DOSEMU2 under development again

[Marti van Lin]

The DOSEMU Dos emulator is in development again under the name DOSEMU2.

This version has many interesting improvements, like Hardware accelerated
KVM support and many SDL optimalisations.

https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/2017/06/dosemu2-under-development-
again/

Besides source code, there are Debian and Fedora binary Pre-release
packages available.

https://github.com/stsp/dosemu2/releases

While DOSBOX is more focused on playing DOS games, DOSEMU is more focused
on running applications like WordPerfect, dBASE IV etc..

I was actually able to print documents in WordPerfect 5.1. on a supported
HP Deskjet 390C printer, using the Centronic Parrallel interface on a old
Linux machine via DOSEMU.

I Love it!

--
|_|0|_| Marti T. van Lin (alias ML2MST)
|_|_|0| http://osg33x.blogspot.com
|0|0|0| Fedora 26 Beta

[Desk Rabbit]

On 22/06/2017 08:45, Marti van Lin wrote:
> The DOSEMU Dos emulator is in development again under the name DOSEMU2.
>
> This version has many interesting improvements, like Hardware accelerated
> KVM support and many SDL optimalisations.
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/2017/06/dosemu2-under-development-
> again/
>
> Besides source code, there are Debian and Fedora binary Pre-release
> packages available.
>
> https://github.com/stsp/dosemu2/releases
>
> While DOSBOX is more focused on playing DOS games, DOSEMU is more focused
> on running applications like WordPerfect, dBASE IV etc..
>
> I was actually able to print documents in WordPerfect 5.1. on a supported
> HP Deskjet 390C printer, using the Centronic Parrallel interface on a old
> Linux machine via DOSEMU.
>
> I Love it!
>

Wordperfect 5.1, dBASE IV????? WTF?

DOSEMU "For those who just can't let the 1980's go"

[Marti van Lin]

Glad I'm a happy old g33k enjoying nostaliga via emulation.

Such in contrast to the grumpy old n00b you are :-p

FOAD!

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Marti van Lin wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

+1

--
Go not to the elves for counsel, for they will say both yes and no.
-- J.R.R. Tolkien

[Desk Rabbit]

I maintained and used Xenix back in the 80's so hardly new to this but I
have no desire to relive that era in computing.

Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

[Desk Rabbit]

Yet another insightful and informative post from one of the "reasonable"
advocates.

[Silver Slimer]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 09:30:44 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>
wrote:

I have to admit that there is little reason to use those outdated
programs for reasons other than nostalgia. I can imagine someone
having a document in a very old format which can't be converted into a
current one and thus needing to load it in the old piece of software
in DOSEMU, but what other benefit might there be?

--
Silver Slimer
EFF & OpenMedia member,
TheRebel.media & Infowars supporter

[Silver Slimer]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 10:38:49 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>
wrote:

I start my day with a cup of +1s from Wideload Porkster. Without them,
I feel groggy all day.

I have to admit that he's been very helpful over the years. I've
learned so much:

- Problems with GRUB? Answer: you're a liar, +1
- Problems with Kwin? Answer: you're a liar, +1
- Unbootable Linux desktop? Answer: you're a liar, +1
- Printer not supported? Answer: you're a liar, +1

This man should have his own tech-related TV show.

[chrisv]

Desk Rabbit wrote:

>I maintained and used Xenix back in the 80's so hardly new to this but I
>have no desire to relive that era in computing.
>
>Nostalgia isn't what it used to be.

When the thugs come to take-away your (fill in the blank), you will
appreciate even the smallest of them.

--
"Understandably, since Linux is garbage, you need to monitor it at all
times like a fragile newborn." - "Slimer"

[Desk Rabbit]

It's the Linux Desktop users tinkering mentality. These guys don't get
much work done, they just fiddle with the OS. I've got a neighbour who
loves his cars, he's got 3 on his property that have never been driven
in years, he just tinkers with them, they are projects. He uses a
regular car for his everyday commute.

[Marti van Lin]

Op 22-06-17 om 13:30 schreef Silver Slimer:

Nostalgia is the main cause IMO and what's wrong with that?

It is a fully on topic treat, because it is a DOS emulator for Linux
being under development again.

I am a huge emulation lover and I think this is great news.

[Marti van Lin]

Op 22-06-17 om 11:15 schreef Chris Ahlstrom:

My sincere apologies, Deskrabbit *Plonked*

[Silver Slimer]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 13:14:18 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>

If I loved tinkering with cars, I'd most probably buy a Dodge
Challenger as I love the car's look and Chrysler's general
unreliability would mean that I would have ample opportunity to fix
little things on it. Since I don't want to tinker on a car at all, I
buy BMWs as they just work for as long as I need them to.

I can't help but notice that these "advocates" also drive American
pieces of crap. They're so used to things breaking down on them (and
probably blaming themselves for it) that they don't feel comfortable
in anything not made by Ford, GM or Chrysler.

[Silver Slimer]

Like I said, for nostalgic reasons DOSEMU makes sense but were you
planning on using these old applications to get work done or just to
remind yourself of how things were?

I am a lover of emulation as well. In fact, I regularly download ROMS
for old video game systems (I have to look into finding KC Munchkin
for the Odyssey 2 later on) and even bought a Chinese clone of the
Gameboy Color to play ancient ROMS on it. However, I don't intend for
this to replace my gaming habit as it's clear that newer games are
superior to the old ones in every imaginable way.

[Desk Rabbit]

Ah the Internet equivalent of a sulking teenager.

[chrisv]

Dunce Rabbit wrote:

>These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS

They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
change that.

--
"there are too many choices in some categories of computer hardware"
- Dumfsck, putting his ignorance on display

[William Poaster]

On 22/6/2017 13:49 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, chrisv posted:

> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>
>>These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>
> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
> change that.

These trolls like DunceRabbit don't get *any* work done, they 're too
busy trolling Linux groups.

--
The troll is but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts
and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more:
his is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
(With acknowledgement to W.S.)

[Desk Rabbit]

On 22/06/2017 14:38, William Poaster wrote:
> On 22/6/2017 13:49 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, chrisv posted:
>
>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>
>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>
>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>> change that.
>
> These trolls like DunceRabbit don't get *any* work done, they 're too
> busy trolling Linux groups.
>

Reading by proxy again Wideload Porkster?

It's because I don't tinker and get my work done quickly and efficiently
that I can while away my time on here.

[Silver Slimer]

On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 15:45:51 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>
wrote:

I feel bad that we're referring to him as Wideload Porkster as William
Poaster isn't his real name. Perhaps we should refer to him as Gross
Fatty which is closer to his real name of Geoff Fitton.

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-22, William Poaster <w...@dev.null> wrote:
> On 22/6/2017 13:49 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, chrisv posted:
>
>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>
>>>These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>
>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>> change that.
>
> These trolls like DunceRabbit don't get *any* work done, they 're too
> busy trolling Linux groups.

Funny to see them in constant contradiction.

--
Marek Novotny
https://github.com/marek-novotny

[7]

Marti van Lin wrote:

> The DOSEMU Dos emulator is in development again under the name DOSEMU2.
>
> This version has many interesting improvements, like Hardware accelerated
> KVM support and many SDL optimalisations.
>
> https://sourceforge.net/p/freedos/news/2017/06/dosemu2-under-development-> again/
>
> Besides source code, there are Debian and Fedora binary Pre-release
> packages available.
>
> https://github.com/stsp/dosemu2/releases
>
> While DOSBOX is more focused on playing DOS games, DOSEMU is more focused
> on running applications like WordPerfect, dBASE IV etc..
>
> I was actually able to print documents in WordPerfect 5.1. on a supported
> HP Deskjet 390C printer, using the Centronic Parrallel interface on a old
> Linux machine via DOSEMU.
>
> I Love it!

You dossy masochist you!

It beats me trying to tell the baud rate of mechanical teletype by
licking the tx/rx lines.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

No need to apologize, Marti!

--
You will become rich and famous unless you don't.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>
>>These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>
> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
> change that.

Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.

--
Kindness is a language which the deaf can hear and the blind can read.
-- Mark Twain

[Chris Ahlstrom]

7 wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

LOL

--
It is right that he too should have his little chronicle, his memories,
his reason, and be able to recognize the good in the bad, the bad in the
worst, and so grow gently old all down the unchanging days and die one
day like any other day, only shorter.
-- Samuel Beckett, "Malone Dies"

[Marti van Lin]

Op 22-6-2017 om 14:45 schreef Silver Slimer:

> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 14:39:30 +0200, Marti van Lin
> <ml2...@dontevenbother.invalid> wrote:
>
>> Op 22-06-17 om 13:30 schreef Silver Slimer:
>>
>>> On Thu, 22 Jun 2017 09:30:44 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>>> On 22/06/2017 08:45, Marti van Lin wrote:
>>>>> The DOSEMU Dos emulator is in development again under the name DOSEMU2.

[snip]

>>>>> I was actually able to print documents in WordPerfect 5.1. on a supported
>>>>> HP Deskjet 390C printer, using the Centronic Parrallel interface on a old
>>>>> Linux machine via DOSEMU.
>>>>>
>>>>> I Love it!
>>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Wordperfect 5.1, dBASE IV????? WTF?
>>>>
>>>> DOSEMU "For those who just can't let the 1980's go"
>>>
>>> I have to admit that there is little reason to use those outdated
>>> programs for reasons other than nostalgia. I can imagine someone
>>> having a document in a very old format which can't be converted into a
>>> current one and thus needing to load it in the old piece of software
>>> in DOSEMU, but what other benefit might there be?
>>>
>>
>> Nostalgia is the main cause IMO and what's wrong with that?
>>
>> It is a fully on topic treat, because it is a DOS emulator for Linux
>> being under development again.
>>
>> I am a huge emulation lover and I think this is great news.
>
> Like I said, for nostalgic reasons DOSEMU makes sense but were you
> planning on using these old applications to get work done or just to
> remind yourself of how things were?

I am trying to get ANSI terminal emulators like Telix to work. (Back in
the BBS scene revival).

DOSEMU is able to route COM-ports via telnet.

Tried a couple of Linux and Windows based Terminal Emulators, to log on
to telnet BBS-es, but there are some promblems with ANSI characters. So
I'm trying it by using DOSEMU.

> I am a lover of emulation as well. In fact, I regularly download ROMS
> for old video game systems (I have to look into finding KC Munchkin
> for the Odyssey 2 later on) and even bought a Chinese clone of the
> Gameboy Color to play ancient ROMS on it. However, I don't intend for
> this to replace my gaming habit as it's clear that newer games are
> superior to the old ones in every imaginable way.

That too, most of it is just having some nostalgic fun.

--
|_|0|_| Marti T. van Lin (alias ML2MST)
|_|_|0| http://osg33x.blogspot.com

|0|0|0| Windows 10 Insider Preview

[Melzzzzz]

On 2017-06-23, Marti van Lin <ml2...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>
> DOSEMU is able to route COM-ports via telnet.

Hm, I haven't seen COM ports while ago...

--
press any key to continue or any other to quit...

[Desk Rabbit]

On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>
>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>
>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>> change that.
>
> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>

You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.

[Desk Rabbit]

On 23/06/2017 05:41, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On 2017-06-23, Marti van Lin <ml2...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> DOSEMU is able to route COM-ports via telnet.
>
> Hm, I haven't seen COM ports while ago...
>

Quaint aren't they? ;-)

[Melzzzzz]

Heh, back in 1992 I was in terminal emulator bussiness on DOS ;)
I wrote several, most notable is Unisys T27 emulator ;)

[Peter Köhlmann]

Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
install the application again.
The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
idiots

The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
or newly installing a application

[Melzzzzz]

There is LDAP and dconf on Linux ;)
But they are not part of the system, essential for booting...

[William Poaster]

On 23/6/2017 13:25 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Köhlmann posted:

> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>
>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>
>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>> change that.
>>>
>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>>
>>
>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>
> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
> install the application again.
> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
> idiots

Windows Registry is also a good place to hide malware.
It's hard to remove malware in the Windows System Registry, because
it's not easy to find where its been hidden.

> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
> or newly installing a application

[chrisv]

Dunce Rabbit wrote:

>You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>case.

He wasn't seriously suggesting that WinDOS users typically need to
"fiddle" with the Registry, Dunce.

>I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>the registry you might well have been right

Similar to Linux-haters' claims that GNU/Linux requires the use of the
command line.

>but these days, it's pure unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.

No more so that your "they just fiddle with the OS" claim, Dunce.

--
"Actually, installing Linux on a modern PC is surprisingly difficult."
- "Slimer"

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>
>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>
>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>> change that.
>>>
>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>
>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>
> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
> install the application again.
> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
> idiots

I had to "fiddle with the Registry" to get Acrobat Reader to find the Word
executable, just last week.

Not long ago, my Windows 7 VM was horribly slow to use. I installed
a "big business" app that I no longer needed, and a few other apps
that I no longer ran. After the next reboot, the VM was amazingly faster.
I blame the Registry... none of these apps were services.

> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
> or newly installing a application

And you can edit them with your favorite editor, and put them under source
control as well. And, unlike applications that scatter configuration all
over the Registry, the configuration is mostly in one place, easy to find.

Yup. Give me text-based configuration any day.


--
Debian Hint #32: The package 'doc-debian' contains some general
documentation about the Debian project. It is also available in Spanish
(doc-debian-es), French (doc-debian-fr) and Ukrainian (doc-debian-uk).

[Silver Slimer]

Now THAT would seem like a good reason to use DOSEMU. I loved Telix.
Hell, I didn't even know that it existed until about 6 months after I
started using BBSs in 1991 or so. I was connecting to them through
Microsoft Works and needless to say, the experience was awful as
everything was monochrome and the ANSI symbols didn't display
correctly. After that, I connected to a few BBSs using specialized
software called YaleBBS (developed by the brother of a friend of a
friend) and was amazed that BBSs could be in colour. Eventually,
someone recommended Telix to me and my life... LOL... changed.

I used to make ANSIs myself and was once a part of iCE.

>> I am a lover of emulation as well. In fact, I regularly download ROMS
>> for old video game systems (I have to look into finding KC Munchkin
>> for the Odyssey 2 later on) and even bought a Chinese clone of the
>> Gameboy Color to play ancient ROMS on it. However, I don't intend for
>> this to replace my gaming habit as it's clear that newer games are
>> superior to the old ones in every imaginable way.
>
>That too, most of it is just having some nostalgic fun.

Nostalgia kicks ass. Anyone who lived through video gaming between
around 1977 and 1990 got to experience something phenomenal,
especially with arcades.

[Fabrice Lohan]

I agree with Peter regarding stuff left around in the registry that can
cause problems for subsequent re-installs of programs because I have
experienced it myself.
The uninstall applications don't always remove all of the registry entries
and baggage gets left behind.

It's easy enough to test. Simply install a program you have never installed
before and then remove it. Run something like CcCleaner and scan the
registry and it's almost certain you will find references to the program
you removed.

The question is whether or not they will cause problems and the answer is,
"it depends". My question is if the program installed stuff in the registry
why isn't it smart enough to remove all of it?

>> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
>> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
>> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
>> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
>> or newly installing a application
>
> And you can edit them with your favorite editor, and put them under source
> control as well. And, unlike applications that scatter configuration all
> over the Registry, the configuration is mostly in one place, easy to find.
>
> Yup. Give me text-based configuration any day.

I prefer text files myself but to be honest I haven't had to touch the
registry much at all. With modern versions of Windows, at least for me, it
just works.

[Marek Novotny]

I'll take a text based config file any as well. Especially since I can
ask RPM where the conf files are. Linux is once again, light years ahead
of Windows. Windows is beaten by a text file. LOL.

[Desk Rabbit]

On 23/06/2017 14:29, William Poaster wrote:
> On 23/6/2017 13:25 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Köhlmann posted:
>
>> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>>
>>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>
>>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>>
>>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>>> change that.
>>>>
>>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
>> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
>> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
>> install the application again.
>> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
>> idiots
>
> Windows Registry is also a good place to hide malware.
> It's hard to remove malware in the Windows System Registry, because
> it's not easy to find where its been hidden.

Utter nonsense. Executables do not live in the registry and if you want
your malware to run there's a very limited number of places you can put
a key that will make the executable run.

Your nonsense is based on complete ignorance.

[Desk Rabbit]

On 23/06/2017 13:25, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>
>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>
>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>
>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>> change that.
>>>
>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>>
>>
>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>
> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
> install the application again.

Bigger applications don't install more entries, where did you get that
nonsense from?

And just like a left over config file in Linux, if nothing reads from
that area it does nothing.

> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
> idiots

Which have successfully out performed the Linux "geniuses" as a business
desktop. ROFL!

>
> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
> or newly installing a application
>

And they can be spread anywhere and everywhere.

[Melzzzzz]

On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:

Are you sure? Drivers, services, start up programs?

>
> Your nonsense is based on complete ignorance.

Well, I don't think you know all places in registry that executable will be run...

[Desk Rabbit]

On 23/06/2017 15:49, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
> Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>
>> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>>
>>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>
>>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>>
>>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>>> change that.
>>>>
>>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>>
>>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
>> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
>> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
>> install the application again.
>> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
>> idiots
>
> I had to "fiddle with the Registry" to get Acrobat Reader to find the Word
> executable, just last week.

That's you trying to run ancient software for free. No problem on a new
machine and probably no problem on an old machine if you had a clue what
you were trying to do.

>
> Not long ago, my Windows 7 VM was horribly slow to use. I installed
> a "big business" app that I no longer needed, and a few other apps
> that I no longer ran. After the next reboot, the VM was amazingly faster.
> I blame the Registry... none of these apps were services.

Utter nonsense and fantasy.

>
>> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
>> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
>> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
>> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
>> or newly installing a application
>
> And you can edit them with your favorite editor, and put them under source
> control as well. And, unlike applications that scatter configuration all
> over the Registry, the configuration is mostly in one place, easy to find.

The registry is always in the same place, walk up to any desktop or
server in the world and it will be in the same place and the config for
Word will be in the same place. Not so with Linux.

>
> Yup. Give me text-based configuration any day.
>
>

They have their place.

[Desk Rabbit]

And that's not the fault of the registry, that the fault of the programmers.

>
> It's easy enough to test. Simply install a program you have never installed
> before and then remove it. Run something like CcCleaner and scan the
> registry and it's almost certain you will find references to the program
> you removed.
>
> The question is whether or not they will cause problems and the answer is,
> "it depends". My question is if the program installed stuff in the registry
> why isn't it smart enough to remove all of it?

Indeed, fault of the programmer, not the registry.

>
>
>>> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
>>> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
>>> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
>>> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
>>> or newly installing a application
>>
>> And you can edit them with your favorite editor, and put them under source
>> control as well. And, unlike applications that scatter configuration all
>> over the Registry, the configuration is mostly in one place, easy to find.
>>
>> Yup. Give me text-based configuration any day.
>
> I prefer text files myself but to be honest I haven't had to touch the
> registry much at all. With modern versions of Windows, at least for me, it
> just works.
>

Indeed it does but these clowns are living in the past.

[Melzzzzz]

On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:

Perhaps Windows XP is ok, but look at that clutter later on...

>
>>
>> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
>> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
>> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
>> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
>> or newly installing a application
>>
>
> And they can be spread anywhere and everywhere.

You have to know that config files does not interfere with the system.
They are not spread all over the place, rather they are under /etc/ and
in user home dir.
Everything you install can compromise your system via registry on
Windows.

[Desk Rabbit]

How is having to ask where the config is better than always knowing that
it's in the registry?

[Melzzzzz]

On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:

Nope, you don't know where config is in registry. Application can write
anything it likes, easilly compromising system.

[Desk Rabbit]

On 23/06/2017 14:52, chrisv wrote:
> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>
>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>> case.
>
> He wasn't seriously suggesting that WinDOS users typically need to
> "fiddle" with the Registry, Dunce.

Are you the operator, got your hand up his arse and operating him from
there?

>
>> I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>> the registry you might well have been right
>
> Similar to Linux-haters' claims that GNU/Linux requires the use of the
> command line.

Which is of course complete nonsense and hasn't been mentioned here at all.

>
>> but these days, it's pure unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>
> No more so that your "they just fiddle with the OS" claim, Dunce.
>

Well the impression from the posts in here is that is very much the
case. Many seem to use Windows for their work so any Linux use is purely
hobby time.

[Melzzzzz]

On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:

> case. Many seem to use Windows for their work so any Linux use is purely
> hobby time.

Does that matter? Here in Serbia kid install Windows to play games. Then
kid finds out about Office. Then kid starts using Access and Excel.
That's the story of Serbia... look ministry of internal affairs has
`api` for reading personal id cards written in VS verbatim. They use
Win32 API typedefs verbatim from Visual Studio, even that does not have
to do anything with GUI ;)
Sad state of IT in government controlled institutions of Serbia...

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 9:36 AM, in article oijfr3$6p7$5...@deskrabbit.motzarella.org,

"Desk Rabbit" <m...@example.com> wrote:

> On 23/06/2017 14:52, chrisv wrote:
>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>
>>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>>> case.
>>
>> He wasn't seriously suggesting that WinDOS users typically need to
>> "fiddle" with the Registry, Dunce.
>
> Are you the operator, got your hand up his arse and operating him from
> there?
>
>>
>>> I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>>> the registry you might well have been right
>>
>> Similar to Linux-haters' claims that GNU/Linux requires the use of the
>> command line.
>
> Which is of course complete nonsense and hasn't been mentioned here at all.

When is noted is that when tasks are mentioned the "advocates" often use the
command line. Which is fine. No issue with that at all and in fact I learn
things from them.

But let us not pretend general users would do it that way.

>>> but these days, it's pure unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>>
>> No more so that your "they just fiddle with the OS" claim, Dunce.
>
> Well the impression from the posts in here is that is very much the
> case. Many seem to use Windows for their work so any Linux use is purely
> hobby time.

--
Personal attacks from those who troll show their own insecurity. They cannot
use reason to show the message to be wrong so they try to feel somehow
superior by attacking the messenger.

They cling to their attacks and ignore the message time and time again.

<https://youtu.be/H4NW-Cqh308>

[Desk Rabbit]

Exactly, all well documented places but rarely if ever used in my
experience. If I could be arsed I'd go searching for malware that
launches from driver or services entries in the registry but I think I'd
be wasting my time.

>
>>
>> Your nonsense is based on complete ignorance.
>
> Well, I don't think you know all places in registry that executable will be run...

I think I do and nearly 1000 Windows workstations being monitored with
zero infections and outbreaks tells me I do.

[Desk Rabbit]

But if you want it to start at run time, you've got very few choices. If
you want it to appear in add/remove programs there's again very little
choice but it will all be in the registry not scattered around a file
system.

[chrisv]

Dunce Rabbit wrote:

> chrisv wrote:
>>
>> He wasn't seriously suggesting that WinDOS users typically need to
>> "fiddle" with the Registry, Dunce.
>
>Are you the operator, got your hand up his arse and operating him from
>there?

Are you a troll, "interpreting" an advocate's statement in the most
ridiculous, unreasonable way possible, so that you can attack?

>> Similar to Linux-haters' claims that GNU/Linux requires the use of the
>> command line.
>
>Which is of course complete nonsense and hasn't been mentioned here at all.

Wrong again.

>> No more so that your "they just fiddle with the OS" claim, Dunce.
>
>Well the impression from the posts in here is that is very much the
>case. Many seem to use Windows for their work so any Linux use is purely
>hobby time.

The impression of your post is that you are very much lying, Dunce.
The truth is that many use both OS's, to get work done.

--
"Which is more important to you: freedom for people or freedom for
code?" - some thing, attacking the GPL

[Melzzzzz]

Are you sure?

>
>>
>>>
>>> Your nonsense is based on complete ignorance.
>>
>> Well, I don't think you know all places in registry that executable will be run...
>
> I think I do and nearly 1000 Windows workstations being monitored with
> zero infections and outbreaks tells me I do.

Are you sure?

[Desk Rabbit]

Nope, my home automation (Openhab) puts them in a subdirectory of /opt
completely at odds with the documentation becasue the guy that bundled
the system (Openhabian) decided to do so. Took me a while to find the
files ;-)

> Everything you install can compromise your system via registry on
> Windows.
>

Except any commercial application, so that's a few thousand apps right
there.

And if the registry is as bad as people say, why have I got close to
1000 workstations humming along and never having an issue. Then factor
in all the other MSPs and none of us are moaning about registry issues
because it's only an issue in the minds of radicalised Linux morons
still living in the past.

[Melzzzzz]

Linux has package manager and it's database for that task. No need for registry.

[Melzzzzz]

Well, on my system,
I just type: pacman -Ql package-name.
/opt is known place for custom packages, but config files are usually in
/etc.

>
>> Everything you install can compromise your system via registry on
>> Windows.
>>
>
> Except any commercial application, so that's a few thousand apps right
> there.
>
> And if the registry is as bad as people say, why have I got close to
> 1000 workstations humming along and never having an issue. Then factor
> in all the other MSPs and none of us are moaning about registry issues
> because it's only an issue in the minds of radicalised Linux morons
> still living in the past.

What are those workstations? Desktops? If controlled environment there
is less danger, but in practice we see whole institutions compromised...

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:

Not so. Linux is the infrastructure for a great many. Look at Azure
alone. More than a third of everything on Azure is Linux. Look at
Amazon. It is running Linux instances. Every KVM I am using is Linux.
Many desktop users simply use one machine and one OS. Many Linux users
use many Linux instances simultaneously. It's not hobby time. Perhaps
that's just your way of dealing with the expansion of Linux that has you
so scared.

Don't concern yourself with what we're doing. Worry about yourself.

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 9:51 AM, in article o6hqkc1v1o8v043b2...@4ax.com,

"chrisv" <chr...@nospam.invalid> wrote:

> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>
>> chrisv wrote:
>>>
>>> He wasn't seriously suggesting that WinDOS users typically need to
>>> "fiddle" with the Registry, Dunce.
>>
>> Are you the operator, got your hand up his arse and operating him from
>> there?
>
> Are you a troll, "interpreting" an advocate's statement in the most
> ridiculous, unreasonable way possible, so that you can attack?
>
>>> Similar to Linux-haters' claims that GNU/Linux requires the use of the
>>> command line.
>>
>> Which is of course complete nonsense and hasn't been mentioned here at all.
>
> Wrong again.
>
>>> No more so that your "they just fiddle with the OS" claim, Dunce.
>>
>> Well the impression from the posts in here is that is very much the
>> case. Many seem to use Windows for their work so any Linux use is purely
>> hobby time.
>
> The impression of your post is that you are very much lying, Dunce.
> The truth is that many use both OS's, to get work done.

Do you deny you use mostly Windows at work?

[RonB]

On 2017-06-23, Peter Köhlmann <peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:

> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>>
>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the

>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure

>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>

> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
> install the application again.

> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
> idiots

Just do a Google search for Registry Cleaners. "About 3,980,000 results (0.57
seconds)" -- but there's "no problems." There's a whole thriving industry
selling products to Windows' users who are trying to fix their Registry.

> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
> or newly installing a application

So much easier and more straightforward than the Malware Magnet OS's
cluster-"kludge" Registry.

--
Zero Tolerance for iCultists and WinTrolls

[RonB]

On 2017-06-23, William Poaster <w...@dev.null> wrote:
>
> Windows Registry is also a good place to hide malware.
> It's hard to remove malware in the Windows System Registry, because
> it's not easy to find where its been hidden.

Yep, anti-malware software spends a LOT of time scanning the Registry for
malware -- unfortunately it doesn't always clean it out. The Windows
Registry is one of the worst parts of the Malware Magnet OS -- and Desk
Rabbit is trying to tout it as a "feature?"

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 10:05 AM, in article oijhpl$ds0$1...@dont-email.me, "RonB"

<ronb02...@gmail.com> wrote:

> On 2017-06-23, Peter Köhlmann <peter-k...@t-online.de> wrote:
>> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>>>
>>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
>> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
>> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
>> install the application again.
>> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
>> idiots
>
> Just do a Google search for Registry Cleaners. "About 3,980,000 results (0.57
> seconds)" -- but there's "no problems." There's a whole thriving industry
> selling products to Windows' users who are trying to fix their Registry.

Then do a search for desktop Linux usage share. Oh. Not even 2%

Seems there is a whole industry AVOIDING desktop Linux because it does not
compete well.

...

[Marek Novotny]

Well, he's right you know. It is a feature for malware writers!

[Silver Slimer]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:24:24 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>
wrote:

Some malware actually leaves keys in the registry which bring the
malware back if it is removed by conventional means. I know this
because I had to remove such garbage from a dumb co-worker's computer.

--
Silver Slimer
EFF & OpenMedia member,
TheRebel.media & Infowars supporter

[Silver Slimer]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:27:26 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>
wrote:

>On 23/06/2017 13:25, Peter Köhlmann wrote:
>> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>>
>>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>
>>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>>
>>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>>> change that.
>>>>
>>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>>>
>>>
>>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>>
>> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
>> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
>> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
>> install the application again.
>
>Bigger applications don't install more entries, where did you get that
>nonsense from?
>
>And just like a left over config file in Linux, if nothing reads from
>that area it does nothing.

I do agree with his assessment that it can lead to strange errors.
Many times, when reinstalling an application, the previous
installation left things in the registry (or in the Users/AppData
directory) which prevented the software from functioning as it should.

>> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been
implemented by
>> idiots
>
>Which have successfully out performed the Linux "geniuses" as a business
>desktop. ROFL!

ROFL.

>>
>> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
>> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
>> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
>> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
>> or newly installing a application
>>
>
>And they can be spread anywhere and everywhere.

While I think the config system in Linux is better, the dependency
system is many times worse.

[Silver Slimer]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 17:32:23 +0100, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com>
wrote:

Very true.

>>
>> It's easy enough to test. Simply install a program you have never installed
>> before and then remove it. Run something like CcCleaner and scan the
>> registry and it's almost certain you will find references to the program
>> you removed.
>>
>> The question is whether or not they will cause problems and the answer is,
>> "it depends". My question is if the program installed stuff in the registry
>> why isn't it smart enough to remove all of it?
>
>Indeed, fault of the programmer, not the registry.
>
>>
>>
>>>> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
>>>> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
>>>> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
>>>> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
>>>> or newly installing a application
>>>
>>> And you can edit them with your favorite editor, and put them under source
>>> control as well. And, unlike applications that scatter configuration all
>>> over the Registry, the configuration is mostly in one place, easy to find.
>>>
>>> Yup. Give me text-based configuration any day.
>>
>> I prefer text files myself but to be honest I haven't had to touch the
>> registry much at all. With modern versions of Windows, at least for me, it
>> just works.
>>
>
>Indeed it does but these clowns are living in the past.

Admittedly, my registry cleaner is mostly useless but I still use it
to make myself feel better. Windows doesn't need to be cleaned up as
much as it used to and frankly, not even as much as a typical Linux
installation with its dependency nightmares.

[RonB]

Sometimes it's hard to know where the Windows leaves off and the malware
starts.

[William Poaster]

On 23/6/2017 17:33 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Melzzzzz posted:

"Your nonsense is based on complete ignorance."

> You have to know that config files does not interfere with the system.
> They are not spread all over the place, rather they are under /etc/ and
> in user home dir.

Correct.

> Everything you install can compromise your system via registry on
> Windows.



--

The troll is but a walking shadow, a poor player that struts
and frets his hour upon the stage and then is heard no more:
his is a tale told by an idiot, full of sound and fury, signifying nothing.
(With acknowledgement to W.S.)

[William Poaster]

On 23/6/2017 17:29 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Melzzzzz posted:

> On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:

>> On 23/06/2017 14:29, William Poaster wrote:
>>> On 23/6/2017 13:25 in comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Köhlmann posted:
>>>

>>>> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>>>>
>>>>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>>>>> change that.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>
>>>>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>>>>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>>>>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>>>>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>>>>
>>>> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
>>>> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
>>>> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
>>>> install the application again.

>>>> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
>>>> idiots
>>>

>>> Windows Registry is also a good place to hide malware.
>>> It's hard to remove malware in the Windows System Registry, because
>>> it's not easy to find where its been hidden.
>>

>> Utter nonsense. Executables do not live in the registry and if you want
>> your malware to run there's a very limited number of places you can put
>> a key that will make the executable run.
>

> Are you sure? Drivers, services, start up programs?

DimRabbit doesn't know his own Windows system:-

https://www.tomsguide.com/us/undetectable-registry-malware,news-19265.html

http://siliconangle.tv/sneaky-virus-poweliks-lives-in-the-registry-good-luck-finding-it/

>> Your nonsense is based on complete ignorance.
>

> Well, I don't think you know all places in registry that executable will be run...

Malware doesn't necessarily need an executable to run. DimRabbit must
never have heard of Windows Registry Attacks.
http://www.darkreading.com/partner-perspectives/intel/detecting-the-undetectable-windows-registry-attacks/a/d-id/1323571

Now who's talking out of complete ignorance.

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-23, RonB <ronb02...@gmail.com> wrote:
> On 2017-06-23, Marek Novotny <marek....@marspolar.com> wrote:
>> On 2017-06-23, RonB <ronb02...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>> On 2017-06-23, William Poaster <w...@dev.null> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> Windows Registry is also a good place to hide malware.
>>>> It's hard to remove malware in the Windows System Registry, because
>>>> it's not easy to find where its been hidden.
>>>
>>> Yep, anti-malware software spends a LOT of time scanning the Registry for
>>> malware -- unfortunately it doesn't always clean it out. The Windows
>>> Registry is one of the worst parts of the Malware Magnet OS -- and Desk
>>> Rabbit is trying to tout it as a "feature?"
>>
>> Well, he's right you know. It is a feature for malware writers!
>
> Sometimes it's hard to know where the Windows leaves off and the malware
> starts.

Ah, what do you expect for a hobby project from the likes of Gates. Not
much a developer. :)

[DFS]

On 6/23/2017 6:38 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2017-06-23, RonB <ronb02...@gmail.com> wrote:
>>>> On 2017-06-23, William Poaster <w...@dev.null> wrote:

3 GuhNoo idiots humping each others' legs all at once. That's nasty.

>> Sometimes it's hard to know where the Windows leaves off and the malware
>> starts.
>
> Ah, what do you expect for a hobby project from the likes of Gates. Not
> much a developer. :)

Read this book to get a realistic portrayal of Gates' history and abilities.

https://www.amazon.com/Hard-Drive-Making-Microsoft-Empire/dp/0471568864

He makes the reclusive Torvalds and the repulsive Stallman look like
dweeb-freaks among men.


<quote>
I sit in my basement all day long and actually dont meet anybody at
all, but what I do is essentially communicate and it is very social:
reading email from people, answering them, telling them that they're
being difficult.
</quote>
http://linux-foundation.org/weblogs/openvoices/linus-torvalds-part-i/


By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
company in history. pwned.

[DFS]

On 6/23/2017 4:29 AM, Melzzzzz wrote:
> On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:

>> On 23/06/2017 05:41, Melzzzzz wrote:
>>> On 2017-06-23, Marti van Lin <ml2...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> DOSEMU is able to route COM-ports via telnet.
>>>
>>> Hm, I haven't seen COM ports while ago...
>>>
>>
>> Quaint aren't they? ;-)
> Heh, back in 1992 I was in terminal emulator bussiness on DOS ;)
> I wrote several, most notable is Unisys T27 emulator ;)


That's good, Melzzzzz!

Glad we have at least 3 actual, good C/C++/assembly programmers on cola
(you Kohlmann and owl)

I'd like to see Kohlmann pitch in on the C 'challenges' but he's too
busy writing MS Office macros that are 6x slower than LO macros.

Feeb's a huge pretender who gets lost after 20 lines of code.

Bloaty seems to know C but doesn't post much.

Ahlstrom is a QA and tester, and refuses to submit ANY code. He made
some lame excuse about 'I write too much code at work' blah blah



ps how's your webserver project coming?

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 2:42 PM, in article 4p2rkcloocg6s8e4r...@4ax.com,

A registry key can point to a file to be opened... as can a text file used
for launching start up programs.

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-23, Melzzzzz <Melz...@zzzzz.com> wrote:
> On 2017-06-23, Desk Rabbit <m...@example.com> wrote:
>> On 23/06/2017 16:53, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>> On 2017-06-23, Chris Ahlstrom <OFee...@teleworm.us> wrote:

>>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

>>>>
>>>>> Desk Rabbit wrote:
>>>>>
>>>>>> On 22/06/2017 23:35, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
>>>>>>> chrisv wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> Dunce Rabbit wrote:
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>>> These guys don't get much work done, they just fiddle with the OS
>>>>>>>>
>>>>>>>> They get just as much "work done" with their OS as WinDOS users do,
>>>>>>>> Dunce. The fact that some of them also like to "tinker" doesn't
>>>>>>>> change that.
>>>>>>>
>>>>>>> Siwwy Wabbit needs to fiddle with his Registry.
>>>>>>
>>>>>> You'd like to believe that but unfortunately that's very much not the
>>>>>> case. I know you guys like to live in the past and in the early days of
>>>>>> the registry you might well have been right but these days, it's pure
>>>>>> unadulterated, utter and complete nonsense.
>>>>>
>>>>> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
>>>>> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
>>>>> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
>>>>> install the application again.
>>>>> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
>>>>> idiots
>>>>

>>>> I had to "fiddle with the Registry" to get Acrobat Reader to find the Word
>>>> executable, just last week.
>>>>
>>>> Not long ago, my Windows 7 VM was horribly slow to use. I installed
>>>> a "big business" app that I no longer needed, and a few other apps
>>>> that I no longer ran. After the next reboot, the VM was amazingly faster.
>>>> I blame the Registry... none of these apps were services.
>>>>

>>>>> The linux config files may look "old-fashioned" compared to the registry,
>>>>> but they have lots of advantages. They are human-readable, they contain
>>>>> explanations what the different entries do, and the package managers keep a
>>>>> user-modified config file by renaming it if it is replaced by version-update
>>>>> or newly installing a application
>>>>

>>>> And you can edit them with your favorite editor, and put them under source
>>>> control as well. And, unlike applications that scatter configuration all
>>>> over the Registry, the configuration is mostly in one place, easy to find.
>>>>
>>>> Yup. Give me text-based configuration any day.
>>>

>>> I'll take a text based config file any as well. Especially since I can
>>> ask RPM where the conf files are. Linux is once again, light years ahead
>>> of Windows. Windows is beaten by a text file. LOL.
>>>
>>
>> How is having to ask where the config is better than always knowing that
>> it's in the registry?

Tell me exactly where ALL config parameters are of a given app. Show
them in one simple to read file. Erase it and restore it. Move it to
another machine. Let's see you make a video of that.

I do it with vim, tmux and slrn all the time and it can be done with
more complex services like BIND, HTTPD and Samba.

[marek@rhel7x ~]$ rpm -qa | grep ssh
openssh-6.6.1p1-35.el7_3.x86_64
libssh2-1.4.3-10.el7_2.1.x86_64
openssh-server-6.6.1p1-35.el7_3.x86_64
openssh-clients-6.6.1p1-35.el7_3.x86_64

[marek@rhel7x ~]$

[marek@rhel7x ~]$ rpm -qc openssh-server
/etc/pam.d/sshd
/etc/ssh/sshd_config
/etc/sysconfig/sshd

See. Simple. Now it's your turn.

> Nope, you don't know where config is in registry. Application can write
> anything it likes, easilly compromising system.

yeah, it can be all over the registry. Fat chance finding it all on some
unknown app. But on Linux, this is simple as shown above.

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
> company in history. pwned.

Nope. Linux is the most successful software in the world. Windows is a
bit player in the grand game only owning the desktop market. And what's
Microsoft doing now? Sticking the Linux environment on every Windows 10
instance that wants it. Selling Linux services on Azure. Joined the
Linux foundation. pwned!

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 6:23 PM, in article
jsydnQWMdqCyItDE...@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny"

<marek....@marspolar.com> wrote:

> On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
>> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
>> company in history. pwned.
>
> Nope. Linux is the most successful software in the world.

Linux is NOT a company.

> Windows is a bit player in the grand game only owning the desktop market.

"Only". As if that is not a pretty amazing thing.

> And what's Microsoft doing now?

Enjoying amazing success.

> Sticking the Linux environment on every Windows 10 instance that wants it.

So?

> Selling Linux services on Azure. Joined the Linux foundation. pwned!

How so? Really... what are you even talking about?

[dfs]

On 06/23/2017 09:23 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
>> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
>> company in history. pwned.
>
> Nope. Linux is the most successful software in the world.

Aren't you supposed to respond to what I wrote, instead of what's in
your wacked-out head?

> Windows is a bit player in the grand game only owning the desktop market.

The ONLY market that matters to you and everyone else in cola.

I notice 'bit player' is your favorite stupid phrase to throw around
lately. Last month you ignorantly claimed Azure was a 'bit player' in
the cloud... but I handed your ass back to you on that one, too.

Windows runs on about 2 billion desktop computers in the world,
generates I don't know how many $billions and jobs for the world.. but
it's a 'bit player'?

And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?

> And what's Microsoft doing now? Sticking the Linux environment on every Windows 10
> instance that wants it. Selling Linux services on Azure. Joined the
> Linux foundation. pwned!

23 years ago desperate Linux users - knowing Linux wasn't nearly fit for
its purpose - created the Wine system so they might have decent Windows
software to run on their hobbyist experiment.

https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_History

Now that's pwnage.

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 7:27 PM, in article oikj0e$il3$1...@dont-email.me, "dfs"

<nos...@dfs.com> wrote:

> On 06/23/2017 09:23 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>>> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
>>> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
>>> company in history. pwned.
>>
>> Nope. Linux is the most successful software in the world.
>
> Aren't you supposed to respond to what I wrote, instead of what's in
> your wacked-out head?

Maybe he really believes Linux is a company.

>> Windows is a bit player in the grand game only owning the desktop market.
>
> The ONLY market that matters to you and everyone else in cola.
>
> I notice 'bit player' is your favorite stupid phrase to throw around
> lately. Last month you ignorantly claimed Azure was a 'bit player' in
> the cloud... but I handed your ass back to you on that one, too.
>
> Windows runs on about 2 billion desktop computers in the world,
> generates I don't know how many $billions and jobs for the world.. but
> it's a 'bit player'?
>
> And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
> which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?

Because he lies to please the herd.

>> And what's Microsoft doing now? Sticking the Linux environment on every
>> Windows 10
>> instance that wants it. Selling Linux services on Azure. Joined the
>> Linux foundation. pwned!
>
> 23 years ago desperate Linux users - knowing Linux wasn't nearly fit for
> its purpose - created the Wine system so they might have decent Windows
> software to run on their hobbyist experiment.
>
> https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_History
>
> Now that's pwnage.

LOL!

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-24, dfs <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
> On 06/23/2017 09:23 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>>> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
>>> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
>>> company in history. pwned.
>>
>> Nope. Linux is the most successful software in the world.
>
> Aren't you supposed to respond to what I wrote, instead of what's in
> your wacked-out head?

You're the one in a Linux group. For ten plus years I might add. Pwned.
Self Nuke. LOL.

>> Windows is a bit player in the grand game only owning the desktop market.
>
> The ONLY market that matters to you and everyone else in cola.

The only market that matters to you. I take a view of the overall
market. I don't exclude anything. In my opinion, a $15 raspberry pi
counts.

> I notice 'bit player' is your favorite stupid phrase to throw around
> lately. Last month you ignorantly claimed Azure was a 'bit player' in
> the cloud... but I handed your ass back to you on that one, too.

Please... First time you handed me anything in this group. I've made a
chump out of you quite often.

> Windows runs on about 2 billion desktop computers in the world,
> generates I don't know how many $billions and jobs for the world.. but
> it's a 'bit player'?

And not a single super computer. Not one. You don't rule the web. You
sure as hell don't rule mobile, which is running into the 2 billion
arena right now and still growing and will continue to grow for the next
decade. Windows, not so much. You're losing more and more ground to
Linux and now even offering Linux services cause how else is Microsoft
going to remain relevant. We both know why Microsoft is not open
sourcing so often. Why Microsoft is offering a Linux environment on
Windows and why Microsoft joined the Linux Foundation. LINUX is the
future. NOTHING you can do or say will change that.

> And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
> which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?

He's not a failed anything. You're in a Linux group talking Linux are
you not??!! HAHAHAHAHA Got you again. Pwned!

Linux is the most deployed software in the word.

>> And what's Microsoft doing now? Sticking the Linux environment on
>> every Windows 10 instance that wants it. Selling Linux services
>> on Azure. Joined the Linux foundation. pwned!
>
> 23 years ago desperate Linux users - knowing Linux wasn't nearly fit for
> its purpose - created the Wine system so they might have decent Windows
> software to run on their hobbyist experiment.
>
> https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_History
>
> Now that's pwnage.

Na. Pwnage is Microsoft coming to Fedora, Canonical and Suse wanting to
stick their environment into the Windows store. Pwnage is Microsoft
using Linux for their switched fabric in Azure, and NOT Windows. Pwnage
is Microsoft now resorting to selling Linux services. I guess if you
can't beat them, you join them, right? Oh and Microsoft is now a
platinum Linux Foundation member. Pwned! So yeah, they joined up like
every other smart company.

And look at you. Ten plus years in a Linux group. We Linux users are
living rent-free in your mind. Pwned! HA HA HA

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 9:17 PM, in article
brSdnZRrSpdeetDE...@giganews.com, "Marek Novotny"

<marek....@marspolar.com> wrote:

> On 2017-06-24, dfs <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>> On 06/23/2017 09:23 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>>> On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>>>> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
>>>> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
>>>> company in history. pwned.
>>>
>>> Nope. Linux is the most successful software in the world.
>>
>> Aren't you supposed to respond to what I wrote, instead of what's in
>> your wacked-out head?
>
> You're the one in a Linux group.

So are you.

> For ten plus years I might add. Pwned.
> Self Nuke. LOL.

You just called out your own self-claimed self nuke. Odd.

>>> Windows is a bit player in the grand game only owning the desktop market.
>>
>> The ONLY market that matters to you and everyone else in cola.
>
> The only market that matters to you. I take a view of the overall
> market. I don't exclude anything. In my opinion, a $15 raspberry pi
> counts.

How many of your videos are about super computers or routers? Oh. I believe
ALL of them are about the desktop... even if not common desktop usage.

>> I notice 'bit player' is your favorite stupid phrase to throw around
>> lately. Last month you ignorantly claimed Azure was a 'bit player' in
>> the cloud... but I handed your ass back to you on that one, too.
>
> Please... First time you handed me anything in this group. I've made a
> chump out of you quite often.

How so? By insisting others are not as good as you because you can make a
network script? LOL!

>> Windows runs on about 2 billion desktop computers in the world,
>> generates I don't know how many $billions and jobs for the world.. but
>> it's a 'bit player'?
>
> And not a single super computer. Not one.

You have not made a single video showing a super computer. Not one.

> You don't rule the web.

What does this even mean? Do you think YOU rule the web... whatever that
means?

> You sure as hell don't rule mobile, which is running into the 2 billion arena
> right now and still growing and will continue to grow for the next decade.

And YOU do?

> Windows, not so much.

You jump from Windows to him. To you.

All about your ego.

And how many videos have you made showing mobile?

> You're losing more and more ground to Linux and now even offering Linux
> services cause how else is Microsoft going to remain relevant.

How is HE losing ground? You are losing it... confusing DFS with MS. Just
weird.

> We both know why Microsoft is not open sourcing so often.

Even YOU noted they are using open source. Good grief... keep your story
straight!

> Why Microsoft is offering a Linux environment on Windows and why Microsoft
> joined the Linux Foundation.

But YOU just said they were not "open sourcing"... presumably meaning
working with the open source community!

> LINUX is the future. NOTHING you can do or say will change that.

Future of WHAT? The desktop? Maybe... but it will have to compete a LOT
better before that happens.

>> And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
>> which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?
>
> He's not a failed anything. You're in a Linux group talking Linux are
> you not??!! HAHAHAHAHA Got you again. Pwned!

You talk about Windows all the time.

> Linux is the most deployed software in the word.

You claim it is not about the desktop but all of your videos are about the
desktop... no?

>>> And what's Microsoft doing now? Sticking the Linux environment on
>>> every Windows 10 instance that wants it. Selling Linux services
>>> on Azure. Joined the Linux foundation. pwned!
>>
>> 23 years ago desperate Linux users - knowing Linux wasn't nearly fit for
>> its purpose - created the Wine system so they might have decent Windows
>> software to run on their hobbyist experiment.
>>
>> https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_History
>>
>> Now that's pwnage.
>
> Na.

You mean when Linux works to handle Windows programs, and does so poorly, it
is not "pwned" but when MS works to handle Linux programs and does so much
better it is not.

LOL!

What a double standard!

> Pwnage is Microsoft coming to Fedora, Canonical and Suse wanting to
> stick their environment into the Windows store.

How? Why is it bad that people use open source? To me that is a GOOD thing.

> Pwnage is Microsoft using Linux for their switched fabric in Azure, and NOT
> Windows.

How so?

> Pwnage is Microsoft now resorting to selling Linux services.

You think companies "resort" to using Linux. Damn... you are dissing Linux
BIG TIME!

> I guess if you can't beat them, you join them, right?

Beat who? Linux is NOT a company!

> Oh and Microsoft is now a platinum Linux Foundation member. Pwned! So yeah,
> they joined up like every other smart company.

You say it is smart as you say it is a bad thing... make up your mind.

> And look at you. Ten plus years in a Linux group. We Linux users are living
> rent-free in your mind. Pwned! HA HA HA

You are ALSO in the same group. Good grief!

[Snit]

On 6/23/17, 9:30 AM, in article oijfg2$6p7$2...@deskrabbit.motzarella.org,
"Desk Rabbit" <m...@example.com> wrote:

...

>>> Unfortunately, it is not. Just look at the mess left in the registry after
>>> deinstalling some bigger application. Most of the time lots of now useless
>>> entries remain. This can even lead to strange errors if you later decide to
>>> install the application again.
>>> The registry has always been a bad idea, and it has been implemented by
>>> idiots
>>
>> I had to "fiddle with the Registry" to get Acrobat Reader to find the Word
>> executable, just last week.
>

> That's you trying to run ancient software for free. No problem on a new
> machine and probably no problem on an old machine if you had a clue what
> you were trying to do.

>
>>
>> Not long ago, my Windows 7 VM was horribly slow to use. I installed
>> a "big business" app that I no longer needed, and a few other apps
>> that I no longer ran. After the next reboot, the VM was amazingly faster.
>> I blame the Registry... none of these apps were services.
>

> Utter nonsense and fantasy.

I am sure he will post evidence soon... not only of the slowdown but that it
was from the registry.

Heck, the herd attacks me for using Linux in a VM... but he uses Windows
there. Blame the VM.
...

[Melzzzzz]

I am now at most boring part, so it slowed down ;p
I have to force myself to finish it ;p

[Marti van Lin]

Op 23-06-17 om 06:41 schreef Melzzzzz:

> On 2017-06-23, Marti van Lin <ml2...@nospam.invalid> wrote:
>>
>> DOSEMU is able to route COM-ports via telnet.
>
> Hm, I haven't seen COM ports while ago...
>

Me nether, talking about a virtual COM-port which is routed to telnet.

--
|_|0|_| Marti T. van Lin (alias ML2MST)
|_|_|0| http://osg33x.blogspot.com
|0|0|0| Linux Hopper 4.10.0-24-lowlatency #28-Ubuntu SMP PREEMPT x86_64

[Fabrice Lohan]

The difference is the Windows user isn't spending her time tinkering and
configuring applications. With Linux it's a must to know how to do this
things.
BTW, the average user wouldn't last 2 seconds with vim before giving up.

Face it, your "superior" geek skills are becoming as obsolete as text based
newsreaders and email programs like slrn and pine.

[chrisv]

Silver Slimer wrote:

>While I think the config system in Linux is better, the dependency
>system is many times worse.

While a lot of extreme, uncompromising language is used, in here,
anyone who is being completely fair would agree that both systems have
their pros as well as their cons. Both are "OK" products.

In any healthy, competitive market, there's no reason to even bicker
about this stuff - we just let the market work.

--
"(Linux users in the main) also want the source code so they can steal
other peoples hard work." - "True Linux advocate" Hadron Quark

[Fabrice Lohan]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 22:27:10 -0400, dfs wrote:

> On 06/23/2017 09:23 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
>> On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>>> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
>>> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
>>> company in history. pwned.
>>
>> Nope. Linux is the most successful software in the world.
>
> Aren't you supposed to respond to what I wrote, instead of what's in
> your wacked-out head?

I've read a couple of his (her?) posts and the pattern is the same.
Conflate other topics into what is actually being discussed and then go on
the attack and wait for the other empty suits to +1 him.

>> Windows is a bit player in the grand game only owning the desktop market.
>
> The ONLY market that matters to you and everyone else in cola.
>
> I notice 'bit player' is your favorite stupid phrase to throw around
> lately. Last month you ignorantly claimed Azure was a 'bit player' in
> the cloud... but I handed your ass back to you on that one, too.

The only thing I can't figure out about this fool is how he is able to
stuff those little balls of cotton into pill bottles on the assembly line
at his day job while posting to COLA at the same time.

> Windows runs on about 2 billion desktop computers in the world,
> generates I don't know how many $billions and jobs for the world.. but
> it's a 'bit player'?

I think he's counting refrigerators and microwave ovens running Linux.
As if the consumer gives a hoot.

> And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
> which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?

Because facts and truth bother these drones.

>
>
>> And what's Microsoft doing now? Sticking the Linux environment on every Windows 10
>> instance that wants it. Selling Linux services on Azure. Joined the
>> Linux foundation. pwned!
>
> 23 years ago desperate Linux users - knowing Linux wasn't nearly fit for
> its purpose - created the Wine system so they might have decent Windows
> software to run on their hobbyist experiment.
>
> https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_History
>
> Now that's pwnage.

Microsoft is in the business of making money. And what better way to make
money than to have programmers give you the programs for free so you can
incorporate them into your applications and sell them !

It's the perfect business model.
I'm just surprised it took Microsoft all this time to figure this out.

[Fabrice Lohan]

Before the first idiot comes along to tell me slrn isn't an email program,
the line should read:

.....as text based newsreaders / email programs like slrn/pine are.

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-24, Fabrice Lohan <fabrice1...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
> On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 20:11:48 -0500, Marek Novotny wrote:

// snip

>> Tell me exactly where ALL config parameters are of a given app. Show
>> them in one simple to read file. Erase it and restore it. Move it to
>> another machine. Let's see you make a video of that.
>>
>> I do it with vim, tmux and slrn all the time and it can be done with
>> more complex services like BIND, HTTPD and Samba.
>>
>> [marek@rhel7x ~]$ rpm -qa | grep ssh
>> openssh-6.6.1p1-35.el7_3.x86_64
>> libssh2-1.4.3-10.el7_2.1.x86_64
>> openssh-server-6.6.1p1-35.el7_3.x86_64
>> openssh-clients-6.6.1p1-35.el7_3.x86_64
>>
>> [marek@rhel7x ~]$
>>
>> [marek@rhel7x ~]$ rpm -qc openssh-server
>> /etc/pam.d/sshd
>> /etc/ssh/sshd_config
>> /etc/sysconfig/sshd
>>
>> See. Simple. Now it's your turn.
>>
>>> Nope, you don't know where config is in registry. Application can write
>>> anything it likes, easilly compromising system.
>>
>> yeah, it can be all over the registry. Fat chance finding it all on some
>> unknown app. But on Linux, this is simple as shown above.
>
> The difference is the Windows user isn't spending her time tinkering and
> configuring applications. With Linux it's a must to know how to do this
> things.

Mac users tinker else they will not get the most out of their software.
Everyone in this group is not the average user. Don't lecture me about
the average user as that scapegoat has no place here at all.

You got a gamer who no doubt tinkers to get the best performance for his
games. He likely has to stay on top of his nVidia drivers, no the
process to roll them back and possibly deal with config issues on a per
game basis. And that's just a gamer.

You got another mac user hell bent on showing this Linux group all the
little things that can be done with AppleScript, tilting images, moving
text and all manner of stupid tinkering.

Average users are iPad users. Average users are the ones I have at the
office that get lost if I move an icon. They know ZERO.

The users here are more capable and that is whom this discussion is
centered around. Now, getting back to the issue. Show me how you find
all the configs left by any given app. Don't run away into the average
user every time you lose an argument as to why Linux kicks ass all over
Windows. Unless of course you have no real answer and you're simply
beaten.

> BTW, the average user wouldn't last 2 seconds with vim before giving up.

I guess you're average then.

> Face it, your "superior" geek skills are becoming as obsolete as text based
> newsreaders and email programs like slrn and pine.

Pine is old school. I use Mutt. And slrn is the best newsreader that
ever was. You cling to garbage because a console scares the shit out of
you. What are you going to do when your GUI fails and nothing but a
command prompt is blinking on the screen and your boss asks how long
until you're back up? Better call someone with real skills.

[Silver Slimer]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 08:17:14 -0500, chrisv <chr...@nospam.invalid>
wrote:

>Silver Slimer wrote:
>
>>While I think the config system in Linux is better, the dependency
>>system is many times worse.
>
>While a lot of extreme, uncompromising language is used, in here,
>anyone who is being completely fair would agree that both systems have
>their pros as well as their cons. Both are "OK" products.
>
>In any healthy, competitive market, there's no reason to even bicker
>about this stuff - we just let the market work.

Agreed. Windows' strengths mostly lay in the user experience.
Generally, in my experience anyway, it is more stable in regular use
and you don't have to worry about the program no longer working as a
result of a program or operating system update. In _my_ experience
(let's be clear), it hasn't happened.

For security and for configuration though, I'd say that Linux is
better. However, it's subjective as some people somehow feel a lot
more comfortable in Windows.

The biggest weakness though, for Windows anyway, is the way it handles
drivers. Yes, it's the operating system in which you'll be able to
handle your hardware to the fullest of its potential. However, it's
also the operating system in which the most recent driver sometimes
decides to break functionality. For instance, my trackpad is unusable
at the moment; the latest driver decided that it would stop
recognizing touches no matter what the sensitivity settings are. I
HAVE to use a mouse as a work-around. In Linux, the free driver always
works right even though its functionality is clearly a lot more
limited. Still, I'd rather limited but functional over simply
non-functional.

In Linux, the biggest weakness are the coders themselves. Sure, the
kernel is mostly perfect (IMO) but anything running atop it is at the
mercy of the competence of the coders. We can argue that it's the same
on both platforms, however there is no real incentive for the Linux
coders to improve their product in a _timely_ manner as there is in
Windows. For a paid product in Windows, if something doesn't work, the
coder knows that his livelihood might be at stake. While Linux coders
are generally good at fixing their issues, you'll find a few who
really don't care what bugs are present and will take their sweet time
to fix them no matter how perssing the matter might be for the user.

However, this is my _impression_ on the matter for those who have
already started replying "liar" without reading the whole post.

[Silver Slimer]

On Fri, 23 Jun 2017 22:55:06 +0100, William Poaster <w...@dev.null>
wrote:

I don't recall if that was the one I came across but I dealt with
something similar. Once again, I'm proven right.

>>> Your nonsense is based on complete ignorance.
>>
>> Well, I don't think you know all places in registry that executable will be run...
>
>Malware doesn't necessarily need an executable to run. DimRabbit must
>never have heard of Windows Registry Attacks.
>http://www.darkreading.com/partner-perspectives/intel/detecting-the-undetectable-windows-registry-attacks/a/d-id/1323571
>
>Now who's talking out of complete ignorance.

Technically, nobody here is ignorant. The end result is that the
malware residing in the registry ends up making reference to an
executable. The anti-malware system will always get rid of the
unwanted executable, but the registry will ensure that it returns no
matter how insistent the anti-malware software is. The only way to
solve the problem is to remove all references to the executable from
within the registry. At least that's what I did to fix my co-worker's
issue.

[Silver Slimer]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 09:13:35 -0400, Fabrice Lohan

Well said. With Linux, to be fair, you'll end up learning how the
system works a lot faster and will therefore gain a lot of technical
knowledge that you might never have accumulated using Windows.
However, it comes as a result of you fixing problems that a typical
Windows user is not likely to have.

Any new user who is motivated to really learn how the system works
might as well go ahead and use Arch. In just one week, a motivated
learned would learn more there than in any other operating system. Of
course, motivation is the key word here; most people nowadays just
want to use their system and aren't willing learners like the computer
users of the 80s and early 90s were.

Hell, if I had received a Mac as my first computer instead of a PS/1,
chances are that I would have become a "just works" advocate as well
and would immediately close the door to something which doesn't always
work right like Linux.

[Fabrice Lohan]

Baloney.

> Everyone in this group is not the average user.

Exactly my point.
It's a bunch of out of touch with reality geeks.
Mostly on the Linux side.

> Don't lecture me about
> the average user as that scapegoat has no place here at all.

I make it a point to never proselytize, especially to a religious zealot.

> You got a gamer who no doubt tinkers to get the best performance for his
> games.

True.

> He likely has to stay on top of his nVidia drivers, no the
> process to roll them back and possibly deal with config issues on a per
> game basis. And that's just a gamer.

That's a hardcore gamer.

> You got another mac user hell bent on showing this Linux group all the
> little things that can be done with AppleScript, tilting images, moving
> text and all manner of stupid tinkering.

Not a typical user, like you say this group isn't comprised of typical
users.

> Average users are iPad users. Average users are the ones I have at the
> office that get lost if I move an icon. They know ZERO.

That's your market whether you want to believe it or not.
It's one reason why Linux fails as a desktop.

The average driver has no clue how to check the air pressure in the tires
on their car either which is why TPS are now a requirement for new cars.

> The users here are more capable and that is whom this discussion is
> centered around.

Of course.
But the users here don't represent the market as a whole.
Not even close.

One time long ago around 1980 or so it was a requirment to know at least
the basics of how a computer operated in order to use it.
These days?
Not so much, if at all.

> Now, getting back to the issue. Show me how you find
> all the configs left by any given app. Don't run away into the average
> user every time you lose an argument as to why Linux kicks ass all over
> Windows. Unless of course you have no real answer and you're simply
> beaten.

Why would I want to?
If I want to change the layout of 40tude I click on a menu item and select
from the choices. Close the menu and bingo the configuration has been
changed.

As an example with slrn you NEED to know where the .slrnrc file lives, you
need to know it's a hidden file and your file manager needs to be
configured to show hidden files and then you need to wade through a bunch
of cryptic text and hope you choose the right option and get ever ., ~ and
other oddball symbol correctly formatted. Then you get to restart slrn to
see if your change worked. If not, rinse and repeat.

See the difference?
I doubt you do.


Way to miss the point.

You Linux advocates enjoy inventing solutions to problems that don't exist.

>
>> BTW, the average user wouldn't last 2 seconds with vim before giving up.
>
> I guess you're average then.
>
>> Face it, your "superior" geek skills are becoming as obsolete as text based
>> newsreaders and email programs like slrn and pine.
>
> Pine is old school. I use Mutt. And slrn is the best newsreader that
> ever was. You cling to garbage because a console scares the shit out of
> you. What are you going to do when your GUI fails and nothing but a
> command prompt is blinking on the screen and your boss asks how long
> until you're back up? Better call someone with real skills.

Laughable at best.
You need to leave the basement once in a while and catch some sunlight.

[Silver Slimer]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 08:40:41 -0500, Marek Novotny

This is the extent of my tinkering:

- Open Steam
- Oh, Nvidia wants to install a new driver... why not?
- Download driver and install cleanly
- Load game, realize it works perfectly but you'd rather have 60fps
than 40fps
- Change the graphics settings to medium-high from medium
- Load game again

And that's only IF the game isn't 60fps to begin with. Meanwhile, it's
still very much playable at that fps.

>You got another mac user hell bent on showing this Linux group all the
>little things that can be done with AppleScript, tilting images, moving
>text and all manner of stupid tinkering.
>
>Average users are iPad users. Average users are the ones I have at the
>office that get lost if I move an icon. They know ZERO.
>
>The users here are more capable and that is whom this discussion is
>centered around. Now, getting back to the issue. Show me how you find
>all the configs left by any given app. Don't run away into the average
>user every time you lose an argument as to why Linux kicks ass all over
>Windows. Unless of course you have no real answer and you're simply
>beaten.

Except that he's telling the truth. None of what any of us do REQUIRES
us to go into config file at all. We do it IF we want to whereas you
do it because you have no choice.

>> BTW, the average user wouldn't last 2 seconds with vim before giving up.
>
>I guess you're average then.
>
>> Face it, your "superior" geek skills are becoming as obsolete as text based
>> newsreaders and email programs like slrn and pine.
>
>Pine is old school. I use Mutt. And slrn is the best newsreader that
>ever was. You cling to garbage because a console scares the shit out of
>you. What are you going to do when your GUI fails and nothing but a
>command prompt is blinking on the screen and your boss asks how long
>until you're back up? Better call someone with real skills.

LONG LIVE THE 1970S!

[Marek Novotny]

On 2017-06-24, Fabrice Lohan <fabrice1...@linuxmail.org> wrote:

> The only thing I can't figure out about this fool is how he is able to
> stuff those little balls of cotton into pill bottles on the assembly line
> at his day job while posting to COLA at the same time.

Right, because having bash skills is such a negative for this job
market. Being comfortable in Vim and knowing how to locate any config
file in Linux is such a negative, eh? Employers want what exactly
according you? Unskilled workers? LOL. Nice self-nuke moron.

>> Windows runs on about 2 billion desktop computers in the world,
>> generates I don't know how many $billions and jobs for the world.. but
>> it's a 'bit player'?
>
> I think he's counting refrigerators and microwave ovens running Linux.
> As if the consumer gives a hoot.

Nope. Android alone is now more than 2 billion "active" monthly devices.
And since mobile is out pacing the PC easily, and since most mobile is
Android, what does that say? Oh don't run and lie. You're just beaten.
You two idiots opened your mouths and got pwned. Deal with it.

>> And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
>> which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?
>
> Because facts and truth bother these drones.

Unbelievable. Linux is the most successful software in the world. It
runs pretty much everything. Windows... It's runs those desktops with
those unskilled morons you talked about. Not a single super top 500
super computer in the world runs on windows. Not one.

>>> And what's Microsoft doing now? Sticking the Linux environment on
>>> every Windows 10 instance that wants it. Selling Linux services
>>> on Azure. Joined the Linux foundation. pwned!
>>
>> 23 years ago desperate Linux users - knowing Linux wasn't nearly fit for
>> its purpose - created the Wine system so they might have decent Windows
>> software to run on their hobbyist experiment.
>>
>> https://wiki.winehq.org/Wine_History
>>
>> Now that's pwnage.
>
> Microsoft is in the business of making money. And what better way to make
> money than to have programmers give you the programs for free so you can
> incorporate them into your applications and sell them !

The money being made is for the services provides by Azure. What Linux
software do you think they are selling you? How much are they selling it
for? Got a link?

> It's the perfect business model.

Delusions aren't business models.

> I'm just surprised it took Microsoft all this time to figure this out.

Ya... loony toony here.

[Marek Novotny]

See, Witness here folks, the beaten Windows user. He has NO answer at
all. Nothing.

> If I want to change the layout of 40tude I click on a menu item and select
> from the choices. Close the menu and bingo the configuration has been
> changed.

Now write a script that takes that configuration and backs it up and
restores it to any other PC you have so you don't have to configure it
again and again.

Where is the config?

Tell me how to find any config on any given app on Windows.

> As an example with slrn you NEED to know where the .slrnrc file lives, you
> need to know it's a hidden file and your file manager needs to be
> configured to show hidden files and then you need to wade through a bunch
> of cryptic text and hope you choose the right option and get ever ., ~ and
> other oddball symbol correctly formatted. Then you get to restart slrn to
> see if your change worked. If not, rinse and repeat.

Finding it is easy. I didn't have to google it or anything. It follows
logic. And I did an entire video on slrn showing what the default config
looks like and how to edit it. All you have to is change the default
values to your own values. OMG how stupid are you?

> See the difference?

vim .slrnrc
Oh the horror!!!

> I doubt you do.
>
> Way to miss the point.

I grok your stupid point. It's just stupid is all.

> You Linux advocates enjoy inventing solutions to problems that don't exist.

Oh really. I can redeploy Samba by coping config files. Sounds good to
me. Can you backup backup a Windows Active Directory and restore it
simply by copying a few text files and sticking them on a thumb drive?

>>> BTW, the average user wouldn't last 2 seconds with vim before giving up.
>>
>> I guess you're average then.
>>
>>> Face it, your "superior" geek skills are becoming as obsolete as text based
>>> newsreaders and email programs like slrn and pine.
>>
>> Pine is old school. I use Mutt. And slrn is the best newsreader that
>> ever was. You cling to garbage because a console scares the shit out of
>> you. What are you going to do when your GUI fails and nothing but a
>> command prompt is blinking on the screen and your boss asks how long
>> until you're back up? Better call someone with real skills.
>
> Laughable at best.

Nope, that's reality. Go look for a new job and see if any of them ask
for being average.

See if knowing bash, vi/vim and knowing the details on how to find and
fix config files is not a skill employers are looking for. BASH is
always a plus. Being able to automate is always a plus. When you get
called in and they start asking you how you would solve hypothetical
problem a and b what are you going to say? Use the pull down menu and
look for something that says click here to fix? Yeah, sure dude.

> You need to leave the basement once in a while and catch some sunlight.

You need to be honest with yourself. You're a loser.

[Marek Novotny]

So I gave you too much credit... Noted.

>>You got another mac user hell bent on showing this Linux group all the
>>little things that can be done with AppleScript, tilting images, moving
>>text and all manner of stupid tinkering.
>>
>>Average users are iPad users. Average users are the ones I have at the
>>office that get lost if I move an icon. They know ZERO.
>>
>>The users here are more capable and that is whom this discussion is
>>centered around. Now, getting back to the issue. Show me how you find
>>all the configs left by any given app. Don't run away into the average
>>user every time you lose an argument as to why Linux kicks ass all over
>>Windows. Unless of course you have no real answer and you're simply
>>beaten.
>
> Except that he's telling the truth. None of what any of us do REQUIRES
> us to go into config file at all. We do it IF we want to whereas you
> do it because you have no choice.

I could use Thunderbird and it is 100% GUI and I wouldn't need to know
jack-shit about a config file.

>>> BTW, the average user wouldn't last 2 seconds with vim before giving up.
>>
>>I guess you're average then.
>>
>>> Face it, your "superior" geek skills are becoming as obsolete as text based
>>> newsreaders and email programs like slrn and pine.
>>
>>Pine is old school. I use Mutt. And slrn is the best newsreader that
>>ever was. You cling to garbage because a console scares the shit out of
>>you. What are you going to do when your GUI fails and nothing but a
>>command prompt is blinking on the screen and your boss asks how long
>>until you're back up? Better call someone with real skills.
>
> LONG LIVE THE 1970S!

Long live the present. Linux is what most of the world runs on. You're
just living in fantasy land is all.

[chrisv]

Marek Novotny wrote:

>> some dumb fsck wrote:
>>>
>>> And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
>>> which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?

OMG Linus a "failed tech leader", says the shameless jackass.

> Unbelievable. Linux is the most successful software in the world.

Dumfsck emits more stupid than anyone else in here, I think.

--
"Most people dont want a choice. Thats why people ship windows." -

[DFS]

On 6/23/2017 9:23 PM, Marek Novotny wrote:
> On 2017-06-23, DFS <nos...@dfs.com> wrote:
>> By comparison, Bill Gates worked all day and night from 14 to
>> retirement, and lead people and built the most successful software
>> company in history. pwned.
>
> Nope.

Yes. The reclusive Torvalds works alone from his basement giving away a
clone of a Unix clone. He's just extremely lucky that people like to
write computer code, and he chose a good OS clone to clone, and a
popular chip to write to.

> Linux is the most successful software in the world.

Of course not.

Torvalds goal was never and will never be achieved: "I have never, ever
cared about really anything but the Linux desktop."

3 years ago Linux kernel developer Greg Kroah-Hartman asked Torvalds
where he thinks Linux should go next. Torvalds replied "I still want the
desktop."

Linux desktop: 1%. FAIL.


Title of "The Most Successful Software In The World" by far goes to
Microsoft Windows. In most measures, too: goal achieved, unit sales,
dollar sales, developer population, tech press, popular recognition, OEM
distribution, application base.

2nd place would probably go to MS Office for similar reasons: it
dominates the markets it was intended for, generates enormous profits,
and has a large ecosystem.

Anything given away doesn't count as a success in my eyes. It's just an
admittance that you're unable to compete.

[Silver Slimer]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 09:17:23 -0500, Marek Novotny
<marek....@marspolar.com> wrote:

>On 2017-06-24, Fabrice Lohan <fabrice1...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>> The only thing I can't figure out about this fool is how he is able to
>> stuff those little balls of cotton into pill bottles on the assembly line
>> at his day job while posting to COLA at the same time.
>
>Right, because having bash skills is such a negative for this job
>market. Being comfortable in Vim and knowing how to locate any config
>file in Linux is such a negative, eh? Employers want what exactly
>according you? Unskilled workers? LOL. Nice self-nuke moron.

If Linux skills were so important, closet homosexual Chris Ahlstrom
wouldn't need to have a Windows job and Geoff Fitton wouldn't need to
use a toothbrush to clean toilets for minimum wage.

>>> Windows runs on about 2 billion desktop computers in the world,
>>> generates I don't know how many $billions and jobs for the world.. but
>>> it's a 'bit player'?
>>
>> I think he's counting refrigerators and microwave ovens running Linux.
>> As if the consumer gives a hoot.
>
>Nope. Android alone is now more than 2 billion "active" monthly devices.
>And since mobile is out pacing the PC easily, and since most mobile is
>Android, what does that say? Oh don't run and lie. You're just beaten.
>You two idiots opened your mouths and got pwned. Deal with it.

But Android isn't Linux... except when the news is positive.

>>> And why did you snip and run from the embarrassing quote from Torvalds,
>>> which showed what a failed tech leader he is compared to Gates?
>>
>> Because facts and truth bother these drones.
>
>Unbelievable. Linux is the most successful software in the world. It
>runs pretty much everything. Windows... It's runs those desktops with
>those unskilled morons you talked about. Not a single super top 500
>super computer in the world runs on windows. Not one.

Go into ANY computer store right now and convince the person who is
about to buy a Windows computer that he shouldn't because Linux runs
on supercomputers. Let's see how effective that is in keeping him away
from a desktop which works correctly. Hell, bring along one of the
laptops you purchased to make yourself feel better about how life
turned out and show him what it's capable of... but make sure to do so
between 11:52am and 12:03pm which is the time period during which
Linux system crashes are least likely.

< snip >

[Silver Slimer]

On Sat, 24 Jun 2017 09:40:09 -0500, Marek Novotny

So you're saying that it is absolutely necessary to tinker at the
settings to play a game? If gamers gave a crap about getting the
highest FPS while still getting the highest amount of detail before
deciding to play a game, nobody would be buying a console. After all,
consoles lose detail and frequently play at a max of 30fps. Meanwhile,
consoles sell a lot better than PCs do for gaming purposes. The same
way that people just wanted to play Pacman and didn't care whether it
didn't look exactly like it was in the arcades back on their
Intellivisions and Ataris, most people don't care if some detail or
frames are missing when they play.

>>>You got another mac user hell bent on showing this Linux group all the
>>>little things that can be done with AppleScript, tilting images, moving
>>>text and all manner of stupid tinkering.
>>>
>>>Average users are iPad users. Average users are the ones I have at the
>>>office that get lost if I move an icon. They know ZERO.
>>>
>>>The users here are more capable and that is whom this discussion is
>>>centered around. Now, getting back to the issue. Show me how you find
>>>all the configs left by any given app. Don't run away into the average
>>>user every time you lose an argument as to why Linux kicks ass all over
>>>Windows. Unless of course you have no real answer and you're simply
>>>beaten.
>>
>> Except that he's telling the truth. None of what any of us do REQUIRES
>> us to go into config file at all. We do it IF we want to whereas you
>> do it because you have no choice.
>
>I could use Thunderbird and it is 100% GUI and I wouldn't need to know
>jack-shit about a config file.

Except that you'd be wondering why the program became unusable after
you downloaded too many threads. If you used the software in Linux,
you'd also be wondering why you get random connection errors going
from one thread to another. You can lie that that's not an issue yet
many people here admitted to having the same problem.

>>>> BTW, the average user wouldn't last 2 seconds with vim before giving up.
>>>
>>>I guess you're average then.
>>>
>>>> Face it, your "superior" geek skills are becoming as obsolete as text based
>>>> newsreaders and email programs like slrn and pine.
>>>
>>>Pine is old school. I use Mutt. And slrn is the best newsreader that
>>>ever was. You cling to garbage because a console scares the shit out of
>>>you. What are you going to do when your GUI fails and nothing but a
>>>command prompt is blinking on the screen and your boss asks how long
>>>until you're back up? Better call someone with real skills.
>>
>> LONG LIVE THE 1970S!
>
>Long live the present. Linux is what most of the world runs on. You're
>just living in fantasy land is all.

If that's the case then I guess I should feel free to blame Linux
whenever something technological screws up in the aforementioned world
which is often.

[DFS]

On 6/24/2017 10:53 AM, shitv wrote:

> Dumfsck emits more stupid than anyone else in here, I think.

I guess you haven't heard, turd: you can't emit an adjective.

What a self-nuking idiot.

[Chris Ahlstrom]

Marek Novotny wrote this copyrighted missive and expects royalties:

> On 2017-06-24, Fabrice Lohan <fabrice1...@linuxmail.org> wrote:
>>
>> The difference is the Windows user isn't spending her time tinkering and
>> configuring applications.

Sure they are, "Fabrice". Registry hacks are *legion* on the internet.

>> With Linux it's a must to know how to do this things.

Nah.

There's a lot of computing lore that is lost simply because the old school
die off and the young'ns reinvent the wheel, badly.

--
Q: How many elephants can you fit in a VW Bug?
A: Four. Two in the front, two in the back.