[News] Try Vista, Run Away to Linux - Linux

This is a discussion on [News] Try Vista, Run Away to Linux - Linux ; PIC: http://www.flickr.com/photos/17046638@N08/1809660485/ "I am sick of Microsoft and now use Ubuntu Linux. This is one of the million reasons i switched." [Tongue in Cheek] Top 10 Reasons Not to Use Ubuntu ,----[ Quote ] | I played around with Ubuntu ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 4 of 4

Thread: [News] Try Vista, Run Away to Linux

  1. [News] Try Vista, Run Away to Linux

    PIC:

    http://www.flickr.com/photos/17046638@N08/1809660485/

    "I am sick of Microsoft and now use Ubuntu Linux. This is one of the million
    reasons i switched."

    [Tongue in Cheek] Top 10 Reasons Not to Use Ubuntu

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | I played around with Ubuntu this Ubuntu Logoweekend and I have been really
    | impressed by everything, but I know many people still want to use a Windows
    | desktop.
    `----

    http://blog.linuxtoday.com/blog/arch...31-103438.html

    Actually reasons to /use/ Linux.


    Related:

    Linux gains despite and because of Microsoft

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | Despite the heightened competition over the last two quarters from
    | Microsoft-Novell and a move by Oracle to undercut Red Hat on the cost of Red
    | Hat Linux support service, Red Hat has reported double-digit growth in
    | revenue and an increase in profit.
    |
    | “The success of Red Hat has been able to validate the future potential for
    | open source software,” Szulik says.
    |
    | Emerging countries are also lucrative markets for Linux, says IDC’s Gillen,
    | because there isn’t as much of the legacy Windows technology to have to
    | displace.
    `----

    http://www.linuxworld.com/news/2007/...ns.html?page=3

  2. Re: [News] Try Vista, Run Away to Linux

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer

    wrote
    on Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:07:05 +0000
    :
    > Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >
    >> PIC:
    >>
    >> http://www.flickr.com/photos/17046638@N08/1809660485/
    >>
    >> "I am sick of Microsoft and now use Ubuntu Linux. This is one of the
    >> million reasons i switched."

    >
    > "48434 days and 10 hours *remaining*", at approx. 33% done, to copy a
    > whopping 430MB over the network!!!
    >
    > Holy molasses, Batman.
    >
    > Let's see...
    >
    > Be generous, and discount the 10 hours.
    >
    > (48434 / 2) * 3 = 72651 *days* in total, to copy 430MB.
    >
    > Ignoring leap years...
    >
    > 72651 / 365 = 199 *YEARS* approx.
    >
    > Let's look at transfer rate...
    >
    > 430 / 199 = 2 MB/year transfer rate approx.
    >
    > MB/s value = 430 / (72651 * 365 * 24 * 60 * 60) = 1.876809755e-10 MB/s
    >
    > .0000000001876809755 megabytes = 0.000196797767 bytes
    >
    > #########################################
    > ###### Vista Network Transfer Rate ######
    > #########################################
    > ###### *0.0002* *bytes* per second ######
    > ###### 430MB will take 200 *YEARS* ######
    > #########################################
    >
    >> [Tongue in Cheek]

    >
    > Jaw on floor.
    >


    I suspect someone really screwed up an unsigned computation.
    48434 * 86400 + 10*3600
    = 4184733600 .
    2^32 = 4294967296 .

    Granted, the difference of these two values doesn't make
    much sense either -- it can be expressed as almost
    3 1/2 years.

    Gotta hand it to those Microsoft engineers, though,
    ensuring that we can report remaining time of more than a
    day on item copies that can apparently take more than a
    day, never mind whether they can actually calculate the
    time remaining properly or not. I'm not sure which of
    these three "features" is the most bizarre.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #1123133:
    void f(FILE * fptr, char *p) { fgets(p, sizeof(p), fptr); }

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


  3. Re: [News] Try Vista, Run Away to Linux

    ____/ The Ghost In The Machine on Thursday 01 November 2007 14:18 : \____

    > In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer
    >
    > wrote
    > on Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:07:05 +0000
    > :
    >> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >>
    >>> PIC:
    >>>
    >>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/17046638@N08/1809660485/
    >>>
    >>> "I am sick of Microsoft and now use Ubuntu Linux. This is one of the
    >>> million reasons i switched."

    >>
    >> "48434 days and 10 hours *remaining*", at approx. 33% done, to copy a
    >> whopping 430MB over the network!!!
    >>
    >> Holy molasses, Batman.
    >>
    >> Let's see...
    >>
    >> Be generous, and discount the 10 hours.
    >>
    >> (48434 / 2) * 3 = 72651 *days* in total, to copy 430MB.
    >>
    >> Ignoring leap years...
    >>
    >> 72651 / 365 = 199 *YEARS* approx.
    >>
    >> Let's look at transfer rate...
    >>
    >> 430 / 199 = 2 MB/year transfer rate approx.
    >>
    >> MB/s value = 430 / (72651 * 365 * 24 * 60 * 60) = 1.876809755e-10 MB/s
    >>
    >> .0000000001876809755 megabytes = 0.000196797767 bytes
    >>
    >> #########################################
    >> ###### Vista Network Transfer Rate ######
    >> #########################################
    >> ###### *0.0002* *bytes* per second ######
    >> ###### 430MB will take 200 *YEARS* ######
    >> #########################################
    >>
    >>> [Tongue in Cheek]

    >>
    >> Jaw on floor.
    >>

    >
    > I suspect someone really screwed up an unsigned computation.
    > 48434 * 86400 + 10*3600
    > = 4184733600 .
    > 2^32 = 4294967296 .
    >
    > Granted, the difference of these two values doesn't make
    > much sense either -- it can be expressed as almost
    > 3 1/2 years.
    >
    > Gotta hand it to those Microsoft engineers, though,
    > ensuring that we can report remaining time of more than a
    > day on item copies that can apparently take more than a
    > day, never mind whether they can actually calculate the
    > time remaining properly or not. I'm not sure which of
    > these three "features" is the most bizarre.
    >

    Did you really mean "features"? Or was it fee churns? Or afeatures
    (anti-features)?

    Anti-Features

    ,----[ Quote ]
    | DRM and trusted/treacherous computing systems are, in many ways, an extreme
    | example of anti-features.
    |
    | [...]
    |
    | Unfortunately for the companies and individuals trying to push anti-features,
    | users increasingly often have alternatives in free software. Similar to
    | Mozilla's pop-up blocking feature, RAW was low-hanging fruit for the free
    | software developers working on CHDK. The absence of similar anti-features
    | form some of the the easiest victories for free software. It does not cost
    | free software developers anything to avoid anti-features. In many cases,
    | doing nothing is exactly what users want.
    `----

    http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/antifeatures

    --
    ~~ Best of wishes

    Roy S. Schestowitz | "Error, no keyboard - press F1 to continue"
    http://Schestowitz.com | GNU/Linux | PGP-Key: 0x74572E8E
    Mem: 515500k total, 444080k used, 71420k free, 2724k buffers
    http://iuron.com - next generation of search paradigms

  4. Re: [News] Try Vista, Run Away to Linux

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Roy Schestowitz

    wrote
    on Thu, 01 Nov 2007 15:30:05 +0000
    <5359227.hyuk05Sbbg@schestowitz.com>:
    > ____/ The Ghost In The Machine on Thursday 01 November 2007 14:18 : \____
    >
    >> In comp.os.linux.advocacy, [H]omer
    >>
    >> wrote
    >> on Thu, 01 Nov 2007 06:07:05 +0000
    >> :
    >>> Verily I say unto thee, that Roy Schestowitz spake thusly:
    >>>
    >>>> PIC:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www.flickr.com/photos/17046638@N08/1809660485/
    >>>>
    >>>> "I am sick of Microsoft and now use Ubuntu Linux. This is one of the
    >>>> million reasons i switched."
    >>>
    >>> "48434 days and 10 hours *remaining*", at approx. 33% done, to copy a
    >>> whopping 430MB over the network!!!
    >>>
    >>> Holy molasses, Batman.
    >>>
    >>> Let's see...
    >>>
    >>> Be generous, and discount the 10 hours.
    >>>
    >>> (48434 / 2) * 3 = 72651 *days* in total, to copy 430MB.
    >>>
    >>> Ignoring leap years...
    >>>
    >>> 72651 / 365 = 199 *YEARS* approx.
    >>>
    >>> Let's look at transfer rate...
    >>>
    >>> 430 / 199 = 2 MB/year transfer rate approx.
    >>>
    >>> MB/s value = 430 / (72651 * 365 * 24 * 60 * 60) = 1.876809755e-10 MB/s
    >>>
    >>> .0000000001876809755 megabytes = 0.000196797767 bytes
    >>>
    >>> #########################################
    >>> ###### Vista Network Transfer Rate ######
    >>> #########################################
    >>> ###### *0.0002* *bytes* per second ######
    >>> ###### 430MB will take 200 *YEARS* ######
    >>> #########################################
    >>>
    >>>> [Tongue in Cheek]
    >>>
    >>> Jaw on floor.
    >>>

    >>
    >> I suspect someone really screwed up an unsigned computation.
    >> 48434 * 86400 + 10*3600
    >> = 4184733600 .
    >> 2^32 = 4294967296 .
    >>
    >> Granted, the difference of these two values doesn't make
    >> much sense either -- it can be expressed as almost
    >> 3 1/2 years.
    >>
    >> Gotta hand it to those Microsoft engineers, though,
    >> ensuring that we can report remaining time of more than a
    >> day on item copies that can apparently take more than a
    >> day, never mind whether they can actually calculate the
    >> time remaining properly or not. I'm not sure which of
    >> these three "features" is the most bizarre.
    >>

    > Did you really mean "features"? Or was it fee churns? Or afeatures
    > (anti-features)?


    OK, "undocumented features". :-)

    >
    > Anti-Features
    >
    > ,----[ Quote ]
    > | DRM and trusted/treacherous computing systems are, in many ways,
    > | an extreme example of anti-features.


    It's a big lie. The general idea is to sell a cat in a poke
    by saying it's a pig. More specifically, the idea might be
    along the lines of the following -- at least, thus is my
    very cynical thinking.

    [1] Botch the solution (in this case, Windows) for security
    purposes, probably inadvertantly at first.

    [2] Wait a bit.

    [3] Fix the solution and hope. If it actually works,
    go back to [1].

    [4] Botch the fix to fix the botch in [3].

    [5] Watch as the problem begins to grow much worse.

    [6] Tout a solution that will fix the security subproblem
    while locking out alternatives to the original solution
    in [1].

    [7] Implement [6].

    [8] Watch as the gullible look up the word "gullible" in
    the dictionary after they've been told that there's
    no such word in the ... oh, wait, wrong joke.

    Unfortunately for the DRM crowd, this has already
    been botched as [7] was implemented a bit too early,
    revealing itself as a danger to the public's cherished
    notion of being able to play a bought song anywhere (which
    is not unreasonable in itself, from a classical material
    standpoint; I bought this flashlight and I should be able
    to take it with me anywhere, why can't I do that with a
    Metallica single or a performance of La Traviata?).

    Nice botch of a bodge to botch the botched competitive market...

    > |
    > | [...]
    > |
    > | Unfortunately for the companies and individuals trying
    > | to push anti-features, users increasingly often have
    > | alternatives in free software. Similar to Mozilla's
    > | pop-up blocking feature, RAW was low-hanging fruit for
    > | the free software developers working on CHDK. The absence
    > | of similar anti-features form some of the the easiest
    > | victories for free software. It does not cost free
    > | software developers anything to avoid anti-features.
    > | In many cases, doing nothing is exactly what users want.
    > `----
    >
    > http://www.fsf.org/blogs/community/antifeatures
    >


    I like the camera example, assuming it's true. Sell two
    otherwise identical cameras, but the one without DRM
    (allowing for RAW mode) is hundreds of dollars more.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Insert random misquote here.

    --
    Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com


+ Reply to Thread