Which Linux for a beginning desktop? - Linux

This is a discussion on Which Linux for a beginning desktop? - Linux ; chris writes: > No. Mean time to crash on the Dell server we bought last week as an > experiment was less than 20 minutes. This is with a vanilla (Dell) > installation of Windoze "server" 2003 with no additional ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast
Results 81 to 100 of 129

Thread: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

  1. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    chris writes:

    > No. Mean time to crash on the Dell server we bought last week as an
    > experiment was less than 20 minutes. This is with a vanilla (Dell)
    > installation of Windoze "server" 2003 with no additional software.


    You need to talk to Dell; that's not normal.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  2. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    chris writes:

    > WRONG!


    I watched it happen. I find direct visual evidence more persuasive than
    your unsupported assertion, even if the latter is in all uppercase.

    > No, but it's a useless installation without any applications!


    Since the variety of applications one can install is nearly infinite,
    there's no sense in comparing installation _including_ applications.

    > You must have a unique version of Win NT then. Did Bill himself write it
    > specially for you?


    No, but I've worked with it a lot.

    > Wrong. Most people started using real operating systems because it was what
    > they were used to - Windoze is a relative newcomer, doesn't fit in with any
    > real operating systems. It was pleasant to discover that there was a
    > viable "home" version of the OS I'd been using at work for over 20 years.


    Your own words belie your assertion. People who are objective and
    unemotional about operating systems never say "Windoze."

    > Linux began as a way to run Unix-type stuff on a home computer ...
    > Windoze had nothing to do with it. It's just a nice benefit that we can
    > now run a proper operating system on home computers and delete the M$ trash
    > that comes "pre-installed" with many machines.


    If you want a proper UNIX system, run *BSD or Solaris, something with a
    real UNIX kernel and a complete OS around it.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  3. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    chris writes:

    > RTFM! Just like everyone else.


    What manual?

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  4. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    chris writes:

    > According to M$'s own web****e, NT4 and earlier has been "sunset" which
    > means it's no longer supported.


    You can obtain support contracts that extend support, IIRC.

    > Not according to Bill Gates.


    I don't know what Bill Gates has said to the media, but they are just
    newer versions of NT. They use the same code base.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  5. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    Trent Buck writes:

    > We were discussing use of Microsoft Office by home users, not PSPs.


    If you're preparing documents for printing as posters (which normally
    requires a real print shop), it's highly relevant.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  6. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    Trent Buck writes:

    > What makes you think that YOUR website is representative of the global
    > install count?


    The fact that it agrees within 1% or so with statistic compiled by
    companies that specialize in gathering data on such things, such as
    WebSideStory.

    > For a start, it's ignoring all the servers that don't run web browsers.


    Those aren't desktops.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  7. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > SINNER writes:


    >> Likely a simple parameter would solve the problem.


    > Probably. How do I find out which parameter that is?


    How about the same way I did?

    Use google like the rest of us.

    --
    David
    When you are in it up to your ears, keep your mouth shut.

  8. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > SINNER writes:


    >> Talk about OVERKILL.


    > That's not the way prepress shops feel about it. If you want to do it
    > right, you need the right tools. Printers hate getting stuff from Word
    > or PowerPoint.


    Printers? You mean Kinkos? We are talking personal use here, you dont
    use prepress for a Home Owners association or Science project.

    --
    David
    2180, U.S. History question:
    What 20th Century U.S. President was almost impeached and what
    office did he later hold?

  9. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    chris writes:

    > A quick check of 200 randomly selected BIG websites showed all but one
    > running Apache Server on some version of either Linux or BSD. The one site
    > running any variant of Windoze was a British "Government" one, which was so
    > badly broken as to be unusable.


    A server is not a desktop.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  10. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > chris writes:


    [...]

    >> Their mail clients and newsreaders are also non-compliant.


    > In what ways?


    The newsreader wraps text incorrectly and does not snip sigs when a
    complian delimeter is used and only recently did they even fix the non
    compliant delimeter applied.

    --
    David
    What the gods would destroy they first submit to an IEEE standards committee.

  11. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > chris writes:


    [...]

    >> Isn't NT now unsupported?


    > It depends on how much you pay for it.


    No, you have to have a separate CUSTOM contract for support, how much you pay
    for the OS has nothing to do with it.

    >> So much for your much-vaunted "support" from MS!


    > NT 3.51 is ten years old; that's pretty old for a supported operating
    > system.


    Except it is not supported at all by contract or otherwise. It stopped
    support Sept 30 2002.

    --
    David
    "Look! There! Evil!.. pure and simple, total evil from the Eighth Dimension!"
    -- Buckaroo Banzai

  12. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > chris writes:


    >> RTFM! Just like everyone else.


    > What manual?


    You must be thinking about the one you got with Windows.

    Google is The Manual for Life, use it. Of course there are many manuals
    for Linux but if you need a pointer:

    http://www.icon.co.za/~psheer/book/index.html.gz

    --
    David
    Is it possible that software is not like anything else, that it is meant to
    be discarded: that the whole point is to always see it as a soap bubble?

  13. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > Trent Buck writes:


    >> We were discussing use of Microsoft Office by home users, not PSPs.


    > If you're preparing documents for printing as posters (which normally
    > requires a real print shop), it's highly relevant.


    Utter and complete nonsense posted just keep the argument going.
    Personal users almost NEVER use prepress for printing ANYTHING. I have a
    very close friend that has been doing Photo Retouch for Prepress shops
    for more years than I care to count, the clients are predominantly
    corporate or small businesses not mothers bringing their child's poster
    to be printed or garage sale signs or science projects. Prepress wont
    even touch one offs, it cost more to set up the press then they could
    possibly make from the job.

    --
    David
    Accept people for what they are -- completely unacceptable.

  14. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    SINNER writes:

    > How about the same way I did?
    >
    > Use google like the rest of us.


    I tried that, for about two hours, with no results.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  15. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    SINNER writes:

    > No, you have to have a separate CUSTOM contract for support, how much you pay
    > for the OS has nothing to do with it.


    I meant how much you pay for the support.

    > Except it is not supported at all by contract or otherwise. It stopped
    > support Sept 30 2002.


    There are still many organizations running it. I was running it myself,
    up until a few days ago.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  16. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    SINNER writes:

    > The newsreader wraps text incorrectly and does not snip sigs when a
    > complian delimeter is used and only recently did they even fix the non
    > compliant delimeter applied.


    Wow.

    --
    Transpose hotmail and mxsmanic in my e-mail address to reach me directly.

  17. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > SINNER writes:


    >> No, you have to have a separate CUSTOM contract for support, how much you pay
    >> for the OS has nothing to do with it.


    > I meant how much you pay for the support.


    Hindsight is 20/20.

    >> Except it is not supported at all by contract or otherwise. It stopped
    >> support Sept 30 2002.


    > There are still many organizations running it. I was running it myself,
    > up until a few days ago.


    Your statment was about support, it isnt.

    --
    David
    #else /* !STDSTDIO */ /* The big, slow, and stupid way */
    -- Larry Wall in str.c from the perl source code

  18. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    * Mxsmanic wrote in comp.os.linux:
    > SINNER writes:


    >> The newsreader wraps text incorrectly and does not snip sigs when a
    >> complian delimeter is used and only recently did they even fix the non
    >> compliant delimeter applied.


    > Wow.


    You asked.

    These were just few issues. When tested against GNKSA it
    fails miserably.

    --
    David
    Parsley
    is gharsley.
    -- Ogden Nash

  19. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    Spake SINNER:
    > You must be thinking about the one you got with Windows.
    >
    > Google is The Manual for Life, use it. Of course there are many manuals
    > for Linux but if you need a pointer:


    Why is the "Microsoft monopoly" bad, but the "Google monopoly" good?

    --
    Trent Buck, Student Errant
    Lisp is the red pill. -- John Fraser

  20. Re: Which Linux for a beginning desktop?

    Mxsmanic wrote:

    > SINNER writes:
    >
    >> The newsreader wraps text incorrectly and does not snip sigs when a
    >> complian delimeter is used and only recently did they even fix the non
    >> compliant delimeter applied.

    >
    > Wow.
    >


    It also defaults to top-posting.

    Their mail clients also default to html. E-mail should NEVER be sent as
    html - it's wasteful of bandwidth and insecure. Also, their mail clients
    automatically open any attachments - a simple and easy way to corrupt a
    user's computer further than MS already have.

    C.

    --
    Everything gets easier with practice, except getting up in the morning!

+ Reply to Thread
Page 5 of 7 FirstFirst ... 3 4 5 6 7 LastLast