| Home |
| Search |
| Today's Posts |
|
#81
|
|||
|
|||
I think this is just one of many problems starting out with Windows. Another is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. What about creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. -John O |
|
#82
|
|||
|
|||
|
begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote:
I think this is just one of many problems starting out with Windows. Another is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. What about creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. -John O Nope It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to do that -- The PROPER way to handle HTML postings is to cancel the article, then hire a hitman to kill the poster, his wife and kids, and **** his dog and smash his computer into little bits. Anything more is just extremism. |
|
#83
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#85
|
|||
|
|||
|
In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote:
: begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: : : I think this is just one of many problems starting out with Windows. : Another : is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. What : about : creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? : : Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. : : -John O : Nope : It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to do that Umm- you _do_ realize that _Linux_ by itself can't even open a window or play a DVD or lots of other basic things, right? Those are all part of a bundle added to Linux and called a "distribution". Sorry- you'r argument holds no water at all. Stan -- Stan Bischof ("stan" at the below domain) www.worldbadminton.com |
|
#86
|
|||
|
|||
|
begin In , on 06/09/2005
at 04:44 PM, said: On ANY platform Not only no but Hell no. ASCII unless you really need something fancier Possibly if you're English only. then HTML unless you really need controlled formatting then PDF if you really need it, right? No. If you really need controlled formating then you use TeX and LaTex. -- Shmuel (Seymour J.) Metz, SysProg and JOAT http://patriot.net/~shmuel Unsolicited bulk E-mail subject to legal action. I reserve the right to publicly post or ridicule any abusive E-mail. Reply to domain Patriot dot net user shmuel+news to contact me. Do not reply to |
|
#87
|
|||
|
|||
|
I think this is just one of many problems starting out with Windows.
Another is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. What about creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. Nope It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to do that So what is your point??? That an operating system (XP) isn't able to unzip files and burn CD's and that it requires an application to do it. Fine... then Linux clearly isn't able to any of this either. It also requires applications to do the same. Is this how petty your arguments have become? |
|
#88
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter ?B?S8O2aGxtYW5u?= writes:
begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: I think this is just one of many problems starting out with Windows. Another is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. What about creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. -John O Nope It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to do that That is true of, and should be true of, any operating system. Putting things like that into the operating system would be nuts. |
|
#89
|
|||
|
|||
|
Note subject change and followups.
In comp.os.linux.advocacy, wrote on Fri, 10 Jun 2005 13:59:49 +0000 (UTC) : In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote: : begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: : : I think this is just one of many problems starting out with Windows. : Another : is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. What : about : creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? : : Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. : : -John O : Nope : It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to do that Umm- you _do_ realize that _Linux_ by itself can't even open a window or play a DVD or lots of other basic things, right? Those are all part of a bundle added to Linux and called a "distribution". Sorry- you'r argument holds no water at all. panic: No init found. Try passing init= option to kernel. That's the message generated by line 607 of /usr/src/linux/init/main.c, and the most probable message one will see if the kernel can even get past the VFS setup, which I'd have to find. (This is a 2.4.25 gentoo-patched variant. However, I doubt this part of the code has changed significantly for awhile.) Linux qua Linux is highly cripped. Not that MS-DOS or NTOSKRNL.EXE or Unix's or even VMS's kernel would be much better off; MS-DOS in particular will prompt for its COMMAND.COM, and NTOSKRNL.EXE might BSOD or simply sit there (I don't know offhand). There's a few issues with modules but overall one can't do much with just the bare kernel. A fair comparison of a Linux distro to Windows might be a Linux distro with whatever freeware one likes, compared with a Windows distro with watever freeware *or* payware one likes, consistent with budgetary requirements of the comparison -- probably around $1000-$5000 for a $200 base hardware computer system. This might include anything from WinZip to Office, Visual Studio and Visual SourceSafe. (Yes, there is payware for Linux. One can include that as well, if one needs to.) Of course one must ask the obvious question as to whether one would want to pay all that much, or go with the Linux distro, which is of similar if not better quality. However, the comparison must include: [1] Standardization issues, including de facto. If files are stored in Microsoft Word format, one must include time and materials in Linux for decoding that format. Fortunately, several options for that are readily available, among them OpenOffice, but there's even a Java variant, POI: http://jakarta.apache.org/poi/index.html Of course one might be better off taking a one-time hit and convering those documents to something more standard, like PDF, HTML, or even XML/RDF. Storing files in MS Word format has already been shown to be slightly dangerous, in light of the Word95-Word97 fiasco. [2] Retraining. This is admittedly a given, and for the good people not that much of a problem. [3] Retraining development. This is another given, but is far fuzzier than #2; fortunately, it's somewhat less costly as well. Basically, someone has to develop #2 in the context of what a worker at one's employer is likely to encounter. [4] Software maintenance. Yes, Linux has it; the costs may be monetary (yearly RedHat Enterprise licensing fees), time (searching for and downloading the relevant bits), energy (compiling[*] the relevant bits), and more time (configuration). [5] Hardware maintenance. Ideally, this would be equal, but one can never be quite sure; Linux works the system differently than Windows. For old high-end server applications Linux might be slightly cheaper, as it knows how to do HALT (Win95 did not). Also, Linux is easily maintainable from a remote location, which may require less staff -- or more coordination, to ensure everyone's on the "same page". [6] Bandwidth costs. Ideally, this would be equal as well, but I have my doubts about Windows. This may or may not include bandwidth generated by malware/rogueware, depending on the comparison structure one wants. [7] Rogueware defense/elimination. I'm not sure even where to start on this one, mostly because if one is a mixed shop one has to get *ultra-paranoid* (or at least, take the worst of the two for a working assumption) and therefore these are defined equal. Nevertheless, Linux tends to be more resistant to malware, which means that the corporation has to do the software equivalent of a honeypot muckout less often (if one compares desktop PCs to, say, portapotties -- and then remembers to wipe one's fingers afterwards :-) ). [8] Development costs. If one has onsite engineering, one has to consider #2-#4 for the engineers as well, who have different requirements from the production system team. These include costs for development kits, time to development given those kits, and various other issues. [9] Verification/QA costs. These might be folded into #7, or not. But we engineers aren't perfect. :-) [10] Conversion costs. Under certain conditions one might take the one-time hit hinted at by #1, and record the actual outlay here. This presumably would include such things as: - hiring a clerk to re-enter everything - development of an automated tool that reads in Word and spits out RTF on the Microsoft system (this might be doable by something in VBScript/JScript, Windows and Word willing) - development/deployment of a tool that reads in Word and spits out something useful on the *Linux* system, something using or akin to the aforementioned POI, or maybe just something that automates OpenOffice. - hiring a fixup clerk to deal with the glitchies after a conversion effort - hiring a review clerk to ensure everything's correct (Note that "hiring" is not set in stone here; it's the putting on of a hat -- red or otherwise -- by whoever's in charge of and/or doing the effort. All three might very well be handled by a competent software engineer, who types in what he needs to, automates what he can, and reviews the results. Note also that some of those documents may very well be on backup tapes.) [11] Monitoring. Various issues ensue in a large production facility, among them the continued smooth operation of all of its parts. It's a bit like tweaking a small model airplane engine versus the complicated teardown/cleanout procedure for an aircraft engine used on a 767. [12] Staff turnover costs. This slightly unusual entry is a must to factor in, though ideally this would be equal as well. However, Linux does have the "buzz" capability, and Microsoft has the "shine" put on by the work of thousands of unnamed marketeers, for just the right amount of gloss on its pamphlets, white papers, and other such literature ("litter"ature?). Which one's more interesting for a prospective employee, all other things being equal (which they probably aren't anyway)? Which one is more likely to help the employer keep the staff he already has? [13] Research & estimation costs (project planning). I say: don't be fooled by the hype on either side. :-) There is a wildcard in all this: the traditional Unix solutions such as Solaris, HP/UX, AIX, and Tru64. (BSD/FreeBSD might be included as well, and FreeBSD is an excellent freeware OS in its own right, along with its distribution, AIUI. But this *is* a Linux advocacy group. :-) ) Some of these are one-time charges, some of these recurring. For example, #3 is one-time (maybe), #2 is either one time or recurring, depending on turnover. #4 and #5 are definitely recurring. One hopes #10 is one-time, but already there's been a sea change from HTML 2.0 (anyone else remember that?) to the current XML/XSL/CSS/XHTML/RDF/etc. mixture. There are also other solutions which I'm less familiar with. VMS, however, I did use for many years (up to late 1989), and is still around. Mainframe operating systems may also be around as well; the only ones I know of are VM/CMS (from IBM), and MVS (a batch-processing system). Tailor as required for one's own corporation. :-) Stan [*] "compile" has two senses here, one of which is to gather and/or process information (e.g., to compile an FBI or other such dossier), the other to convert source code into object code using a tool (the compiler). It's an issue similar to "computer" which prior to the end of World War II or thereabouts was simply "one who computes", or "processor", which was "one who processes" (e.g., an insurance claims processor). One of the reasons distros are so attractive is that those supporting the distro have done most of the legwork for the individual using that distro. -- #191, It's still legal to go .sigless. |
|
#91
|
|||
|
|||
|
Peter K=F6hlmann wrote: begin virus.txt.scr wrote: Umm- you _do_ realize that _Linux_ by itself can't even open a window or play a DVD or lots of other basic things, right? Those are all part of a bundle added to Linux and called a "distribution". Sorry- you'r argum= ent holds no water at all. Stan Take your precious XP CD, install XP from it and tell me that you can genrate MP3 and burn DVD once again Hint: You can't probably use half your hardware if you just stick to XP alone Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD The person you are arguing with isn't worth the bother. They are playing word games. To compare Linux and Windows the way they are now you take the Linux kernel by itself and find you can't do anything with it. Then you take the XP microkernel by itself and find you can't do anything with it. So comparitively, Linux and XP are equally useless, which should come as no surprise. |
|
#92
|
|||
|
|||
|
Thursday 09 June 2005 09:11 pm Noah Roberts wrote in
: Bob Cain wrote: The function is free on Linux because everything is free on Linux (except your time.) :-) Time is never free, but in Linux at least you don't have to spend a lot of it. Really? I find it much easier to find drivers and apps for windows than for linux. And since it takes *time* to search for these things...not to mention the higher level of difficulty in resolving dependencies. |
|
#93
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#94
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 6/10/2005 4:06 PM, Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote:
Friday 10 June 2005 11:13 am Peter Köhlmann wrote in : begin virus.txt.scr wrote: In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote: : begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: : : I think this is just one of many problems starting out with : Windows. : Another : is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. : What : about : creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? : : Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. : : -John O : Nope : It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to : do that Umm- you _do_ realize that _Linux_ by itself can't even open a window or play a DVD or lots of other basic things, right? Those are all part of a bundle added to Linux and called a "distribution". Sorry- you'r argument holds no water at all. Stan Take your precious XP CD, install XP from it and tell me that you can genrate MP3 and burn DVD once again Hint: You can't probably use half your hardware if you just stick to XP alone Now *thats* funny. Are you claiming that XP has *less* support for hardware? o_0 Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. Winblows has the cooperation of the manufacturers from the get-go. Lets not lie about Linux vs Windoze. They each have their strengths & weaknesses. Linux *still* has a ways to go regarding hardware support. Windoze has....a seemingly insurmountable effort needed to overcome the security issues. HTH I booted Mandrake Move on my Dell XPS Gen2 and it detected and configured everything! |
|
#95
|
|||
|
|||
|
Friday 10 June 2005 11:13 am Peter Köhlmann wrote in
: begin virus.txt.scr wrote: In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote: : begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: : : I think this is just one of many problems starting out with : Windows. : Another : is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. : What : about : creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? : : Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. : : -John O : Nope : It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to : do that Umm- you _do_ realize that _Linux_ by itself can't even open a window or play a DVD or lots of other basic things, right? Those are all part of a bundle added to Linux and called a "distribution". Sorry- you'r argument holds no water at all. Stan Take your precious XP CD, install XP from it and tell me that you can genrate MP3 and burn DVD once again Hint: You can't probably use half your hardware if you just stick to XP alone Now *thats* funny. Are you claiming that XP has *less* support for hardware? o_0 Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. Winblows has the cooperation of the manufacturers from the get-go. Lets not lie about Linux vs Windoze. They each have their strengths & weaknesses. Linux *still* has a ways to go regarding hardware support. Windoze has....a seemingly insurmountable effort needed to overcome the security issues. HTH |
|
#96
|
|||
|
|||
|
=D0=A5=F1=D8M=FC++ wrote: Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. What are you talking about here? I almost never have to tweak anything in my BIOS to get hardware working. Those times that I do it is a standard part of working with the hardware in question and Windows requires it also. Now I HAVE had to move cards around in different slots to trick windows into working but this was with 98, not the newer versions, and it was because I took them out and put them back in different slots because I forgot where they originally were and 98 just couldn't handle that. But Linux has never required any special treatment wrt the BIOS or card positions. So I really must ask what you mean by the above and where your information comes from. It simply doesn't coincide with ANY experience I have had with Linux in 10 years of using it. |
|
#97
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#98
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dan writes:
Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. Winblows has the cooperation of the manufacturers from the get-go. Lets not lie about Linux vs Windoze. They each have their strengths & weaknesses. Linux *still* has a ways to go regarding hardware support. Windoze has....a seemingly insurmountable effort needed to overcome the security issues. Except that some people have found that Linux by default supports their hardware where Windows did not. Of course the manufacturer might well have a driver to support that particular item, but you stillhave to load that driver, etc. I booted Mandrake Move on my Dell XPS Gen2 and it detected and configured everything! Ie, the Linux distros often have better support for the hardware, and has a lot more software than Windows has. For Windows you can certainly get driver support from the manufacturer more than you can get support from the manufacturer with Linux. And for Windows you may be able to buy more software than you can for Linux. But, going to the store, buying them, installing them, etc all take time as well as does going to manufacturer's web sites, finding the drivers, installing them etc. It will be a tossup. If you use relatively common hardware, and software, Linux will in general set it up and have software equivalents, and is much cheaper. If you have unusual hardware or software (including very new hardware) then you will probably get better support in Windows for precisely the reasons you state. One area where more work is needed in Linux is sound support. Alsa is getting there, but many of the Linux apps do not use alsa, they use oss, and the migration is still ongoing. |
|
#99
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2005-06-10, Bob Cain wrote:
JEDIDIAH wrote: On 2005-06-09, wrote: On WinDOS you have to find, install, configure & debug some 3rd party application (which probably cost extra money). What part of installing what is effectively a 'Printer Driver' do you find so terribly difficult? The "find" part would probably overwhelm the average user, assuming they would have any clue to ask. Given how Microsoft tends to treat the end user, it is unlikely that this is something that would occur to them. The "install" & "configure" part also might throw the typical Win user for a loop since they probably don't think of printer output as something that you can just put in a file then do something useful with. If you really knew what you were talking about, you would have a more detailed description of the process. Except you don't. You download the pdfFactory installer and, double click on it and say "yes" to the license agreement. You do have to reboot to use it though but it does tell you that. This is probably the simplest app I've ever installed and used. A really poor example of any Win difficulties. Like I said. MS-Foo users aren't used to the concept of the print subsystem generating something that can be generally useful. Many of them probably would have problems printing to anything but the default device and couldn't tell you how to select another printer if you ask them. You're dealing with the same cultural barriers that would be present if you were trying to switch them to Linux. -- The best OS in the world is ultimately useless ||| if it is controlled by a Tramiel, Jobs or Gates. / | \ |
|
#101
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2005-06-10, Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote:
Friday 10 June 2005 11:13 am Peter Köhlmann wrote in : begin virus.txt.scr wrote: In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote: : begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: [deletia] Take your precious XP CD, install XP from it and tell me that you can genrate MP3 and burn DVD once again Hint: You can't probably use half your hardware if you just stick to XP alone Now *thats* funny. Are you claiming that XP has *less* support for hardware? o_0 It's funny but true. Linux distros have a much faster release cycle. So you have to worry less about drivers that are newer than the OS. Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. Winblows has the cooperation of the manufacturers from the get-go. None of the distributions I have ever thrown at my laptop have had that problem. It was pretty current when I threw my first copy of Mandrake at it. Everything "just worked". Lets not lie about Linux vs Windoze. They each have their strengths & weaknesses. And "including everything with the OS" is not a strength of Windows. Linux *still* has a ways to go regarding hardware support. Windoze has....a seemingly insurmountable effort needed to overcome the security issues. HTH You are confusing one issue with another. -- The best OS in the world is ultimately useless ||| if it is controlled by a Tramiel, Jobs or Gates. / | \ |
|
#102
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#103
|
|||
|
|||
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 14:54:23 -0600, Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote: Thursday 09 June 2005 09:11 pm Noah Roberts wrote in : Bob Cain wrote: The function is free on Linux because everything is free on Linux (except your time.) :-) Time is never free, but in Linux at least you don't have to spend a lot of it. Really? I find it much easier to find drivers and apps for windows than for linux. And since it takes *time* to search for these things...not to mention the higher level of difficulty in resolving dependencies. apt-cache search app function apt-get install appfoo, dpendencies handled, what's difficult? If you'd prefer a clicky pointy way of doing this, use synaptic, click search, enter search term, select from the packages, click apply. Dependencies are handled for you. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCq0APd90bcYOAWPYRAuSOAJ9MnhQNP/m1wANwjPTt8dGR5qE5AgCeLWhT 8iUhea38Ib8D6+9R/Rofs5w= =lPUL -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock Quidquid latine dictum sit, altum viditur. (Whatever is said in Latin sounds profound.) |
|
#104
|
|||
|
|||
|
-----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-----
Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 15:06:51 -0600, Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote: Friday 10 June 2005 11:13 am Peter Köhlmann wrote in : begin virus.txt.scr wrote: In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote: : begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: : : I think this is just one of many problems starting out with : Windows. : Another : is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. : What : about : creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? : : Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. : : -John O : Nope : It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to : do that Umm- you _do_ realize that _Linux_ by itself can't even open a window or play a DVD or lots of other basic things, right? Those are all part of a bundle added to Linux and called a "distribution". Sorry- you'r argument holds no water at all. Stan Take your precious XP CD, install XP from it and tell me that you can genrate MP3 and burn DVD once again Hint: You can't probably use half your hardware if you just stick to XP alone Now *thats* funny. Are you claiming that XP has *less* support for hardware? o_0 hell yes! tried installing XP on a SPARC box lately? or perhaps a Mac G5? perhaps you've installed XP on an S/390 lately? Oh, you wanted to limit the discussion to only PC grade hardware? XP doesn't support a lot of PC hardware also, older scanners running from the SCSI card, off brand equipment from a few years ago, that still works well, and does it's job is often not supported by XP. Sure, if you want to limit the discussion even further, to relatively new stuff, from the larger manufacturers, then you can probably say that XP supports more hardware. You just have to ignore all the hardware that XP doesn't support. I can take a liveCD (I recommend Knoppix, or PCLinuxOS) into most any computer store, and boot the x86 boxes and see what's what, I can't do that with XP, there's no LiveCD version of XP I can get. BartPE has really crappy hardware support, and of course, it can't be distributed due to the XP licence, I could live with that, *if* I could be sure the CD supported a good cross section of hardware, but it doesn't. Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. Winblows has the cooperation of the manufacturers from the get-go. Lets not lie about Linux vs Windoze. They each have their strengths & weaknesses. Linux *still* has a ways to go regarding hardware support. Windoze has....a seemingly insurmountable effort needed to overcome the security issues. HTH try opening your horizons, XP supports a very limited subset of computer hardware. -----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE----- Version: GnuPG v1.2.5 (GNU/Linux) iD8DBQFCq0PXd90bcYOAWPYRAlxjAKChh3oWix/Licu8ZvKLZlJEoJuxpQCg1bQ4 ZTfQ3G8HpaVfxSRf5Ib29Vk= =lSvx -----END PGP SIGNATURE----- -- Jim Richardson http://www.eskimo.com/~warlock "We have captured lightning and used it to teach sand how to think." |
|
#105
|
|||
|
|||
|
What is most galling are these historical revisionists coming in and
trying to contradict everyone's firsthand experiences in this area. If anything, Microsoft SLOWED THINGS DOWN. Please remove r.a.p. from this thread...the BS has reached my neck. -John O |
|
#106
|
|||
|
|||
|
JohnO wrote:
What is most galling are these historical revisionists coming in and trying to contradict everyone's firsthand experiences in this area. If anything, Microsoft SLOWED THINGS DOWN. Please remove r.a.p. from this thread...the BS has reached my neck. Then have a seat and take a deep breath. |
|
#107
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2005-06-11, JohnO johno@ wrote:
What is most galling are these historical revisionists coming in and trying to contradict everyone's firsthand experiences in this area. If anything, Microsoft SLOWED THINGS DOWN. Please remove r.a.p. from this thread...the BS has reached my neck. -John O No one is exactly straping you to the chair with your eyelids pulled open here. -- The best OS in the world is ultimately useless ||| if it is controlled by a Tramiel, Jobs or Gates. / | \ |
|
#108
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 2005-06-11, Noah Roberts wrote:
JohnO wrote: What is most galling are these historical revisionists coming in and trying to contradict everyone's firsthand experiences in this area. If anything, Microsoft SLOWED THINGS DOWN. Please remove r.a.p. from this thread...the BS has reached my neck. Then have a seat and take a deep breath. My advice would to be stop being such a whiny little bitch and learn how to use a newsreader. Bitching about crossposting only wastes more bandwidth. -- The best OS in the world is ultimately useless ||| if it is controlled by a Tramiel, Jobs or Gates. / | \ |
|
#109
|
|||
|
|||
|
"Noah Roberts" wrote in
oups.com: Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote: Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. What are you talking about here? I almost never have to tweak anything in my BIOS to get hardware working. Those times that I do it is a standard part of working with the hardware in question and Windows requires it also. Since when does windoze require you to "turn off plug & play os in bios"? ROTFLMAO~!!~~ Now I HAVE had to move cards around in different slots to trick windows into working but this was with 98, not the newer versions, and it was because I took them out and put them back in different slots because I forgot where they originally were and 98 just couldn't handle that. But Linux has never required any special treatment wrt the BIOS or card positions. So I really must ask what you mean by the above and where your information comes from. It simply doesn't coincide with ANY experience I have had with Linux in 10 years of using it. My personal experience of trying to get linux to work with sound (onboard) and modem. So...*your* personal experience has been different. Are you calling me a liar? If linux was as easy to administer than windoze, then Billy G would have done more than simply chat with redhat. He would have bought them out  |
|
#110
|
|||
|
|||
|
JEDIDIAH wrote in news:ZY6dnbdh-OM1rTbfRVn-
: On 2005-06-10, Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote: Friday 10 June 2005 11:13 am Peter Köhlmann wrote in : begin virus.txt.scr wrote: In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote: : begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: [deletia] Take your precious XP CD, install XP from it and tell me that you can genrate MP3 and burn DVD once again Hint: You can't probably use half your hardware if you just stick to XP alone Now *thats* funny. Are you claiming that XP has *less* support for hardware? o_0 It's funny but true. Thats silly. YOU just called that other guy a liar then when he conceeded that since the manufacturers work *with* windoze to produce drivers they have better support. Linux distros have a much faster release cycle. So you have to worry less about drivers that are newer than the OS. Drivers that are kludged and reverse engineered. Sure, those are much better. Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. Winblows has the cooperation of the manufacturers from the get-go. None of the distributions I have ever thrown at my laptop have had that problem. It was pretty current when I threw my first copy of Mandrake at it. Consider yourself lucky. None of the distros *I've* installed on mine have worked better than win98 and supported *all* my chipsets flawlessly. Its been a series of frustrating trial and LOTS of error. And in the end, the only distro that worked with my laptop ran so slowly on it that I could watch the menus being scanned across the screen. Everything "just worked". Sure it did  Lets not lie about Linux vs Windoze. They each have their strengths & weaknesses. And "including everything with the OS" is not a strength of Windows. Where did I say windoze includes everything? 0_o Linux *still* has a ways to go regarding hardware support. Windoze has....a seemingly insurmountable effort needed to overcome the security issues. HTH You are confusing one issue with another. Nope. Linux dosent have the cooperation of the hardware manufacturers that windoze has. HTH |
|
#111
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dyn0 Mu77 wrote:
"Noah Roberts" wrote in oups.com: Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote: Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. What are you talking about here? I almost never have to tweak anything in my BIOS to get hardware working. Those times that I do it is a standard part of working with the hardware in question and Windows requires it also. Since when does windoze require you to "turn off plug & play os in bios"? Since when does Linux? I'm not calling you a liar. I am saying you don't know wtf you are talking about. This is rather obvious to anyone that does. Of course you could be a liar, but I am giving you the benefit of the doubt. |
|
#112
|
|||
|
|||
|
Jim Richardson wrote in news:nnsrn2-
: -----BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE----- Hash: SHA1 On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 15:06:51 -0600, Ð¥ñØMü++ wrote: Friday 10 June 2005 11:13 am Peter Köhlmann wrote in : begin virus.txt.scr wrote: In comp.os.linux.misc Peter K??hlmann wrote: : begin virus.txt.scr John O wrote: : : I think this is just one of many problems starting out with : Windows. : Another : is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. : What : about : creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? : : Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. : : -John O : Nope : It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to : do that Umm- you _do_ realize that _Linux_ by itself can't even open a window or play a DVD or lots of other basic things, right? Those are all part of a bundle added to Linux and called a "distribution". Sorry- you'r argument holds no water at all. Stan Take your precious XP CD, install XP from it and tell me that you can genrate MP3 and burn DVD once again Hint: You can't probably use half your hardware if you just stick to XP alone Now *thats* funny. Are you claiming that XP has *less* support for hardware? o_0 hell yes! tried installing XP on a SPARC box lately? or perhaps a Mac G5? perhaps you've installed XP on an S/390 lately? Oh, you wanted to limit the discussion to only PC grade hardware? Duh. Thanks for throwing up that Strawman for us all to appreciate... XP doesn't support a lot of PC hardware also, older scanners running from the SCSI card, off brand equipment from a few years ago, that still works well, and does it's job is often not supported by XP. Ah, so you admit that you use old hardware. Now, will you be so honest as to admit that linux dosent support older hardware all that well? I bet you cant Sure, if you want to limit the discussion even further, to relatively new stuff, from the larger manufacturers, then you can probably say that XP supports more hardware. You just have to ignore all the hardware that XP doesn't support. Win98 is simply better on older hardware. XP supports more hardware simply because windoze is the 800lb gorilla and the pc makers know it. Linux suffers from another thing as well: everybody is trying to do their own thing. If the sofware engineers cooperated and worked on a single distro under a single banner then linux would gain dominance in the desktop market. I can take a liveCD (I recommend Knoppix, or PCLinuxOS) into most any computer store, and boot the x86 boxes and see what's what, I can't do that with XP, there's no LiveCD version of XP I can get. Why would you need one? XP is already on those machines BartPE has really crappy hardware support, and of course, it can't be distributed due to the XP licence, I could live with that, *if* I could be sure the CD supported a good cross section of hardware, but it doesn't. Nice strawman. Are the soundcards & modems supported under your magic linux live cd? No. Now tell me that the exact same is true when I install from the SuSE DVD Did SuSE support the hardware without tweaks & swapping out cards & turning stuff off in the BIOS? Nope. Winblows has the cooperation of the manufacturers from the get-go. Lets not lie about Linux vs Windoze. They each have their strengths & weaknesses. Linux *still* has a ways to go regarding hardware support. Windoze has....a seemingly insurmountable effort needed to overcome the security issues. HTH try opening your horizons, XP supports a very limited subset of computer hardware. Thats insane. XP has the pc makers working directly with micr0$oft going for it. Linux is a thousand coders all thinking they will overcome the beast from redmond singlehandedly. You think you're all working on the same thing. You arnt. You're effort is dispersed among too many separate issues. Collectively under one banner and a real leader and direction; linux could kick some serious ass. Too many individualists to have that happen though. FYI HTH |
|
#113
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#114
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dyn0 Mu77 wrote:
Linux distros have a much faster release cycle. So you have to worry less about drivers that are newer than the OS. Drivers that are kludged and reverse engineered. A large percentage of Linux drivers are developed by the manufacturers themselves and most of those make it into the kernel. Others are developed by Linux developers working for someone else or on their own time with reference material provided by the manufacturer, sometimes under NDA but other times not. The remainder are developed by very bright individuals who reverse engineer the device and write specs themselves. These later drivers are of course slower to get created and more prone to error since the manufacturer refuses to release information needed to develop the driver without reverse engineering. Not only that but fewer and fewer developers are showing interest in reverse engineering products just so the manufacturer can sell a few more to customers they don't care about since more and more manufacturers DO care about their customers enough to provide drivers and/or specs to Linux developers. Fewer and fewer Linux users are willing to purchase products from manufacturers that don't care about them enough to make sure they can use the product they purchased in the OS they choose. Linux developers began making it a habbit to advertise which manufacturers "played nice" and which didn't and Linux users who needed such a product would primarily purchase from the former type of manufacturer. This *has* had an effect on the willingness of many manufacturers to develop and/or release specs for their products. Manufacturers are beginning to understand that their customers have the right to choose the OS they wish to use and if they want to be able to compete in such a marketplace they need to share the information necissary to use their products. There are a few, like digidesign who don't play nice with ANYBODY, that are very slow to realize this; they either will or they will go out of business... The whole "kludged and reverse engineered" thing has not been true for quite some time now. You can easily design a computer to be 100% Linux compatible by purchasing from companies who care about their customers. |
|
#115
|
|||
|
|||
|
Dyn0 Mu77 wrote:
I havent given up. I'm still trying but when some LUSER brings me a winboxen and says "fix it" its way easier for me to patch it up than it is for me to even get a decent install of lin-whatever on my own pc. And I took the A+ courses. HAHAHHAHAHAHAHHAHAHAH. You're killing me...stop!!! |
|
#116
|
|||
|
|||
|
|
|
#117
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Fri, 10 Jun 2005 14:42:03 +0200, Peter Köhlmann
wrote: I think this is just one of many problems starting out with Windows. Another is Unzipping files. I have to load an application for that too. What about creating MP3 files or burning CDs? Another application, right? Wrong. Win XP comes with all this stuff. -John O Nope It /might/ be bundled with it, but XP just by itself is unable to do that You're being silly. When you install XP these facilities are installed by default. By any sensible definition they are "part of Windows". |
|
#118
|
|||
|
|||
|
On 10 Jun 2005 22:39:09 GMT, Unruh wrote:
Except that some people have found that Linux by default supports their hardware where Windows did not. Of course the manufacturer might well have a driver to support that particular item, but you stillhave to load that driver, etc. And some have found it doesn't, particularly with newer laptop machines. |
|
#119
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 13:28:25 -0500, JEDIDIAH
wrote: MS-Foo users aren't used to the concept of the print subsystem generating something that can be generally useful. Many of them probably would have problems printing to anything but the default device and couldn't tell you how to select another printer if you ask them. Windows systems (and doubtless Linux systems) have a plethora of options and functions. People who like exploring keep finding new ones! General users learn the functions they need. |
|
#120
|
|||
|
|||
|
On Sat, 11 Jun 2005 13:33:14 -0500, JEDIDIAH
wrote: I can start with the most basic install of one of the most user hostile distributions like debian and be burning cds or paying mp3's with just two commands. The first one will automagically install the app. The second one will run the app. Whereas in a default installation of Windows XP you'd just double-click the file, or drag it to a CD burner icon. What was your point again? |
| Reply |
| Thread Tools | |
| Display Modes | |
|
|
Similar Threads
|
||||
| Thread | Forum | |||
| Great Money Making Opportunity | Vacuum Tubes | |||
| Why Windows is Easier than Linux For An End User, Especially for Multimedia work. | Pro Audio | |||
| An open letter to Mix Magazine from Mixerman | Pro Audio | |||
| John Mellencamp Attacks President Bush In Open Letter | Audio Opinions | |||
Linear Mode
