life after Windows....

On 2009-03-25, Mxsmanic wrote:
aracari writes:

But things get better all the time. I know a lot of people using
one of the distribs quite happily. Mind you, they rarely tell you
what they do with it!

Because most Linux users do almost nothing with their computers.

I'm currently reading usenet on mine.

Mxsmanic wrote:

And that's another problem with Linux: an endless number of "distributions"
which are actually different operating systems.

No, they are different distributions of the same operating system
(GNU/Linux).

With no standards, there's no
hope of competing with Windows.

The difference in standards is negligible and hidden from the general
user. I agree that package management systems should be compatible and
libraries and mount points should be standard, but you're making out
that there is much more of a difference than there actually is.

Mxsmanic wrote:

William Black writes:

What do you run on your server?

FreeBSD. It's a real UNIX, not a fake one like Linux. And it runs very well
without a GUI.

I often run FreeBSD as well but to say that it is a real UNIX(tm) as
opposed to a fake UNIX(tm) is ridiculous. Beyond POSIX compliance, what
more do you want?

Next you'll be talking about the difference in memory management...

Mxsmanic wrote:

aracari writes:

But things get better all the time. I know a lot of people using
one of the distribs quite happily. Mind you, they rarely tell you
what they do with it!

Because most Linux users do almost nothing with their computers.

What a load of rubbish. I do far more with Linux than I ever did (or
could) with MICROS~1. I'll also give Mac OSX a miss, thank you very much.

William Black wrote:

Almost all users do almost nothing with their computers.

Yep. I often complain that user-friendliness has now become
idiot-friendliness. Mainstream operating systems and programs are
targeted at the lowest common denominator, the result being that the
users are lulled into a false sense of security. It wouldn't be a
problem with a system that simply worked with no bugs, but no such
system exists. Instead, the user is left at the mercy of designers who
seek to protect the user from himself. In the case of Windows, a
monolithic system that has been continuously kludged to bring it up to
date with the modern age, there is nothing the user can do once it
fails. At least with Linux and the various open source BSD operating
systems, a quick search on Google will tell the intrepid (or, ideally,
competent) user what to do to make it work again. That is, of course,
if it fails in the first place, although more a matter of when with
Ubuntu

Already there are larger numbers on Linux computers about than ever before.
The Asus 'eeepc' type devices the shops are currently full of almost all run
Linux in some form or other, with a software fit that is remarkably like
the one I mentioned above for the home user.

As the public become educated (an inevitable result of computer education in
schools), and as government departments in Europe abandon Windows for legal
reason, the user base will expand.

At some point in the reasonably near future I fully expect Unix and its
variants will become dominant.

That's what I hope.

We might disagree on politics, but at least you have your head screwed
on when it comes to technology

On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 01:07:24 +0000, John Stubbings wrote:

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:57:44 +0000, aracari wrote:

'Mxsmanic' wrote this:

aracari writes:

CP/M cannot be compared with Linux any more than DOS can be.

Why not?

Duh! Because neither are GUI op/systems.

ps-Are you still being sockpuppeted by Ari Silverslime?

Figures. The homo has no balls to do that to my face.
--
Ari's Fun Times!
http://tr.im/hrFG
Motto: Run, rabbit, Run!

Markku Grönroos wrote:

Perhaps you faggot get lost from travel forums.

Perhaps you could learn to speak a bit of English before addressing the
adults when they are talking.

Btw., they are called 'newsgroups', not forums.

Mxsmanic wrote:

White Spirit writes:

He couldn't get it to play WAVs and MP3s? What's the matter with him?

That's the wrong question. The right question is: What's the matter with the
OS? After all, he was able to play all of that under Windows.

It is precisely the right question because the answer was only a quick
search away. An MP3 application is an extra and is not part of the
operating system.

This betrays an attitude common among Linux fans: If something doesn't work,
it's the user's fault, not the operating system's fault. It's not a very
rational or productive attitude.

Since when did MP3 software comprise part of an operating system? It is
a userspace tool.

Doug Jewell wrote:

Don't get me wrong, I like Linux, and have it as a 2nd boot option on
all my PC's, but it is not a "97% of users" type OS. For starters 97% of
users expect to be able to just plug and play - they expect to be able
to go to the shop and buy a new game, family history program, photo
editing program, printer, scanner, webcam, etc and have it JUST WORK.
Windows does this very well. 99% of software you put the disk in and it
works. A fair portion of hardware works out of the box, and the
remainder you put the disk in and away you go.

Linux however does this very poorly. The first limitation with software
is the range available. Lets take just one category - photo editing.
Windows you have the industry standard - photoshop. You also have dozens
of other choices from publishers such as Corel, Magix, and more, and
every conceivable price point from tens of dollars to thousands of
dollars. Linux you have GIMP. Sure it is free but it also has a dreadful
UI. Put a beginner in front of photoshop elements and they'll have
meaningful results fairly quickly. Put someone in front of GIMP, and
even if they have a reasonable amount of experience they'll struggle
with the UI.

If hardware and software is not compatible, it is not the fault of the
operating system. It is because developers/manufacturers do not support
it. Windows actually does not support software and hardware very well;
speaking as a software developer, I would say that it actually does it
quite poorly. The difference, which you have missed, is that developers
and manufacturers happen to support Windows very well. Think about it.

Frank J. Camper (alias "Ari") wrote:
On Thu, 26 Mar 2009 01:07:24 +0000, John Stubbings wrote:

On Wed, 25 Mar 2009 23:57:44 +0000, aracari wrote:

'Mxsmanic' wrote this:

aracari writes:

CP/M cannot be compared with Linux any more than DOS can be.
Why not?
Duh! Because neither are GUI op/systems.

ps-Are you still being sockpuppeted by Ari Silverslime?

Figures. The homo has no balls to do that to my face.

What is it you want him to do to your face with his balls, you faggot?