama Rama, Hare Hare
<--where did that .sig file go? Dick will find it!
^^^
Moshe
Assuming you have Windows already installed.
1. Create some free space at the end of your drive.
2. Boot Fedora 12 DVD.
3. Install Linux, take defaults and allow it to install the LVM in
the free space.
4. Double check that Grub has Windows listed. It calls it "Other".
5. Done.
Worked fine for me with Windows 7 x64 Ultimate on the same drive.
Fedora 12 has a few problems, but far less than Ubuntu.
Joel
>Rex claims that the Windows 7 EULA forbids running Windows 7 under a
>non-Windows VM. Is that true? Will Microsoft activate a setup like
>that?
It's not true. The language says nothing about the host OS. Just
that the license can only be used in one machine, whether virtual or
hardware.
--
Joel Crump
Norman Peelman
Ray,
Both Virtualbox and VMWare will walk you through basically the same
steps (a wizard) to create your virtual machine(s). Start now before
building the new machine. You can try as many different distros as you
like (and at the same time) and it will cost you nothing but a little
time. Like right now I have multiple guests all running on my Ubuntu
8.04 host - an AMD X2 64 6400+, ASUS M2N-SLI Deluxe w/nvidia chipset,
GeForce 9400 GT (1 GIG DDR2, PCI-E 2.0) gfx card, and 4 GIGs of RAM.
Dual monitor setup.
With decent hardware, virtual machines will run at near full speed,
specially if the cpu supports them natively (AMD-V, INTEL-V).
ToolPackinMama
you can be web surfing via Linux in about 15 minutes.
ToolPackinMama
The problem with that idea is it isn't always evident when Windows
"needs" to be "reinstalled". It's possible to have a deeply infected
system that is not obviously infected.
I wish to impress upon you lovely people that there are a gazillion
nasty little infections your computer can pick up - by surfing porn, or
by doing only innocuous G-rated things - and it's nearly impossible to
render your Windows PC completely secure.
You must not simply be philosophical about an infected computer. Many
malware infections are quite dangerous. An infected PC can be doing
evil work for some far-away malicious master, at your expense, and they
could be spying on you and stealing your passwords and online banking
data right now.
Keeping your computer updates UPDATED helps, and running an UPDATED
version of anti-virus helps, but even if you do those things faithfully,
you may still have a problem. There are certain infections your
computer can get that will disable your anti-virus program, while
apparently leaving it running, for example.
There are better ways to protect yourself, and one of them that is
gaining favor is the use of a virtual machine:
http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/150478/get_started_with_virtual_machines.html
Please read the article and if you have it in you to do something like
this I strongly urge you to try it.
Another possible solution is to use Linux (or something like it) for
your operating system, instead of Windows. Linux is vastly more secure
and safe than Windows is, and modern versions of Linux like Ubuntu are
easy to get started with and use.
Ubuntu is absolutely free of charge. It costs you nothing to try it.
You have to be fairly computer-savvy to install and use it in a
dual-boot system (which is what I am doing), but to install and use the
WUBI version for Windows is very easy, and takes only a few minutes.
Only people like me who use the PC for things like gaming really have a
compelling reason to stay with Windows.
Most people who primarily use the PC for email and web surfing can
switch to Linux and stay there. Stop reinstalling Windows: just switch
to Linux, full stop.
ToolPackinMama
That is true, and that's the best way to go if a person is really new to
this and unsure.
Then you can spend two weeks researching anything you want while
web-surfing via Linux.
ToolPackinMama
> There are three better solutions for you, given that you state that you just
> want a dual boot to browse safely:-
>
> 1. Get yourself a machine with one of the various "instant on" Linux set
> ups. Several to choose from.
>
> 2. Use a Live CD for your browsing. Even you ought to be able to manage
> that. Use it for your on-line financial transactions as well - we wouldn't
> want you losing all those millions of yours.
>
> 3. Buy, or get somebody to set up for you "Linux on a stick", and use that.
>
All good ideas.
bbgruff
An excellent answer, but to the wrong question.
What we (Vaughn and I) are looking for is the RayLupez explanation of how to
*start* with Linux installed, and *then* install Windows 7 to dual boot,
without "clobbering" the Linux on the way.
Hadron
It doesnt clobber linux. It clobbers the mbr. Its naughty but not that
naughty. You simply need to reinstall grub. Its not rocket science and
since according to "advocates" you cant get a pc without Windows then
its a non issue for most people.
(btw debian squeeze clobbers Windows : the installer doesn't properly
include windows in the grub menu - probably the act of some vengeful
little hack - you need to run update grub again as root to include the
windows partitions).
Brian
>
> An excellent answer, but to the wrong question. What we (Vaughn and I)
> are looking for is the RayLupez explanation of how to *start* with Linux
> installed, and *then* install Windows 7 to dual boot, without
> "clobbering" the Linux on the way.
https://help.ubuntu.com/community/RecoveringUbuntuAfterInstallingWindows
Brian
>
> (btw debian squeeze clobbers Windows : the installer doesn't properly
> include windows in the grub menu - probably the act of some vengeful
> little hack - you need to run update grub again as root to include the
> windows partitions).
Only a Debian Testing user would know that, which invalidates pIk's claim
you don't use Debian.
Hadron
Koehlmann is an idiot. I run Stable and Testing systems. He will claim I
googled up the issue. I can point to various posts I have made
correcting certain "advocates" about Debian/LInux but can't be
bothered. COLA "advocates" are the scum of the earth in the main -
lying, hypocritical, vicious and petty little men with ideas of grandeur
as to their status in the FOSS world. hardly any, if any, contribute a
single thing to FOSS and get off here claiming things like Miguel de
Icaza is an MS shill and anti FOSS.
Aragorn
identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
> On Apr 3, 2:51 am, Marti van Lin <ml2...@gmail.com> wrote:
>
>> Op 02-04-10 23:17, Aragorn schreef:
>>
>> What an excellent post. Yet I'm afraid you are waisting your time and
>> bandwidth.
>>
>> RayLopez99 will now probably start name-calling and insulting you,
>> simply because you are clearly an experienced user.
>
> No, I will insult you, moron, since you add nothing to the
> conversation except crying wolf.
>
> As for the Aragorn schreef fellow, your countryman apparently, [...
Nope. Marti's Dutch. I'm Belgian.
> ...] though his English is excellent, and I commend you for learning
> English at such an early age, [...
I started at age six, on my own account.
> ...] as clearly non-English languages such as Dutch or Greek or
> Chinese for that matter are not going to cut it in the global
> economy, he completely misread my question and as a consequence nearly
> his entire reply was worthless.
Oh no, it wasn't. I gave you good advice, and I also set you straight
on some obvious attempts at trollbaiting.
> English is like that, as word order
> adds meaning as opposed to case ending.
This has nothing to do with my mastery of English - I am perfectly aware
of word order - but perhaps it may have to do with the fact that I'm
autistic and that my brain works differently from that of
neurotypicals.
> A primitive but effective language. Thus he assumed I am trying to
> install Linux on a 2 year old or a 15 year old machine (the sentence
> was a bit ambiguous, but a native English speaker would have
> understood it).
I have understood you perfectly well, albeit that it only dawned to me
after I had already sent off my post that I had misread that part.
Still, that's largely irrelevant, because I gave you good advice on
what to do and what not to do.
> In fact, it's to be installed (if at all) on a machine I will build
> this year.
>
> The most useful reply--and I did save it for future reference--was the
> second post in this thread by Norman, advocating VirtualBox.
I did not advocate VirtualBox, but if you look back then you will see
that I mentioned it as a virtualization solution most desktop users are
quite happy about, and that it exists in versions for both GNU/Linux
and Microsoft Windows as the host operating system.
> One reply that's useful out of 50 or so attempts. Consider that a
> victory for groups like this, with their obvious bias.
comp.os.linux.hardware does not have any bias. And that's where I'm
posting from.
Peter Köhlmann
Translation: Hadron Larry Snot Quark googled for problems
--
You're genuinely bogus.
RayLopez99
>
> Nope. Marti's Dutch. I'm Belgian.
>
Nice chocolates.
> > ...] though his English is excellent, and I commend you for learning
> > English at such an early age, [...
>
> I started at age six, on my own account.
>
> > ...] as clearly non-English languages such as Dutch or Greek or
> > Chinese for that matter are not going to cut it in the global
> > economy, he completely misread my question and as a consequence nearly
> > his entire reply was worthless.
>
> Oh no, it wasn't. I gave you good advice, and I also set you straight
> on some obvious attempts at trollbaiting.
Nope. Try again.
>
> > English is like that, as word order
> > adds meaning as opposed to case ending.
>
> This has nothing to do with my mastery of English - I am perfectly aware
> of word order - but perhaps it may have to do with the fact that I'm
> autistic and that my brain works differently from that of
> neurotypicals.
>
Autistic in the good sense I hope. Some autistics are very rude.
And why do autistics get drawn to computer science it seems? A
research question.
> > A primitive but effective language. Thus he assumed I am trying to
> > install Linux on a 2 year old or a 15 year old machine (the sentence
> > was a bit ambiguous, but a native English speaker would have
> > understood it).
>
> I have understood you perfectly well, albeit that it only dawned to me
> after I had already sent off my post that I had misread that part.
> Still, that's largely irrelevant, because I gave you good advice on
> what to do and what not to do.
Nope.
>
> > In fact, it's to be installed (if at all) on a machine I will build
> > this year.
>
> > The most useful reply--and I did save it for future reference--was the
> > second post in this thread by Norman, advocating VirtualBox.
>
> I did not advocate VirtualBox, but if you look back then you will see
> that I mentioned it as a virtualization solution most desktop users are
> quite happy about, and that it exists in versions for both GNU/Linux
> and Microsoft Windows as the host operating system.
Yes, I hope I can find VirtualBox for Windows for free. If not, maybe
I'll pay for it if it's less than $100 or so.
>
> > One reply that's useful out of 50 or so attempts. Consider that a
> > victory for groups like this, with their obvious bias.
>
> comp.os.linux.hardware does not have any bias. And that's where I'm
> posting from.
>
Every newsgroup has bias. Do you know why Socrates (Google him) was
considered the wisest man on earth (according to the Delphic oracle)?
Because he knew that he knew nothing. Do you know that, know-it-all?
If you don't think you have bias, then that's your bias. At least I
acknowledge my bias for Windows, and back it up with facts as I see
them (no serious viruses in 20 years of serious computing, seriously).
> --
> *Aragorn*
> (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
Registered? Like a sex offender?
AraGORN, you be GONE!
It's hard to flame somebody who admits they have a learning
disability, but I do my best.
Now off to church for me, since midnight mass beckons. As a God
fearing Christian I have to atone for my sins, whatever they may be...
RL
Chris Ahlstrom
No, a real Debian user would call it by its correct name "update-grub",
nym-shifter.
Nor would a real Debian user call it a likely "vengeful little hack", rather
than a bug.
--
The devil can cite Scripture for his purpose.
-- William Shakespeare, "The Merchant of Venice"
Chris Ahlstrom
And his astraweb butt-buddy shilled for him.
--
You will be honored for contributing your time and skill to a worthy cause.
Leon Whyte
I don't use Microsoft but many of my friends do so I have sent this url as a
link to them.
It looks like an interesting way to try out Ubuntu Linux.
Thanks.
ToolPackinMama
> ToolPackinMama wrote:
>> http://wubi-installer.org/
>>
>>
>
> I don't use Microsoft but many of my friends do so I have sent this url
> as a link to them.
> It looks like an interesting way to try out Ubuntu Linux.
> Thanks.
De nada! :)
Aragorn
identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
> On Apr 3, 4:09 pm, Aragorn <arag...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
>> [RayLopez99 wrote:]
>>
>> > ...] as clearly non-English languages such as Dutch or Greek or
>> > Chinese for that matter are not going to cut it in the global
>> > economy, he completely misread my question and as a consequence
>> > nearly his entire reply was worthless.
>>
>> Oh no, it wasn't. I gave you good advice, and I also set you
>> straight on some obvious attempts at trollbaiting.
>
> Nope. Try again.
I consider derogatory misinformation as the kind you spread about how
GNU/Linux has no good webbrowsers to be trollbait. Didn't need to try
again. Just because you've snipped it doesn't mean that the evidence
is gone.
>> > English is like that, as word order adds meaning as opposed to case
>> > ending.
>>
>> This has nothing to do with my mastery of English - I am perfectly
>> aware of word order - but perhaps it may have to do with the fact
>> that I'm autistic and that my brain works differently from that of
>> neurotypicals.
>
> Autistic in the good sense I hope. Some autistics are very rude.
I know, but they don't necessarily mean to be. They are just very
much "to the point" and pay less attention to formalities or social
rules.
> And why do autistics get drawn to computer science it seems? A
> research question.
Because autistic people *think* very logically, and computers *work*
logically. Therefore, computers are an ideal way for autistic people
to express their creativity. Aside from my involvement in computer
technology, I'm also a musician and an author.
>> > A primitive but effective language. Thus he assumed I am trying to
>> > install Linux on a 2 year old or a 15 year old machine (the
>> > sentence was a bit ambiguous, but a native English speaker would
>> > have understood it).
>>
>> I have understood you perfectly well, albeit that it only dawned to
>> me after I had already sent off my post that I had misread that part.
>> Still, that's largely irrelevant, because I gave you good advice on
>> what to do and what not to do.
>
> Nope.
Then you failure to acknowledge this must be a matter of "the eye of the
beholder". Other people have already agreed that my advice to you was
sound enough, and surely honest enough, given that you were mocking
GNU/Linux in your original post.
>> > In fact, it's to be installed (if at all) on a machine I will build
>> > this year.
>>
>> > The most useful reply--and I did save it for future reference--was
>> > the second post in this thread by Norman, advocating VirtualBox.
>>
>> I did not advocate VirtualBox, but if you look back then you will see
>> that I mentioned it as a virtualization solution most desktop users
>> are quite happy about, and that it exists in versions for both
>> GNU/Linux and Microsoft Windows as the host operating system.
>
> Yes, I hope I can find VirtualBox for Windows for free. If not, maybe
> I'll pay for it if it's less than $100 or so.
I believe there is a free version for Windows as well. I've never used
VirtualBox but if my information is correct, then you should be able to
download it from Sun Microsystems' website. (They're the ones
developing it.)
>> > One reply that's useful out of 50 or so attempts. Consider that a
>> > victory for groups like this, with their obvious bias.
>>
>> comp.os.linux.hardware does not have any bias. And that's where I'm
>> posting from.
>
> Every newsgroup has bias.
That is not what I meant. What I meant was that there is no bias
against a person for asking a question. Well, in general, that is.
There is at least one person in this newsgroup who is usually treated
with hostility from the others, but that's his own fault.
> Do you know why Socrates (Google him) [...
I don't need to. I'm educated and I'm quite familiar with Socrates,
Plato, Euclides, et al.
> ...] was considered the wisest man on earth (according to the Delphic
> oracle)?
Whatever the oracle said had to be taken with a grain of salt, given
that all Delphic oracles were intoxicated by fumes from volcanic vents.
> Because he knew that he knew nothing. Do you know that, know-it-all?
Yes, as I said, I'm familiar with Socrates. And I also regret that you
have to label me a "know-it-all" just because I happen to have an IQ in
the range of that of Albert Einstein and a virtually eidetic memory.
But then again, you were already somewhat of a troublemaker to begin
with, so I guess I should keep it into account that you're simply
unable to treat people with respect.
> If you don't think you have bias, then that's your bias. At least I
> acknowledge my bias for Windows, and back it up with facts as I see
> them (no serious viruses in 20 years of serious computing, seriously).
No serious viruses that you know of, you mean.
>> (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
>
> Registered? Like a sex offender?
As a GNU/Linux and Free & Open Source Software activist, I have
registered both myself and my machines on that website. Alas, the
registry is not accurate because people who do not log in on a regular
basis - say, once a year - are automatically dropped from the database.
> AraGORN, you be GONE!
Very bad pun. And I'm not going anywhere. I'm not the Windows user
bashing GNU/Linux here - that would rather be you, so if one of us is
out of place, then it isn't me.
> It's hard to flame somebody who admits they have a learning
> disability, but I do my best.
Yes, I've noticed that. Were you born with this blatant disrespect for
polite people who are trying to give you advice or did it take years of
practice?
> Now off to church for me, since midnight mass beckons. As a God
> fearing Christian I have to atone for my sins, whatever they may be...
That's funny, because I had your rather figured to be a Luciferian.
Marty Felker
I think you "may" have to backup what Linux files you have that you want
to save and begin by installing Windows firstg. Then use Ubuntu to
resize and install the dual bootwith Windows. In general you almost
always need to isntall Windows first.
Marty
Charlie Wilkes
> Microsoft Windows is also a platform which comes together with a very
> Microsoft-specific way of looking at computer technology - a specific
> way which works in an indoctrinating and conditioning manner due to the
> vendor lock-in and exclusion of non-proprietary software - and
> Microsoft Windows users therefore cannot accept anything of a different
> paradigm. Thus, Microsoft Windows users tend to blame GNU/Linux for
> their own failure at accepting it, while the real problem is situated
> between the keyboard and the chair.
The real problem is that there are gaps in open-source software.
I have been using Ubuntu for a couple of years now. I really like it. I
have gotten so that I like the Gimp as well as Photoshop, I like the Pan
newsreader, etc. But I got one of those flip HD camcorders and discovered I
could not get the output to play smoothly in Ubuntu. Then I got a blu ray
player and discovered that my machine couldn't hack it, but it could almost
keep up in Windows with the coreAVC codec - if I start by ripping the disc
with AnyDVD, for which no freeware or Linux equivalent is available. So I
am building a new machine with Windows 7. It's not my preferred solution,
but I want HD video.
Mark Hobley
> Then I got a blu ray player and discovered that my machine couldn't hack it
> but it could almost keep up in Windows with the coreAVC codec
I thought that blu ray discs were protected by DRM. I always say "Don't buy
DRM protected discs". Vendors are not helpful when it comes to making backups
of your discs.
It appears that there is some software called makemkv for Linux, which will
do the trick, but I have not tried it.
Mark.
--
Mark Hobley
Linux User: #370818 http://markhobley.yi.org/
RayLopez99
> > Yes, I hope I can find VirtualBox for Windows for free. If not, maybe
> > I'll pay for it if it's less than $100 or so.
>
> I believe there is a free version for Windows as well. I've never used
> VirtualBox but if my information is correct, then you should be able to
> download it from Sun Microsystems' website. (They're the ones
> developing it.)
OK, I might try it...under Windows...let me Google this...Linux has
problems in VirtualBox (requires 'add ins') but might be worth a look-
see.
"Presently, VirtualBox runs on Windows, Linux, Macintosh and
OpenSolaris hosts and supports a large number of guest operating
systems including but not limited to Windows (NT 4.0, 2000, XP, Server
2003, Vista, Windows 7), DOS/Windows 3.x, Linux (2.4 and 2.6), Solaris
and OpenSolaris, and OpenBSD.
Linux family
Generally, all 2.4 and 2.6 kernels work; however, we recommend 2.6.13
or above for better performance. Kernels 2.6.18 to 2.6.18.2 contain a
race condition (which was unfortunately backported to the Ubuntu 6.06
Server and 6.10 kernels) that can cause boot crashes in virtual
machines."
>
> >> > One reply that's useful out of 50 or so attempts. Consider that a
> >> > victory for groups like this, with their obvious bias.
>
> >> comp.os.linux.hardware does not have any bias. And that's where I'm
> >> posting from.
>
> > Every newsgroup has bias.
>
> That is not what I meant. What I meant was that there is no bias
> against a person for asking a question. Well, in general, that is.
> There is at least one person in this newsgroup who is usually treated
> with hostility from the others, but that's his own fault.
>
You just contradicted yourself ("Well, in general, that is."). But
you're excused--you're dyslexic. Or creative, perhaps you're allowed
contradiction (poet Walt Whitman--Google him--"I contradict myself?
Well, I contradict myself").
>
> > Because he knew that he knew nothing. Do you know that, know-it-all?
>
> Yes, as I said, I'm familiar with Socrates. And I also regret that you
> have to label me a "know-it-all" just because I happen to have an IQ in
> the range of that of Albert Einstein and a virtually eidetic memory.
>
Einstein reportedly had only a 135 IQ--I surpass him by five points.
Besides IQ is not everything.
>
> > If you don't think you have bias, then that's your bias. At least I
> > acknowledge my bias for Windows, and back it up with facts as I see
> > them (no serious viruses in 20 years of serious computing, seriously).
>
> No serious viruses that you know of, you mean.
>
Your argument hinges on metaphysics and is not scientific. Do you
believe in angels in your PC as well? The ghost in the machine?
> >> (registered GNU/Linux user #223157)
>
> > Registered? Like a sex offender?
>
> http://counter.li.org
>
> As a GNU/Linux and Free & Open Source Software activist, I have
> registered both myself and my machines on that website. Alas, the
> registry is not accurate because people who do not log in on a regular
> basis - say, once a year - are automatically dropped from the database.
Alas, it's also clear from visiting this site that anybody, including
a Windows user, can ask to be "counted". Count me out.
>
> > AraGORN, you be GONE!
>
> Very bad pun. And I'm not going anywhere. I'm not the Windows user
> bashing GNU/Linux here - that would rather be you, so if one of us is
> out of place, then it isn't me.
AraGORN, you are worse than bad PORN!
Better? Or bitter? Bitte?
>
> > It's hard to flame somebody who admits they have a learning
> > disability, but I do my best.
>
> Yes, I've noticed that. Were you born with this blatant disrespect for
> polite people who are trying to give you advice or did it take years of
> practice?
Years of practice. And I've become a master baiter.
>
> > Now off to church for me, since midnight mass beckons. As a God
> > fearing Christian I have to atone for my sins, whatever they may be...
>
> That's funny, because I had your rather figured to be a Luciferian.
What is that sulphur smell?
RL
RayLopez99
> RayLopez99 wrote:
> > The most useful reply--and I did save it for future reference--was the
> > second post in this thread by Norman, advocating VirtualBox.
>
> With decent hardware, virtual machines will run at near full speed,
> specially if the cpu supports them natively (AMD-V, INTEL-V).
>
Thanks Norman. I will check out VirtualBox, and saw the screenshots
for the wizard today--it looked easy. I notice they don't support all
Linux additions, but all I need is one Linux distro to be supported--
since my goal is to surf the net under Linux rather than Windows--do
you think this is possible? I don't see why not.
The advantage of Virtual OS rather than dual boot is (I think) you can
just click on an icon to switch to Linux rather than cold reboot.
RL
Adrian
>
> Rex claims that the Windows 7 EULA forbids running Windows 7 under a
> non-Windows VM. Is that true? Will Microsoft activate a setup like
> that?
>
http://www.microsoft.com/About/Legal/EN/US/IntellectualProperty/UseTerms/Default.aspx
MICROSOFT SOFTWARE LICENSE TERMS
WINDOWS 7 ULTIMATE
3. ADDITIONAL LICENSING REQUIREMENTS AND/OR USE RIGHTS.
d. Use with Virtualization Technologies. Instead of using the
software directly on the licensed
computer, you may install and use the software within only one
virtual (or otherwise emulated)
hardware system on the licensed computer. When used in a
virtualized environment, content
protected by digital rights management technology, BitLocker or
any full volume disk drive
encryption technology may not be as secure as protected content
not in a virtualized
environment. You should comply with all domestic and
international laws that apply to such
protected content.
Rex was wrong, once again.
Hadron
It is not a question about when Rexx is wrong, but rather of when he is
right. Outside of WronG and Koehlmann and possibly Gortard I can't think
of anyone who is wrong as often as Rexx. He's not purposely dishonest
like Creepy Chris as Rexx doesn't fawn and suck up to the like of Roy or
Koehlmann, but he appears somewhat delusional.
Chris Ahlstrom
> The real problem is that there are gaps in open-source software.
>
> I have been using Ubuntu for a couple of years now. I really like it. I
> have gotten so that I like the Gimp as well as Photoshop, I like the Pan
> newsreader, etc. But I got one of those flip HD camcorders and discovered I
> could not get the output to play smoothly in Ubuntu. Then I got a blu ray
> player and discovered that my machine couldn't hack it, but it could almost
> keep up in Windows with the coreAVC codec - if I start by ripping the disc
> with AnyDVD, for which no freeware or Linux equivalent is available. So I
> am building a new machine with Windows 7. It's not my preferred solution,
> but I want HD video.
You should try out my Acer 4810T single-core 64-bit laptop running Debian
Linux then. Full 1080p. (Disclosure: Fedora on the same laptop had issues
with full HD.)
--
You will remember something that you should not have forgotten.
Chris Ahlstrom
What about Win 7 Home Premium? Or Win 7 Professional? What about if
obtained preinstalled on an OEM machine?
I checked it out, got the PDF.
Yep, Rex is wrong.
--
You are so boring that when I see you my feet go to sleep.
Norman Peelman
1) You will boot into Windows as normal
2) You will start Virtualbox (or VMWare)
3) You will start your appliance (Linux in this case)
4) You can use either Windows or Linux at the same time as Linux will be
running in a window (or full screen - you can minimize either to get
back to Windows)
The advantage is that you don't have to fool with dual boot AND you
have access to both running operating systems at the same time. You may
need to install the 'guest additions' so that the mouse works between
both in a seamless manner. The guest additions come with and are
installed from the mini menu from with the running guest. You can ask
questions if needed.
As far as Linux distro support... it seams to cover all the major
ones. If you find a distro you want to try, find what it is based on and
use that for your OS choice. If trying one of the *buntus then select
Ubuntu (maybe even Debian which *buntus are based on).
I suggest you try Linux Mint 8, it is based on Ubuntu and has (from
what i've seen so far) a nice interface. You would select Ubuntu under
the OS Choice drop down.
--
Norman
Registered Linux user #461062
Aragorn
identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
> On Apr 4, 1:17 am, Aragorn <arag...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
>> > Yes, I hope I can find VirtualBox for Windows for free. If not,
>> > maybe I'll pay for it if it's less than $100 or so.
>>
>> I believe there is a free version for Windows as well. I've never
>> used VirtualBox but if my information is correct, then you should be
>> able to download it from Sun Microsystems' website. (They're the
>> ones developing it.)
>
> OK, I might try it...under Windows...let me Google this...Linux has
> problems in VirtualBox (requires 'add ins') but might be worth a look-
> see.
>
> "Presently, VirtualBox runs on Windows, Linux, Macintosh and
> OpenSolaris hosts and supports a large number of guest operating
> systems including but not limited to Windows (NT 4.0, 2000, XP, Server
> 2003, Vista, Windows 7), DOS/Windows 3.x, Linux (2.4 and 2.6), Solaris
> and OpenSolaris, and OpenBSD.
> Linux family
> Generally, all 2.4 and 2.6 kernels work; however, we recommend 2.6.13
> or above for better performance. Kernels 2.6.18 to 2.6.18.2 contain a
> race condition (which was unfortunately backported to the Ubuntu 6.06
> Server and 6.10 kernels) that can cause boot crashes in virtual
> machines."
Ubuntu 6.x is old - I think they're at version 9.x by now. Now, I'm not
exactly experienced with Ubuntu, but just about every recent
distribution has a kernel with a version number of around 2.6.30 or
above.
>> >> > One reply that's useful out of 50 or so attempts. Consider that
>> >> > a victory for groups like this, with their obvious bias.
>>
>> >> comp.os.linux.hardware does not have any bias. And that's where
>> >> I'm posting from.
>>
>> > Every newsgroup has bias.
>>
>> That is not what I meant. What I meant was that there is no bias
>> against a person for asking a question. Well, in general, that is.
>> There is at least one person in this newsgroup who is usually treated
>> with hostility from the others, but that's his own fault.
>
> You just contradicted yourself ("Well, in general, that is.").
That's not a contradiction. That's just a non-pedantic description.
Either way, your comment about the bias was mainly intended with regard
to C.O.L.A., and I am fully aware of all the animosity going on there.
I was just trying to point out that this is not the case in the other
groups you've crossposted this thread to, and of which I am a member.
> But you're excused--you're dyslexic.
It's not dyslexia either. Dyslexia is a disruption in the reading
and/or writing of individual words or small groups of words, and I do
have that as well - dyslexia is a condition on the autism spectrum, by
the way - but only when I'm fatigued.
>> > Because he knew that he knew nothing. Do you know that,
>> > know-it-all?
>>
>> Yes, as I said, I'm familiar with Socrates. And I also regret that
>> you have to label me a "know-it-all" just because I happen to have an
>> IQ in the range of that of Albert Einstein and a virtually eidetic
>> memory.
>
> Einstein reportedly had only a 135 IQ--I surpass him by five points.
> Besides IQ is not everything.
Einstein's IQ was 148. Mine is 140.
>> > If you don't think you have bias, then that's your bias. At least
>> > I acknowledge my bias for Windows, and back it up with facts as I
>> > see them (no serious viruses in 20 years of serious computing,
>> > seriously).
>>
>> No serious viruses that you know of, you mean.
>
> Your argument hinges on metaphysics and is not scientific.
This has nothing to do with metaphysics at all. Just because you don't
know of any viruses or worms or trojans being active on your machine
doesn't mean that they're there. And given the rather arcane nature of
Windows as an environment, it is not easy to assess whether there are
indeed such malware programs active on your machine or not.
>> > AraGORN, you be GONE!
>>
>> Very bad pun. And I'm not going anywhere. I'm not the Windows user
>> bashing GNU/Linux here - that would rather be you, so if one of us is
>> out of place, then it isn't me.
>
> AraGORN, you are worse than bad PORN!
>
> Better?
Marginally.
> Or bitter?
Not so much. You don't seem to feel bitter at all when insulting
anyone.
> Bitte?
That's German for "please".
>> > It's hard to flame somebody who admits they have a learning
>> > disability, but I do my best.
>>
>> Yes, I've noticed that. Were you born with this blatant disrespect
>> for polite people who are trying to give you advice or did it take
>> years of practice?
>
> Years of practice. And I've become a master baiter.
I am more than willing to take your word on that. (And yes, I do
understand the phonetics pun.)
>> > Now off to church for me, since midnight mass beckons. As a God
>> > fearing Christian I have to atone for my sins, whatever they may
>> > be...
>>
>> That's funny, because I had your rather figured to be a Luciferian.
>
> What is that sulphur smell?
In Dutch, the official word for a match stick is "lucifer". I could say
even far more than that, but that's beyond the scope of this
conversation, and even beyond the scope of this newsgroup - keep in
mind that I'm posting this from comp.os.linux.hardware.
Aragorn
identifying as Aragorn wrote...
> This has nothing to do with metaphysics at all. Just because you
> don't know of any viruses or worms or trojans being active on your
> machine doesn't mean that they're there.
^
Typo... That should read "[...] doesn't mean they're *not* there."
Bill Marcum
On 2010-04-04, Aragorn <ara...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
> Ubuntu 6.x is old - I think they're at version 9.x by now. Now, I'm not
> exactly experienced with Ubuntu, but just about every recent
> distribution has a kernel with a version number of around 2.6.30 or
> above.
>
beta and due for official release any day now. This will be an LTS (long
term support) release like 6.06.
--
Alexander Hamilton started the U.S. Treasury with nothing - and that was
the closest our country has ever been to being even.
-- The Best of Will Rogers
chrisv
>On Sunday 04 April 2010 13:07 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
>identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
Good God, there's a lot of people who like to feed worthless trolls.
Aragorn
identifying as chrisv wrote...
I remember you from when I was still subscribed to C.O.L.A. myself,
Chris, but as you can see, I am replying from C.O.L.H. Therefore, I am
not familiar with any of the troll nyms that have started to occur
after I left C.O.L.A. all these years ago.
Although there was a serious amount of trollbaiting going on in the
original post, I chose to reply because I felt that, for the sake of
the lurkers in the group I'm posting this from, sound advice should be
given, FUD should be rectified, and the intent of the original poster
should be made clear.
In addition, I also feel that many Win-trolls are probably spouting
nonsense because they themselves actually *believe* their own drivel.
If they were paid Microsoft shills, then they'd know that they're lying
through their teeth - Microsoft has or had its own GNU/Linux lab, so
they know very well what's true and what isn't - but it is typically
the Windows addict who writes trollish posts about GNU/Linux because...
(1) they're so afraid of it that they hate it, because they
fear that it'll take over the market and force them to
use something other than Windows; and
(2) they don't know what they're talking about, and they may
have picked up a few nonsensical things from other clueless
Windows fanboys.
I don't feed trolls for fun. I also don't feed trolls so as to disrupt
the newsgroup, and I equally don't feed trolls out of some egotripping,
selfindulging drive, or out of hatred for one or all of these
individuals.
I "feed trolls" - if you can call it that, but I do not, which is why I
put it between quotes - because I want to rectify the misinformation,
both to them and towards the insufficiently aware lurkers and newbies,
onto whom the FUD spread by these trolls could have the very effect
that FUD is intended to have.
My goal is to educate on what's true and what's not true. Nothing else.
One Shot, One Kill
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:g5pjr5tpcqlme7v5o...@4ax.com...
chrisv is a piece of shit. chrisv is a liar.
RayLopez99
> On Monday 05 April 2010 15:25 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
>
> identifying as chrisv wrote...
> > Aragorn wrote:
>
> >> On Sunday 04 April 2010 13:07 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
> >> identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
>
> > Good God, there's a lot of people who like to feed worthless trolls.
>
> I remember you from when I was still subscribed to C.O.L.A. myself,
> Chris, but as you can see, I am replying from C.O.L.H. Therefore, I am
> not familiar with any of the troll nyms that have started to occur
> after I left C.O.L.A. all these years ago.
You did not miss anything. Chrisv is essentially a disrupter of COLA--
he wants conversation to only revolve around his own posts, and they
all have to be happy talk about how great Linux is. Chrisv would do
well in North Korea (which uses Linux in it's "Red Star" OS, says the
news today).
>
> Although there was a serious amount of trollbaiting going on in the
> original post, I chose to reply because I felt that, for the sake of
> the lurkers in the group I'm posting this from, sound advice should be
> given, FUD should be rectified, and the intent of the original poster
> should be made clear.
And you failed. As I told you, you misread my original post. I am
not booting Linux on an old machine, even 2 years old, but a new
machine to be built. "Norman" have good advice, which you seconded,
on using virtualization.
> (1) they're so afraid of it that they hate it, because they
> fear that it'll take over the market and force them to
> use something other than Windows; and
A just fear.
>
> (2) they don't know what they're talking about, and they may
> have picked up a few nonsensical things from other clueless
> Windows fanboys.
Some perhaps, but not me.
>
> I don't feed trolls for fun. I also don't feed trolls so as to disrupt
> the newsgroup, and I equally don't feed trolls out of some egotripping,
> selfindulging drive, or out of hatred for one or all of these
> individuals.
>
> I "feed trolls" - if you can call it that, but I do not, which is why I
> put it between quotes - because I want to rectify the misinformation,
> both to them and towards the insufficiently aware lurkers and newbies,
> onto whom the FUD spread by these trolls could have the very effect
> that FUD is intended to have.
And you have failed. See above. But thanks for trying anyway.
>
> My goal is to educate on what's true and what's not true. Nothing else.
>
> --
Failed is the key phrase.
You did.
But thanks anyway for your response and good luck in your endeavors as
an author, programmer, and whatever else you claim to be.
RL
sctvguy1
>
> Failed is the key phrase.
>
> You did.
>
> But thanks anyway for your response and good luck in your endeavors as
> an author, programmer, and whatever else you claim to be.
>
> RL
Hey Ray, get the fuck back to COLA and stay there. People are sick to death
of you cross-posting COLA trolls who play circle jerks with each other.
Your bullshitting "subject" should have been ignored by everyone, except
your COLA shills. Go back to your own sandbox.
RayLopez99
Ray, get the fuck back to COLA and stay there. People are sick to
death
> of you cross-posting COLA trolls who play circle jerks with each other.
> Your bullshitting "subject" should have been ignored by everyone, except
> your COLA shills. Go back to your own sandbox.
What do you think worthy of conversation? How to 'assemble' a PC
using a screwdriver? Woo-hoo! That's difficult, think I need a
newsgroup to help me.
RL
Aragorn
identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
> On Apr 6, 4:03 am, Aragorn <arag...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>
>> On Monday 05 April 2010 15:25 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
>> identifying as chrisv wrote...
>>
>> > Aragorn wrote:
>>
>> >> On Sunday 04 April 2010 13:07 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
>> >> identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
>>
>> > Good God, there's a lot of people who like to feed worthless
>> > trolls.
>>
>> I remember you from when I was still subscribed to C.O.L.A. myself,
>> Chris, but as you can see, I am replying from C.O.L.H. Therefore, I
>> am not familiar with any of the troll nyms that have started to occur
>> after I left C.O.L.A. all these years ago.
>
> You did not miss anything.
Of that I am aware. C.O.L.A. actually has the wrong name. It's
supposed to be a newsgroup for GNU/Linux advocacy, while it has become
the home for rabid Windows advocates instead.
> Chrisv is essentially a disrupter of COLA-- he wants conversation to
> only revolve around his own posts, [...
That is not how I remember him at all.
> ...] and they all have to be happy talk about how great Linux is.
Perhaps because it's supposed to be a GNU/Linux advocacy group? Duh!
> Chrisv would do well in North Korea (which uses Linux in it's "Red
> Star" OS, says the news today).
Yes, North Korea has followed in the footsteps of the People's Republic
of China, who have built their own "Red Flag" distribution. Still,
GNU/Linux advocacy *is* perfectly on-topic for C.O.L.A., so if that is
what ChrisV is doing - and it *is* what I remember him to have been
doing - then he is perfectly within his rights to do so.
>> Although there was a serious amount of trollbaiting going on in the
>> original post, I chose to reply because I felt that, for the sake of
>> the lurkers in the group I'm posting this from, sound advice should
>> be given, FUD should be rectified, and the intent of the original
>> poster should be made clear.
>
> And you failed. As I told you, you misread my original post. I am
> not booting Linux on an old machine, even 2 years old, but a new
> machine to be built.
That was the only mistake I made in my original reply to you. You also
spouted lots of other nonsense on which I set you straight. I don't
see that as failure at all.
>> (1) they're so afraid of it that they hate it, because they
>> fear that it'll take over the market and force them to
>> use something other than Windows; and
>
> A just fear.
I don't see why. GNU/Linux is vastly superior to anything the guys in
Redmond can come up with. As I have told you in my original reply,
GNU/Linux is a UNIX-style operating system, and there is a reason as to
why longstanding IT professionals, engineers, scientists and motion
picture production companies have stuck to UNIX.
Windows only owes its commercial success to very clever and sometimes
outrageously deceptive marketing, and there is a reason as to why it
was pushed this way and this hard by Microsoft. Making money out of it
was only part of that. The real reason is the fact that the
proprietary nature of the Microsoft code subjugates every Windows user
to vendor lock-in and other "intellectual property" strategies. If you
own a Windows computer, then the operating system on it - and all other
Microsoft software you have installed - remains the property of
Microsoft, not *your* property and not at your leisure to do with as
you please.
>> (2) they don't know what they're talking about, and they may
>> have picked up a few nonsensical things from other clueless
>> Windows fanboys.
>
> Some perhaps, but not me.
Oh, I seriously doubt that, given your comment about the lack of web
browsers in GNU/Linux. Unless you know you were lying, of course, and
given that you as a Windows fanboy reside in C.O.L.A. there is a just
suspicion to corroborate that.
>> I don't feed trolls for fun. I also don't feed trolls so as to
>> disrupt the newsgroup, and I equally don't feed trolls out of some
>> egotripping, selfindulging drive, or out of hatred for one or all of
>> these individuals.
>>
>> I "feed trolls" - if you can call it that, but I do not, which is why
>> I put it between quotes - because I want to rectify the
>> misinformation, both to them and towards the insufficiently aware
>> lurkers and newbies, onto whom the FUD spread by these trolls could
>> have the very effect that FUD is intended to have.
>
> And you have failed.
No, I did not. Just because you keep on repeating it doesn't make it
any less false.
RayLopez99
> >> I remember you from when I was still subscribed to C.O.L.A. myself,
> >> Chris, but as you can see, I am replying from C.O.L.H. Therefore, I
> >> am not familiar with any of the troll nyms that have started to occur
> >> after I left C.O.L.A. all these years ago.
>
> > You did not miss anything.
>
> Of that I am aware. C.O.L.A. actually has the wrong name. It's
> supposed to be a newsgroup for GNU/Linux advocacy, while it has become
> the home for rabid Windows advocates instead.
True. Most of the Linux users in fact use Windows mostly.
>
> > Chrisv is essentially a disrupter of COLA-- he wants conversation to
> > only revolve around his own posts, [...
>
> That is not how I remember him at all.
He must have changed. Now he's an intolerant bigot who claims to
killfile anybody that disagrees with him.
>
> > ...] and they all have to be happy talk about how great Linux is.
>
> Perhaps because it's supposed to be a GNU/Linux advocacy group? Duh!
Not true. Happy talk = propaganda. Think King Leopold and the
Belgian Congo, and how he was civilizing the savages.
>
> > Chrisv would do well in North Korea (which uses Linux in it's "Red
> > Star" OS, says the news today).
>
> Yes, North Korea has followed in the footsteps of the People's Republic
> of China, who have built their own "Red Flag" distribution. Still,
> GNU/Linux advocacy *is* perfectly on-topic for C.O.L.A., so if that is
> what ChrisV is doing - and it *is* what I remember him to have been
> doing - then he is perfectly within his rights to do so.
He's within his rights, but he's an intolerant bigot.
>
> > And you failed. As I told you, you misread my original post. I am
> > not booting Linux on an old machine, even 2 years old, but a new
> > machine to be built.
>
> That was the only mistake I made in my original reply to you. You also
> spouted lots of other nonsense on which I set you straight. I don't
> see that as failure at all.
Not true. We agree to disagree.
>
> >> (1) they're so afraid of it that they hate it, because they
> >> fear that it'll take over the market and force them to
> >> use something other than Windows; and
>
> > A just fear.
>
> I don't see why. GNU/Linux is vastly superior to anything the guys in
> Redmond can come up with. As I have told you in my original reply,
> GNU/Linux is a UNIX-style operating system, and there is a reason as to
> why longstanding IT professionals, engineers, scientists and motion
> picture production companies have stuck to UNIX.
So what? Those are specialty markets. Some people still like and use
FORTRAN because it has legacy applications to scientific mainframe
applications. The desktop is a mass market.
>
> Windows only owes its commercial success to very clever and sometimes
> outrageously deceptive marketing, and there is a reason as to why it
> was pushed this way and this hard by Microsoft.
Lots of things depend on advertising. Get over it.
> Making money out of it
> was only part of that. The real reason is the fact that the
> proprietary nature of the Microsoft code subjugates every Windows user
> to vendor lock-in and other "intellectual property" strategies. If you
> own a Windows computer, then the operating system on it - and all other
> Microsoft software you have installed - remains the property of
> Microsoft, not *your* property and not at your leisure to do with as
> you please.
So what? Besides you're wrong--you can sell your software--I think
it's called the first sale principle of law--as long as you don't keep
a copy.
>
> >> (2) they don't know what they're talking about, and they may
> >> have picked up a few nonsensical things from other clueless
> >> Windows fanboys.
>
> > Some perhaps, but not me.
>
> Oh, I seriously doubt that, given your comment about the lack of web
> browsers in GNU/Linux. Unless you know you were lying, of course, and
> given that you as a Windows fanboy reside in C.O.L.A. there is a just
> suspicion to corroborate that.
Never said that. I may have said Linux browsers probably suck (and
they probably do), but I've learned that Firefox exists for Linux so
it can't be that bad.
>
> >> I "feed trolls" - if you can call it that, but I do not, which is why
> >> I put it between quotes - because I want to rectify the
> >> misinformation, both to them and towards the insufficiently aware
> >> lurkers and newbies, onto whom the FUD spread by these trolls could
> >> have the very effect that FUD is intended to have.
>
> > And you have failed.
>
> No, I did not. Just because you keep on repeating it doesn't make it
> any less false.
Nope. Try again.
RL
B Sellers
> On Tuesday 06 April 2010 16:17 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
> identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
>
>> On Apr 6, 4:03 am, Aragorn <arag...@chatfactory.invalid> wrote:
>>
>>> On Monday 05 April 2010 15:25 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
>>> identifying as chrisv wrote...
>>>
>>>> Aragorn wrote:
>>>>> On Sunday 04 April 2010 13:07 in comp.os.linux.hardware, somebody
>>>>> identifying as RayLopez99 wrote...
>>>> Good God, there's a lot of people who like to feed worthless
>>>> trolls.
Snip
> No, I did not. Just because you keep on repeating it doesn't make it
> any less false.
>
Someone has to refute the willful ignorance of trolls. You did
a good job Aragorn, Thanks.
What is equally damaging is htm coders who write code
that only works on Windows machines. I use the short version
because that is what it is called when you furnish an .html file
to Windows. That is why I switched to Eternal-September from
Individual Net. I spent a good deal of energy dealing with Click
and Buy service but they could not let me use my Linux machine
to deal with them and when I booted to Windows they refused
my CC and DC cards as not being real. Well that is Euro 11 i
wil be not spending this year so I took my CC out and bought
a new printer and then with the DC a black ink cartridge so
I know they work.
;^)
later
bliss
chrisv
>Someone has to refute the willful ignorance of trolls.
Not really, when a troll is as ridiculous as RayDopez. Anyone worth a
shit can immediately identify him as a worthless twit that should be
ignored.
B Sellers
You ignore the newbies who drop in for information about
the systems. To them he sounds halfway reasonable,
later
bliss
chrisv
If they are dullards.
IMO the idiocy and dishonesty are readily apparent.
RayLopez99
> You ignore the newbies who drop in for information about
> the systems. To them he sounds halfway reasonable,
I am reasonable. I cite my works, unlike chrisv, who is all opinion.
I deal in logic, unlike my opponents who just name call.
RL
RayLopez99
> > You ignore the newbies who drop in for information about
> >the systems. To them he sounds halfway reasonable,
>
> If they are dullards.
>
> IMO the idiocy and dishonesty are readily apparent.
You calling newbies "dullards"? Noted. And all newbies will hate you
for it.
IMO. OPINION is like arse wholes chrisv--everybody has one.
FACTS matter. 1% matters. The CNet article that says OO is not
compatible with Word matters.
RL
Terry Porter
Personally I think Aragorn has done a nice job refuting the RayDopez
wintroll. Aragorn knows Linux well, and refuted *every single* FUD the
troll wrote, in a knowlegable and factual way.
As far as newbies go, I too felt this way once, and refuted all troll
nonsence for the same reasons.
However as the Internet is full of bad information, wrong information and
clever FUD information etc, I decided that a newbie will need to learn to
sift thru what's real and what's not anyway.
Dopez is a excellent troll, and he knows how to get responses from
bonafide Linux advocates with his cleverly crafted half truths, so while
I agree with Chrisv, and think it would be more productive to just ignore
the troll, I guess he's here to stay ....
Unfortunaterly.
--
This quadcore running Gnu/Linux Archlinux 2009.08 X86_64 and posting via
Pan.
Get your Free copy NOW! www.archlinux.org/
Moshe
> On Wed, 07 Apr 2010 0>
> As far as newbies go, I too felt this way once, and refuted all troll
> nonsence for the same reasons.
Yea, but you get most of it wrong Terry Porter.
> However as the Internet is full of bad information, wrong information and
> clever FUD information etc, I decided that a newbie will need to learn to
> sift thru what's real and what's not anyway.
And much of that wrong information comes from you
Terry 'telnet' Porter.
chrisv
>Dopez is a excellent troll, and he knows how to get responses from
>bonafide Linux advocates with his cleverly crafted half truths
You've got to be joking. What he writes screams "idiot troll" to
me...
DFS
> Personally I think Aragorn has done a nice job refuting the RayDopez
> wintroll. Aragorn knows Linux well, and refuted *every single* FUD the
> troll wrote, in a knowlegable and factual way.
Except for the bullshit lies Aragorn spouted:
"UNIX has been the choice of true professionals in the
scientific, medical and engineering fields for decades already."
"Microsoft Windows is also a platform which comes together with a very
Microsoft-specific way of looking at computer technology - a specific
way which works in an indoctrinating and conditioning manner due to the
vendor lock-in and exclusion of non-proprietary software - and
Microsoft Windows users therefore cannot accept anything of a different
paradigm. Thus, Microsoft Windows users tend to blame GNU/Linux for
their own failure at accepting it, while the real problem is situated
between the keyboard and the chair."
"about 10 minutes to install GNU/Linux, after about two weeks of
installing Windows, with all the reboots, additional software loading,
downloading of virus updates, setting up the firewall and installing
whatever else you need on it."
All bullshit lies.
Terry Porter
Me too, but we have many years of Linux troll experience. Just look at
the sheer number of responses the troll gets ?
chrisv
>On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:44:54 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>
>> Terry Porter wrote:
>>
>>>Dopez is a excellent troll, and he knows how to get responses from
>>>bonafide Linux advocates with his cleverly crafted half truths
>>
>> You've got to be joking. What he writes screams "idiot troll" to me...
>
>Me too, but we have many years of Linux troll experience. Just look at
>the sheer number of responses the troll gets ?
Proving that one need not be "clever" to get fed by troll-feeders,
many of whom know exactly what is happening.
I don't think that newbies are fooled as easily as some suppose,
either. All it takes is one slip-up to spot a dishonest idiot.
--
"choice : for the brain dead." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark
Hadron
And he is calling himself "Aragorn" which, like "Gandalf", suggests a
bearded loony with a rather high opinion of himself and his Unixy
skills. Probably never kissed a girl but bought one a set of Elf ears
for Christmas once.
TomB
Well said, "Hadron".
--
BOFH excuse #325:
Your processor does not develop enough heat.
ToolPackinMama
> On 4/7/2010 8:12 PM, Terry Porter wrote:
>
>> Personally I think Aragorn has done a nice job refuting the RayDopez
>> wintroll. Aragorn knows Linux well, and refuted *every single* FUD the
>> troll wrote, in a knowlegable and factual way.
>
> Except for the bullshit lies Aragorn spouted:
>
> "UNIX has been the choice of true professionals in the
> scientific, medical and engineering fields for decades already."
But that is true.
>
> "Microsoft Windows is also a platform which comes together with a very
> Microsoft-specific way of looking at computer technology - a specific
> way which works in an indoctrinating and conditioning manner due to the
> vendor lock-in and exclusion of non-proprietary software - and
> Microsoft Windows users therefore cannot accept anything of a different
> paradigm. Thus, Microsoft Windows users tend to blame GNU/Linux for
> their own failure at accepting it, while the real problem is situated
> between the keyboard and the chair."
Hmm... maybe that is opinion, but not what most people would class as a lie.
>
> "about 10 minutes to install GNU/Linux,
which is true...
after about two weeks of
> installing Windows, with all the reboots, additional software loading,
> downloading of virus updates, setting up the firewall and installing
> whatever else you need on it."
Which is what I call an exaggeration. I recently just did both, and if
you install Windows 7 there are not that many updates, and you (from
start to finish) are all caught up in about an hour.
However, if you install Win XP, then you are indeed in for hundreds of
update downloads, and depending on your connection speed and other
variables, you could be downloading updates, and updates of updates, for
days. That is no exaggeration.
ToolPackinMama
> On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:44:54 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>
>> Terry Porter wrote:
>>
>>> Dopez is a excellent troll, and he knows how to get responses from
>>> bonafide Linux advocates with his cleverly crafted half truths
>>
>> You've got to be joking. What he writes screams "idiot troll" to me...
>
>
> Me too, but we have many years of Linux troll experience. Just look at
> the sheer number of responses the troll gets ?
>
>
Well, what if somebody would rather talk to and about somebody else?
Change the subject.
If he is a troll then you talking about only him only helps him to
derail on-topic discussion.
ToolPackinMama
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>> On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:44:54 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>
>>> Terry Porter wrote:
>>>
>>>> Dopez is a excellent troll, and he knows how to get responses from
>>>> bonafide Linux advocates with his cleverly crafted half truths
>>>
>>> You've got to be joking. What he writes screams "idiot troll" to me...
>>
>> Me too, but we have many years of Linux troll experience. Just look at
>> the sheer number of responses the troll gets ?
>
> Proving that one need not be "clever" to get fed by troll-feeders,
> many of whom know exactly what is happening.
>
> I don't think that newbies are fooled as easily as some suppose,
> either. All it takes is one slip-up to spot a dishonest idiot.
>
Maybe some of you self-styled non-trolls could start some new on-topic
threads instead of letting the accused trolls shape and control the
conversation here....
Mark
>
> That very sentence already bulks with prejudice and bias. GNU/Linux is
> a UNIX system and UNIX has been the choice of true professionals in the
> scientific, medical and engineering fields for decades already.
>
> The problem however is that most Microsoft Windows users are of a
> category of computer users - whether amateur or professional - who uses
> their computers for typical home and office work, and who are thus not
> familiar with the more technical aspects of information technology,
> aspects at which Microsoft Windows has always failed terribly. Even on
> account of multimedia, Microsoft Windows was very late to catch up with
> UNIX, Atari, Amiga and pre-OS X Apple MacIntoshes.
>
> Microsoft Windows is also a platform which comes together with a very
> Microsoft-specific way of looking at computer technology - a specific
> way which works in an indoctrinating and conditioning manner due to the
> vendor lock-in and exclusion of non-proprietary software - and
> Microsoft Windows users therefore cannot accept anything of a different
> paradigm. Thus, Microsoft Windows users tend to blame GNU/Linux for
> their own failure at accepting it, while the real problem is situated
> between the keyboard and the chair.
Message-ID: <81nra7...@mid.individual.net>
Keep digging that hole, Mark Kent.
> Well, truth be told, if you pick one of the "less technical"
> distributions like Ubuntu - and considering that you're only installing
> it with the purpose of doing some browsing, you won't need a fully
> fledged installation with all the whistles and bells - then I'd
> say "about 10 minutes to install GNU/Linux, after about two weeks of
> installing Windows, with all the reboots, additional software loading,
> downloading of virus updates, setting up the firewall and installing
> whatever else you need on it."
Only a dishonest asshole like yourself would make such a claim.
Chris Ahlstrom
> And he is calling himself "Aragorn" which, like "Gandalf", suggests a
> bearded loony with a rather high opinion of himself and his Unixy
> skills. Probably never kissed a girl but bought one a set of Elf ears
> for Christmas once.
:-D
--
Increased knowledge will help you now. Have mate's phone bugged.
chrisv
>If he is a troll then you talking about only him only helps him to
>derail on-topic discussion.
I consider it an investment for the future. Feel free to not
understand, I don't care if you agree or not.
chrisv
>Hadron pulled this Usenet boner:
>
>> And he is calling himself "Aragorn" which, like "Gandalf", suggests a
>> bearded loony with a rather high opinion of himself and his Unixy
>> skills. Probably never kissed a girl but bought one a set of Elf ears
>> for Christmas once.
>
> :-D
Funny, eh?
Rather ironic, as well, coming from "Hadron Quark", who used to
pretend that he worked at CERN.
Guffaw!
Hadron
> Aragorn wrote:
>
>>
>> That very sentence already bulks with prejudice and bias. GNU/Linux is
>> a UNIX system and UNIX has been the choice of true professionals in the
>> scientific, medical and engineering fields for decades already.
>>
>> The problem however is that most Microsoft Windows users are of a
>> category of computer users - whether amateur or professional - who uses
>> their computers for typical home and office work, and who are thus not
>> familiar with the more technical aspects of information technology,
>> aspects at which Microsoft Windows has always failed terribly. Even on
>> account of multimedia, Microsoft Windows was very late to catch up with
>> UNIX, Atari, Amiga and pre-OS X Apple MacIntoshes.
>>
>> Microsoft Windows is also a platform which comes together with a very
>> Microsoft-specific way of looking at computer technology - a specific
>> way which works in an indoctrinating and conditioning manner due to the
>> vendor lock-in and exclusion of non-proprietary software - and
>> Microsoft Windows users therefore cannot accept anything of a different
>> paradigm. Thus, Microsoft Windows users tend to blame GNU/Linux for
>> their own failure at accepting it, while the real problem is situated
>> between the keyboard and the chair.
>
> Message-ID: <81nra7...@mid.individual.net>
>
> Keep digging that hole, Mark Kent.
Quotes like
,----
| >> The problem however is that most Microsoft Windows users are of a
| >> category of computer users - whether amateur or professional - who uses
| >> their computers for typical home and office work, and who are thus not
| >> familiar with the more technical aspects of information technology,
| >> aspects at which Microsoft Windows has always failed terribly. Even on
`----
Suggest it might be someone similar to Mark Kent. All mouth and no
trousers. Totally convinced he is so much cleverer than "Windows users".
>
>> Well, truth be told, if you pick one of the "less technical"
You mean easier to install? That is not "less technical".
>> distributions like Ubuntu - and considering that you're only installing
>> it with the purpose of doing some browsing, you won't need a fully
>> fledged installation with all the whistles and bells - then I'd
>> say "about 10 minutes to install GNU/Linux, after about two weeks of
>> installing Windows, with all the reboots, additional software loading,
>> downloading of virus updates, setting up the firewall and installing
>> whatever else you need on it."
>
> Only a dishonest asshole like yourself would make such a claim.
Nonsense isn't it?
Terry Porter
> Terry Porter wrote:
>
>>On Thu, 08 Apr 2010 07:44:54 -0500, chrisv wrote:
>>
>>> Terry Porter wrote:
>>>
>>>>Dopez is a excellent troll, and he knows how to get responses from
>>>>bonafide Linux advocates with his cleverly crafted half truths
>>>
>>> You've got to be joking. What he writes screams "idiot troll" to
>>> me...
>>
>>Me too, but we have many years of Linux troll experience. Just look at
>>the sheer number of responses the troll gets ?
>
> Proving that one need not be "clever" to get fed by troll-feeders, many
> of whom know exactly what is happening.
Some posters just can't resist feeding the trolls, but they probably have
valid reasons (for themselves). I've said before, that after a bad day at
the office, it's better to hassle trolls on usenet than argue with the
the wife, or shout at the kids.
>
> I don't think that newbies are fooled as easily as some suppose, either.
> All it takes is one slip-up to spot a dishonest idiot.
I agree 100%, newbies are only new to Linux, they are not stupid.
Aragorn
identifying as Mark wrote...
> Aragorn wrote:
>
>> That very sentence already bulks with prejudice and bias. GNU/Linux
>> is a UNIX system and UNIX has been the choice of true professionals
>> in the scientific, medical and engineering fields for decades
>> already.
>>
>> The problem however is that most Microsoft Windows users are of a
>> category of computer users - whether amateur or professional - who
>> uses their computers for typical home and office work, and who are
>> thus not familiar with the more technical aspects of information
>> technology, aspects at which Microsoft Windows has always failed
>> terribly. Even on account of multimedia, Microsoft Windows was very
>> late to catch up with UNIX, Atari, Amiga and pre-OS X Apple
>> MacIntoshes.
>>
>> Microsoft Windows is also a platform which comes together with a very
>> Microsoft-specific way of looking at computer technology - a specific
>> way which works in an indoctrinating and conditioning manner due to
>> the vendor lock-in and exclusion of non-proprietary software - and
>> Microsoft Windows users therefore cannot accept anything of a
>> different paradigm. Thus, Microsoft Windows users tend to blame
>> GNU/Linux for their own failure at accepting it, while the real
>> problem is situated between the keyboard and the chair.
>
> Message-ID: <81nra7...@mid.individual.net>
>
> Keep digging that hole, Mark Kent.
My name is not Mark Kent, and I'm not digging any holes. You must be
mistaking me for someone else - alas, not uncommon on Usenet, as I've
come to experience. Back in my days on C.O.L.A. I was even accused of
being one and the same person as a regular poster there named Rex
Ballard, just because both Rex and myself write in a rather elaborate
style. Rex was however already a longstanding regular on C.O.L.A.
before I subscribed, and I presume that he also stuck around for long
after I left.
The name "Mark Kent" is clearly Anglosaxon, by the way, which I am not.
I'm from that little place that's usually quite unknown to Americans,
called "the rest of the planet".
Oh, and that message ID took me to some web-based forum, where something
nasty was being said about me solely on the basis of my pseudonym.
Well, trolls *do* go ad hominem - everyone knows that - because they
don't really have anything other to contribute to humanity but drivel,
but just for the record, I have already been using this pseudonym for
many years (and not just on Usenet) for two reasons - not that it's any
of your business, but okay, I'll humor you:
(1) If you have read Tolkien's "Lord Of The Rings" or have seen the
movies, then you'll be familiar with the character of Aragorn. What
the movies don't accentuate as much as the books is Aragorn's past,
and the reason why he is, until the end of the trilogy, not the king
of Gondor, as was his rightful heritage. Although metaphorically,
this in itself bears a lot of resemblance to my own life.
(2) When the first "Lord Of The Rings" movie was released to the big
screen, several unrelated people began calling me Aragorn because
of my physical likeness to the character of Aragorn as portrayed
by Viggo Mortensen. Apparently people think I look very much like
him, and considering the noble character of Aragorn the
Ranger/Strider, I found that to be a compliment.
I do of course fully understand that any of the above is totally wasted
on someone who is dead set on hostility and insult, such as a troll.
After all, I already wrote higher up that trolls have virtually nothing
to contribute to society, so in order to do something with their lives,
they choose to bully the righteous.
People like you have always been around and will always be around.
Fortunately, there exists such a thing as a killfile.
>> Well, truth be told, if you pick one of the "less technical"
>> distributions like Ubuntu - and considering that you're only
>> installing it with the purpose of doing some browsing, you won't need
>> a fully fledged installation with all the whistles and bells - then
>> I'd say "about 10 minutes to install GNU/Linux, after about two weeks
>> of installing Windows, with all the reboots, additional software
>> loading, downloading of virus updates, setting up the firewall and
>> installing whatever else you need on it."
>
> Only a dishonest asshole like yourself would make such a claim.
There was nothing dishonest whatsoever about my reply, and there is
nothing dishonest whatsoever in my person. There is however a great
deal of dishonesty of accusing a person to be another person and
insulting him without that you've even seen his face or bothered to
trace back his origins. You Windows trolls *do* know how to interpret
newsreader headers, don't you?
Anyway, off to the bin with you. I generally have more patience, but
today I don't. That's my prerogative as a human being, and it still
makes me a hundred times more honorable than you.
<plonk>
Aragorn
identifying as Hadron wrote...
Whatever that means, but considering that I've stayed quite polite and
respectful and that you - as someone who has already established
himself as a troll in a rather conspicuous manner - are now the second
person to resort to insults, you will hereby get to join your
buddy "Mark" in my killfile.
> Totally convinced he is so much cleverer than "Windows
> users".
Perhaps if you were to pull your head out of your arse, you would come
to see that all the technical fields which I have listed in the part of
text which you did *not* quote are using a UNIX-family operating
system, and perhaps, if you had some sort of education, you would also
understand *why* they do.
>>> Well, truth be told, if you pick one of the "less technical"
>
> You mean easier to install? That is not "less technical".
Ubuntu hides the more technical aspects of the operating system by
default. This is not something I endorse, but it does make the
transition easier for Windows users, who are typically allergic to
anything remotely technical sounding.
(And don't tell me that this is not true, because it's the Wintrolls'
primary excuse for why "GNU/Linux isn't ready for the desktop".)
>>> distributions like Ubuntu - and considering that you're only
>>> installing it with the purpose of doing some browsing, you won't
>>> need a fully fledged installation with all the whistles and bells -
>>> then I'd say "about 10 minutes to install GNU/Linux, after about two
>>> weeks of installing Windows, with all the reboots, additional
>>> software loading, downloading of virus updates, setting up the
>>> firewall and installing whatever else you need on it."
>>
>> Only a dishonest asshole like yourself would make such a claim.
>
> Nonsense isn't it?
Yes, what "Mark" posted was nonsense, and what you added to that as
well. And everything else I've seen you post has been nonsense so far.
So anyway, off to the bin with you. Say "Hi" to you friend.
Will
Keep digging, Mark Kent.
From: "Dennis Ritchie"
Message-ID: <81nra7...@mid.individual.net>
X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
>
> My name is not Mark Kent, and I'm not digging any holes. You must be
> mistaking me for someone else - alas, not uncommon on Usenet, as I've
> come to experience. Back in my days on C.O.L.A. I was even accused of
> being one and the same person as a regular poster there named Rex
> Ballard, just because both Rex and myself write in a rather elaborate
> style. Rex was however already a longstanding regular on C.O.L.A.
> before I subscribed, and I presume that he also stuck around for long
> after I left.
>
Rexx is a lying asshole like yourself.
Hadron
Bwahahahahahahaha.
So, err, Clark Kent (superman) was not an American citizen after all.
Duh. Hint : the world is full of people with Anglo Saxon sounding
names. People move.
Has all the hall marks of a Mark Kent post : total and utter belief in
his own superiority and a total and utter windbag.
SteveH
Or perhaps you could stop crossposting back to the bleedin' Linux groups.
:-)
--
SteveH
Aragorn
identifying as Will wrote...
My name is not Mark Kent, nymshifter. Get back on your meds because
you're starting to hallucinate again.
> From: "Dennis Ritchie"
> Message-ID: <81nra7...@mid.individual.net>
> X-Newsreader: Microsoft Outlook Express 6.00.2900.3138
> X-MimeOLE: Produced By Microsoft MimeOLE V6.00.2900.3350
And I don't do Windows. These are *my* headers:
From: Aragorn <ara...@chatfactory.invalid> (A noiseless patient
Spider)
Date: Friday 09 April 2010 10:56:39
Groups: comp.os.linux.advocacy, comp.os.linux.hardware,
alt.comp.hardware.pc-homebuilt
User-Agent: KNode/0.10.9
Message-ID: <hpmq48$ig4$1...@news.eternal-september.org>
>> My name is not Mark Kent, and I'm not digging any holes. You must be
>> mistaking me for someone else - alas, not uncommon on Usenet, as I've
>> come to experience. Back in my days on C.O.L.A. I was even accused
>> of being one and the same person as a regular poster there named Rex
>> Ballard, just because both Rex and myself write in a rather elaborate
>> style. Rex was however already a longstanding regular on C.O.L.A.
>> before I subscribed, and I presume that he also stuck around for long
>> after I left.
>
> Rexx is a lying asshole like yourself.
Nope, Rex did not lie a single time when I was on C.O.L.A., and neither
did I. I'm also not going to start lying now. Nymshifting however
*is* a form of lying, and it's also a telltale signature of a troll so
as to avoid killfiles.
Keep on nymshifting, "troll boi". Plenty of room in my filter for you.
Hmmm... aioe.org... Smells like a flat fish in here...
Moshe
> Nope, Rex did not lie a single time when I was on C.O.L.A., and neither
> did I.
Can't say for you, but Rex not lying?
You're kidding right?
> I'm also not going to start lying now.
You just did by your statement that Rex didn't lie.
> Nymshifting however
> *is* a form of lying, and it's also a telltale signature of a troll so
> as to avoid killfiles.
Who cares about avoiding kill files?
The so called trolls get far more responses than any of the Linux
"advocates" do.
> Keep on nymshifting, "troll boi". Plenty of room in my filter for you.
Nobody cares.
> Hmmm... aioe.org... Smells like a flat fish in here...
You need to get your olfactory system checked.
BTW, your not fooling anyone Mr. "Asperger".
One Shot, One Kill
"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote in message
news:53csr5pj836fu174v...@4ax.com...
chrisv is a worthless piece of shit. chrisv is a liar.
ToolPackinMama
> ToolPackinMama wrote:
>> Maybe some of you self-styled non-trolls could start some new on-topic
>> threads instead of letting the accused trolls shape and control the
>> conversation here....
>
> Or perhaps you could stop crossposting back to the bleedin' Linux groups.
> :-)
>
It doesn't belong in PC-HOMEBUILT...
Darren Salt
[snip]
> I am reasonable. I cite my works, unlike chrisv, who is all opinion.
> I deal in logic, unlike my opponents who just name call.
[citation needed]
--
| Darren Salt | linux at youmustbejoking | nr. Ashington, | Toon
| using Debian GNU/Linux | or ds ,demon,co,uk | Northumberland | Army
| + http://www.youmustbejoking.demon.co.uk/ & http://tartarus.org/ds/
Nothing is but what is not.