This is a discussion on Re: Why Linux is too bad to use - Handheld ; VistaEra did eloquently scribble: > Linux gets the most hype and while MacOS and Solaris are also potential > candidates, Linux gets most of the hype? Where? I've never EVER seen an advert for linux ANYWHERE other than in computer ...
did eloquently scribble:
> Linux gets the most hype and while MacOS and Solaris are also potential
Linux gets most of the hype?
Where? I've never EVER seen an advert for linux ANYWHERE other than in
computer magazines. Apple ads as splattered on billboards all over the place
with Mitchell and Webb as Mac and PC. Where're these tux billboards?
You can't escape Microsoft Vista adverts on TV unless you stick to the bbc
now. (and on the day of the launch even that wasn't enough)
> they always lose out because 1. MacOS comes from a flake company
> who don't really produce computers, they produce Ipods,
Oh, yeah, I remember that. Wayyyy back in 1977, they released their first
IPOD! It was the size of a boom box and only held 2 songs and could only
play samples grabbed from an apple II... Yes... I remember that.
One of my mystical powers is the ability to visit parallel dimensions like
the one you come from.
> I first saw Linux back in the 486 era when it was barely a year old. It was
> running on a 486 and was pleased to see how fast it managed to list it's
> directories compared to the speed of DOS on my 386. However it was clear
> even at that time, that Linux would never be a challenge to Microsoft DOS.
> This was obvious because Linux was developing into nothing more than a Unix
> clone, and Unix had been completely rejected in favour of Microsoft DOS by
> the desktop computing community.
So... You think that DOS... A single user, single tasking pile of utter ****
that stretched the definition of Operating System to breaking point... Beat
linux AND unix on MERIT?
All DOS is.... Is a glorified program launcher! That's all it's capable of.
Microsoft's deal with IBM had nothing to do with it, I take it?
If microsoft had just appeared out of the blue with DOS for the IBM when it
was released amongst a market of alternatives, they would've gone bust in a
> Typing a few commands into the Linux console, and watching the shell spit
> out cryptic and incomprehensible error messages made me laugh out loud I
> remember, I then turned off the machine and walk away in complete and utter
> disgust at the lack of vision in the Unix/Linux community. Yes they really
> had decided to produce yet another clone of the very OS that couldn't even
> compete against DOS. Retards I said to myself... Pathetic retards...
No such file or directory
Such a TERRIBLY cryptic error message.
Meanwhile, wasn't it windows that had an error box pop up that said "An
error occurred because an error occurred"?
> A few years later, I abandoned the DOS command line, in favour of the vastly
> superior Windows 95 GUI - having successfully ignored all earlier versions
> of Microsoft Windows, as the earliest Windows offerings were also completely
> unusable and unstable.
As was Windows 95 compared to the alternatives.
> I gave Linux another shot at impressing me again that year, and once again I
> was presented with the same text command line that I had seen years earlier.
> The same cryptic commands, the same useless error messages
How is cp and ls more useless and cryptic than DOS?
Let's see some of these useless error messages.
All the linux error messages I've seen are in nice, plain english.
, the same user
> hostility and the same absolute lack of vision in the Unix/Linux community.
> Yes they really had decided to produce yet another clone of the very OS that
> couldn't even compete against DOS. Retards I said to myself... Pathetic
UNIX..... compete with DOS?!
I was wrong... I've never been to THAT specific alternate universe after
How in gods name did Unix even ATTEMPT to compete with DOS?
They were in completely different MARKETS!
DOS could never run on the hardware Unix was targetted at, and even if it
did it would've been totally useless.
Yes, you were, weren't you.
> When X-windows for Linux arrived
X-Windows arrived then, did it?
I'm sooooooooo sorry your dimension suffered so badly.
In mine, here, we had X available in the first version of linux you tried.
I'll leave it there, you've just turned into a troll repeater now and it's
| firstname.lastname@example.org | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste! |
|Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| I can SMELL!!! KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and |
| in | get out the puncture repair kit!" |
| Computer Science | Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf |