Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates. - Linux

This is a discussion on Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates. - Linux ; You guys are always on the wrong side....

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 26

Thread: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

  1. Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    You guys are always on the wrong side.



  2. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    DFS schrieb:
    >
    > You guys are always on the wrong side.
    >

    Who is "you"? C.O.L.A writers? Then you are not a C.O.L.A writer? Or are
    you? Maybe you are both writing and not writing in C.O.L.A at the same time
    and nobody knows for sure?

    Help! DFS is resembling Schrödingers Cat!

    Jan

  3. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    Jan Kandziora did eloquently scribble:
    > DFS schrieb:
    >>
    >> You guys are always on the wrong side.
    >>

    > Who is "you"? C.O.L.A writers? Then you are not a C.O.L.A writer? Or are
    > you? Maybe you are both writing and not writing in C.O.L.A at the same time
    > and nobody knows for sure?


    > Help! DFS is resembling Schrödingers Cat!


    Nah, he's been observed, his probability waveform has collapsed into the
    "COLA writer" rather than "Not a cola writer" category.

    No need to panic, all you need to remember is most things he says, are
    deceptive.
    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | "Are you pondering what I'm pondering Pinky?" |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| |
    | in | "I think so brain, but this time, you control |
    | Computer Science | the Encounter suit, and I'll do the voice..." |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  4. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    After takin' a swig o' grog, DFS belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > You guys are always on the wrong side.


    Don't forget to make your monthly payment to the local don, DFS.

    --
    That was a real kneecapper!

  5. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 01:11:59 -0400, DFS wrote:

    > You guys are always on the wrong side.


    How is that Munich migration going anyways?

    5 Years, Millions of Euros, for only 14,000 PC's.. the size of a small to
    medium enterprise. Yeah, Linux is ready to be mass replace Windows.

  6. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Sat, 3 Nov 2007 01:11:59 -0400, DFS wrote:
    >
    >> You guys are always on the wrong side.

    >
    > How is that Munich migration going anyways?
    >


    It is right on track

    > 5 Years, Millions of Euros, for only 14,000 PC's.. the size of a small to
    > medium enterprise. Yeah, Linux is ready to be mass replace Windows.


    Yes. And just imagine the massiv amount to be paid for all those linux
    licences over the years.

    Oh, wait...
    --
    The Day Microsoft makes something that does not suck is probably
    the day they start making vacuum cleaners.


  7. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > Not to mention that MS can forget about locking users to their Office
    > formats in this case


    Lemme see:

    * they're locked into MS Office formats
    * OpenOffice claims compatibility with Office formats

    One or both of you is lying - I know who it is.



    > And lets not forget: MS tends to make massivly bloated ****ty OS like
    > Vista with outragious


    outragious = outrageous



    > hardware requirements just to run that resource hog
    > itself.
    >
    > When they continue that trend (and nothing indicates they will stop it)
    > you can see that fine working hardware has to be replaced every few years
    > just because of that


    Pure lying cola scum bull****. A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM and a cheap
    video card runs Vista just fine. You can easily find them on ebay for $300
    or less.

  8. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    DFS wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> Not to mention that MS can forget about locking users to their Office
    >> formats in this case

    >
    > Lemme see:
    >
    > * they're locked into MS Office formats
    > * OpenOffice claims compatibility with Office formats


    It has. It opens MS Office formats just fine. Until the new round of Office,
    that is

    > One or both of you is lying - I know who it is.
    >


    Please explain the existance of the "docx" format then. Which is *not* yet
    supported by OO
    They want to get rid of that "upgrade" cylcle which MS tries to force on its
    users every few years

    >
    >> And lets not forget: MS tends to make massivly bloated ****ty OS like
    >> Vista with outragious

    >
    > outragious = outrageous
    >
    >
    >
    >> hardware requirements just to run that resource hog
    >> itself.
    >>
    >> When they continue that trend (and nothing indicates they will stop it)
    >> you can see that fine working hardware has to be replaced every few years
    >> just because of that

    >
    > Pure lying cola scum bull****. A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM and a
    > cheap
    > video card runs Vista just fine. You can easily find them on ebay for
    > $300 or less.


    Which is a system you will not find in at least three out of four times
    inside the bavarian government *now* (note your 2GByte mem, for example)

    And that will continue every 4 to 5 years. Each time they have upgraded
    their hardware to run the latest MS idiocy halfway decent the next round of
    MS idiocy-ware arrives, and needs *again* twice the hardware resources just
    to run the OS

    You *do* know that a system which runs the latest and greatest linux/KDE
    just fine (including OO apps) with room to spare will barely /boot/ Vista,
    do you?
    --
    Microsoft's Guide To System Design:
    If it starts working, we'll fix it. Pronto.


  9. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, DFS

    wrote
    on Sat, 03 Nov 2007 17:53:28 -0400
    :
    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> Not to mention that MS can forget about locking users to their Office
    >> formats in this case

    >
    > Lemme see:
    >
    > * they're locked into MS Office formats
    > * OpenOffice claims compatibility with Office formats
    >
    > One or both of you is lying - I know who it is.


    OpenOffice is lying; OO can read and write MS Office
    document formats with ease. (They are, of course,
    proprietary formats, and Microsoft might decide to change
    them tomorrow. However, Microsoft has a similar problem --
    if it changes the format, it may break its own ability to
    read older versions of that format. In short, Microsoft
    is a victim of Windows' success.)

    >
    >
    >
    >> And lets not forget: MS tends to make massivly bloated ****ty OS like
    >> Vista with outragious

    >
    > outragious = outrageous


    The Windows spellchecker would have caught that.

    >
    >
    >
    >> hardware requirements just to run that resource hog
    >> itself.
    >>
    >> When they continue that trend (and nothing indicates they will stop it)
    >> you can see that fine working hardware has to be replaced every few years
    >> just because of that

    >
    > Pure lying cola scum bull****. A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM
    > and a cheap video card runs Vista just fine.
    > You can easily find them on ebay for $300 or less.


    Even cheaper systems can run Vista fine as well. Did you mean Aero?

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Useless C/C++ Programming Idea #104392:
    for(int i = 0; i < 1000000; i++) sleep(0);

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


  10. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:

    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> Not to mention that MS can forget about locking users to their Office
    >>> formats in this case

    >>
    >> Lemme see:
    >>
    >> * they're locked into MS Office formats
    >> * OpenOffice claims compatibility with Office formats

    >
    > It has. It opens MS Office formats just fine.


    And then you can save to non-MS formats. But you just said they were locked
    into MSOffice formats?



    > Until the new round of Office, that is
    >
    >> One or both of you is lying - I know who it is.
    >>

    >
    > Please explain the existance of the "docx" format then.


    That would be a new file format for MS Word 2007. What about it?

    Too cheap to buy Office 2007?
    http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...444731033.aspx



    > Which is *not* yet supported by OO


    So when they continue to claim you can work with your Office files, OO is
    lying. What else is new? Their website used to claim 100% compatibility
    with MS Office files - they removed that lie last year.


    > They want to get rid of that "upgrade" cylcle which MS tries to force on
    > its users every few years


    Nobody is forced to do anything.

    And http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...444731033.aspx

    Poor dumbkopf Kohlmann: lazy and wrong.



    >> Pure lying cola scum bull****. A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM and a
    >> cheap
    >> video card runs Vista just fine. You can easily find them on ebay for
    >> $300 or less.

    >
    > Which is a system you will not find in at least three out of four times
    > inside the bavarian government *now* (note your 2GByte mem, for example)


    How would you know what runs in the Bavarian govt?

    And what does the Bavarian govt have to do with your lies about "outragious
    hardware requirements just to run that resource hog" that "require fine
    working hardware to be replaced every few years"?

    Neither of your spastic claims is true.



    > And that will continue every 4 to 5 years. Each time they have upgraded
    > their hardware to run the latest MS idiocy halfway decent the next round
    > of MS idiocy-ware arrives, and needs *again* twice the hardware resources
    > just to run the OS


    Lie



    > You *do* know that a system which runs the latest and greatest linux/KDE
    > just fine (including OO apps) with room to spare will barely /boot/ Vista,
    > do you?


    And yet more lies from lying scum.

    There's not a computer in existence that will run OpenOffice "just fine" (if
    just fine is comparable to the speed and efficiency of MSOffice 2003 on a
    3ghz Pentium). Not long ago it took 10 seconds just to launch OO (cr)apps
    on the IBM BlueGene/L supercomputer. That sludgeware is a menace to your
    computer.



  11. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    DFS wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Not to mention that MS can forget about locking users to their Office
    >>>> formats in this case
    >>>
    >>> Lemme see:
    >>>
    >>> * they're locked into MS Office formats
    >>> * OpenOffice claims compatibility with Office formats

    >>
    >> It has. It opens MS Office formats just fine.

    >
    > And then you can save to non-MS formats. But you just said they were
    > locked into MSOffice formats?
    >


    Right. How many people know that OO will read/write MS Ofiice formats just
    fine?

    >
    >> Until the new round of Office, that is
    >>
    >>> One or both of you is lying - I know who it is.
    >>>

    >>
    >> Please explain the existance of the "docx" format then.

    >
    > That would be a new file format for MS Word 2007. What about it?


    Yup. And people who are dumb enough to use it (that is, typical windows
    users) will save in the default format (which is *not* the old doc-format)

    > Too cheap to buy Office 2007?
    > http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...444731033.aspx
    >


    Has nothing to do with "cheap"

    >
    >> Which is *not* yet supported by OO

    >
    > So when they continue to claim you can work with your Office files, OO is
    > lying. What else is new? Their website used to claim 100% compatibility
    > with MS Office files - they removed that lie last year.
    >


    Ah, so you yourself admit now that after MS *again* changed their Ofiice
    formats, OO can not read the new one yet?

    You know, the very reason why those people in munich want to escape that
    lock-in situation you claim does not exist?

    >> They want to get rid of that "upgrade" cylcle which MS tries to force on
    >> its users every few years

    >
    > Nobody is forced to do anything.
    >
    > And http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...444731033.aspx
    >
    > Poor dumbkopf Kohlmann: lazy and wrong.
    >


    That helps exactly not at all

    >
    >>> Pure lying cola scum bull****. A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM and a
    >>> cheap
    >>> video card runs Vista just fine. You can easily find them on ebay for
    >>> $300 or less.

    >>
    >> Which is a system you will not find in at least three out of four times
    >> inside the bavarian government *now* (note your 2GByte mem, for example)

    >
    > How would you know what runs in the Bavarian govt?


    Well, I would know it a *lot* better than you do, wouldn't you agree?

    > And what does the Bavarian govt have to do with your lies about
    > "outragious hardware requirements just to run that resource hog" that
    > "require fine working hardware to be replaced every few years"?
    >
    > Neither of your spastic claims is true.
    >


    Well, A computer which runs XP acceptably (none will run it ever "just
    fine") will be completely underpowered to run Vista

    >
    >> And that will continue every 4 to 5 years. Each time they have upgraded
    >> their hardware to run the latest MS idiocy halfway decent the next round
    >> of MS idiocy-ware arrives, and needs *again* twice the hardware resources
    >> just to run the OS

    >
    > Lie


    Really?
    A computer which ran Win-NT4 fine would barely boot W2000.

    A computer needed to run Win2000 was totally underpowered to run XP. W2000
    ran acceptably with 256MByte RAM

    XP choked with that RAM, it needed at least twice that amount, 512MBytes

    Vista is barely able to just *boot* on 512MBytes RAM, it needs 1GByte to
    just run itself (for sufficiently small values of "run")

    We have not talked processor speed and harddisks yet, but they better be
    also "upgraded".

    So, yes, these facts known to basically every pimple-face in your
    surroundings are for you a "lie".

    Interesting

    >
    >> You *do* know that a system which runs the latest and greatest linux/KDE
    >> just fine (including OO apps) with room to spare will barely /boot/
    >> Vista, do you?

    >
    > And yet more lies from lying scum.
    >
    > There's not a computer in existence that will run OpenOffice "just fine"
    > (if just fine is comparable to the speed and efficiency of MSOffice 2003
    > on a
    > 3ghz Pentium). Not long ago it took 10 seconds just to launch OO (cr)apps
    > on the IBM BlueGene/L supercomputer. That sludgeware is a menace to your
    > computer.


    Poor DumbFull****.

    Your lies about linux software are beyond idiotic
    --
    Warning: 10 days have passed since your last Windows reinstall.


  12. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    The Ghost In The Machine wrote:

    > DFS wrote:
    >> A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM
    >> and a cheap video card runs Vista just fine.
    >> You can easily find them on ebay for $300 or less.

    >
    > Even cheaper systems can run Vista fine as well. Did you mean Aero?


    No, but if I said $100 systems (like this one
    http://cgi.ebay.com/Custom-built-PC-...QQcmdZViewItem )

    will run Vista just fine - and they will - top scum Kohlmann would have
    whined about Aero. Then I would have whined "the Bavarian govt doesn't
    need to run Aero". Then he would have whined "then why upgrade to Vista",
    etc etc.

    I saved some tedium.


  13. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    DFS wrote:
    > The Ghost In The Machine wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>
    >>> A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM and a cheap video card
    >>> runs Vista just fine. You can easily find them on ebay for
    >>> $300 or less.

    >>
    >> Even cheaper systems can run Vista fine as well. Did you
    >> mean Aero?

    >
    > No, but if I said $100 systems (like this one
    > http://cgi.ebay.com/Custom-built-PC-...QQcmdZViewItem
    > )
    >
    > will run Vista just fine - and they will - top scum Kohlmann
    > would have whined about Aero. Then I would have whined "the
    > Bavarian govt doesn't need to run Aero". Then he would have
    > whined "then why upgrade to Vista", etc etc.
    >
    > I saved some tedium.


    So did I. Vista converts another Windows fan to Ubuntu:

    http://community.zdnet.co.uk/blog/0,...331777b,00.htm

    or http://tinyurl.com/2txg7r

    Monday 22 October 2007, 1:43 AM
    Vista versus The Gutsy Gibbon - Ubuntu 7.10

    Posted by Rupert Goodwins

    But again, the experience was mostly fine. Having used Ubuntu for
    the best part of a year, I'm a fan. I can (and will) go into the
    bipolar experience thereof - but for every ounce of frustration
    in trying to track down the answer to a problem through the
    jungle of forums and dubious advice, there's half a pound of
    pleasure when I can just install an application that does
    something I want done.

    Which leaves my Vista machine. This is a Sony laptop that I've
    borrowed from the review pile while my lovely Dell X1 is up on
    bricks, and it's been my first serious encounter with the OS. And
    it's not been a good experience. There are plenty of specific
    problems that may be Vista or may be Sony. The wireless
    networking is vastly unreliable when switching between different
    access points, for example, and I've traced this down to a habit
    it has of creating new profiles and populating them with
    incorrect DNS addresses.

    But mostly: it's slow, it's intrusive, and it's arbitrarily
    different. It takes minutes to wake up from various sleep states
    or from a restart; minutes in which parts of the system seem to
    get going only to lapse into an unresponsive state where you're
    not at all sure whether your mouse clicks are registering. When
    you're going through a lot of restarts (as in, say, when you're
    trying to diagnose a wireless network problem), that adds up to a
    lot of pain.

    Elsewhere, it behaves like XP behaves on a 256MB computer, only
    it's running in 2GB. Everything is just... slow.
    (I won't mention the dead laptop at work that's dead because the
    Windows Genuine Advantage system has decided that its copy of
    Vista is illegitimate. It came in as a review machine, without
    the usual documentation, so we don't have the OEM's licence key.
    We do have the OEM's Vista still installed, but that's Not Good
    Enough.)

    So here's the funny thing. I've used Windows since 1.0. I've
    lived through the bad times of Windows/386 and ME, and the good
    times of NT 3.51 and 2K. I know XP if not backwards, then with a
    degree of familiarity that only middle-aged co-dependents can
    afford each other. Along the way, I've dallied with many other
    operating systems on many other platforms - but never with Unix
    and only lately with Linux.

    Then how come I'm so much more at home with Ubuntu than Vista? It
    boils down to one abiding impression: Ubuntu goes out of its way
    to get out of your way, even if it doesn't succeed all the time.
    Vista goes out of its way to be Vista and enforce the Vista way.
    You must conform regardless of the implications.

    Call me curmudgeonly, call me prejudiced, call me atypical, but
    isn't computing all about doing what users want?

  14. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Peter Köhlmann

    wrote
    on Sun, 04 Nov 2007 00:01:48 +0100
    :
    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Not to mention that MS can forget about locking users to their Office
    >>>>> formats in this case
    >>>>
    >>>> Lemme see:
    >>>>
    >>>> * they're locked into MS Office formats
    >>>> * OpenOffice claims compatibility with Office formats
    >>>
    >>> It has. It opens MS Office formats just fine.

    >>
    >> And then you can save to non-MS formats. But you just said they were
    >> locked into MSOffice formats?
    >>

    >
    > Right. How many people know that OO will read/write MS Ofiice formats just
    > fine?


    Presumably, almost as many people as know about OpenOffice.
    (In short: not that many. This is admittedly a problem.)

    >
    >>
    >>> Until the new round of Office, that is
    >>>
    >>>> One or both of you is lying - I know who it is.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Please explain the existance of the "docx" format then.

    >>
    >> That would be a new file format for MS Word 2007. What about it?

    >
    > Yup. And people who are dumb enough to use it
    > (that is, typical windows users) will save in the
    > default format (which is *not* the old doc-format)


    I'll admit to wondering what the new format brings to
    the table. Is there an advantage (other than, obviously,
    format lock-in) over the old Word format?

    >
    >> Too cheap to buy Office 2007?
    >> http://office.microsoft.com/en-us/wo...444731033.aspx
    >>

    >
    > Has nothing to do with "cheap"


    This backwards compatibility pack has a number of issues.
    Equations, for example, become graphics; theme data is
    permanently lost.

    If this is reading, this is a destructive read, but at least
    it partially answers my previous question.

    >
    >>
    >>> Which is *not* yet supported by OO

    >>
    >> So when they continue to claim you can work with your Office files, OO is
    >> lying. What else is new? Their website used to claim 100% compatibility
    >> with MS Office files - they removed that lie last year.
    >>

    >
    > Ah, so you yourself admit now that after MS *again* changed
    > their Ofiice formats, OO can not read the new one yet?


    I don't think MS changed them gratuitiously in this case; the
    new capabilities in the above Compatibility Pack attest thereto.
    Of course, Microsoft probably didn't pay that much attention
    to upward compatibility, except perhaps for wiggling a
    version number in a header.

    So now the OO developers have a little work to do.

    >
    > You know, the very reason why those people in munich want
    > to escape that lock-in situation you claim does not exist?
    >
    >>> They want to get rid of that "upgrade" cylcle which MS tries to force on
    >>> its users every few years


    [unhelpful stuff snipped]

    >>
    >>>> Pure lying cola scum bull****. A P4, 2.0ghz system with 2gb RAM and a
    >>>> cheap
    >>>> video card runs Vista just fine. You can easily find them on ebay for
    >>>> $300 or less.
    >>>
    >>> Which is a system you will not find in at least three out of
    >>> four times inside the bavarian government *now* (note your
    >>> 2GByte mem, for example)

    >>
    >> How would you know what runs in the Bavarian govt?

    >
    > Well, I would know it a *lot* better than you do, wouldn't you agree?
    >
    >> And what does the Bavarian govt have to do with your lies about
    >> "outragious hardware requirements just to run that resource hog" that
    >> "require fine working hardware to be replaced every few years"?
    >>
    >> Neither of your spastic claims is true.
    >>

    >
    > Well, A computer which runs XP acceptably (none will run it ever "just
    > fine") will be completely underpowered to run Vista


    I'd think it depends on whether Aero is in the mess or not.

    [rest snipped for brevity]

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows Vista. It'll Fix Everything(tm).

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


  15. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > Do you really think the 30, 40, 50 million (or wever it comes out to in the
    > end of the migration) will be it? No, they will have to continue to keep
    > paying the LiMux people to maintain and enhance the system, just like they
    > would have to pay for new OS licenses over the years.


    Are you seriously trying to claim that Munich would not have to pay for
    administrators for Windows systems?

    Get outa town, man!

    --
    Tux rox!

  16. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom:

    > A computer needed to run Win2000 was totally underpowered to run XP. W2000
    > ran acceptably with 256MByte RAM
    >
    > XP choked with that RAM, it needed at least twice that amount, 512MBytes


    I can certainly attest to that, based on recent experience.

    Incredible. Gob-smackin' jaw-droppin' pants-soilin' incredible.

    > Vista is barely able to just *boot* on 512MBytes RAM, it needs 1GByte to
    > just run itself (for sufficiently small values of "run")


    Munich is undoubtedly kvelling inside to have avoided the
    land-fill-proportion debacle that is Windows Vista.

    --
    Tux rox!

  17. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    Linonut wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out this bit o'
    > wisdom:
    >
    >> Do you really think the 30, 40, 50 million (or wever it comes out to in
    >> the
    >> end of the migration) will be it? No, they will have to continue to keep
    >> paying the LiMux people to maintain and enhance the system, just like
    >> they would have to pay for new OS licenses over the years.

    >
    > Are you seriously trying to claim that Munich would not have to pay for
    > administrators for Windows systems?
    >
    > Get outa town, man!
    >


    Additionally, they would have to pay for their AV stuff
    Add that to the fact that a windows admin can take care of far fewer
    computers than a linux admin.

    Nope, Erik F can just shove his "admin/maintenance costs" idiocy. Right back
    to where he pulled it from
    --
    Who the **** is General Failure, and why is he reading my harddisk?


  18. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:56:17 GMT, Linonut wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Do you really think the 30, 40, 50 million (or wever it comes out to in the
    >> end of the migration) will be it? No, they will have to continue to keep
    >> paying the LiMux people to maintain and enhance the system, just like they
    >> would have to pay for new OS licenses over the years.

    >
    > Are you seriously trying to claim that Munich would not have to pay for
    > administrators for Windows systems?
    >
    > Get outa town, man!


    Where did I say administrators? "The system" doesn't mean the computers,
    it means LiMux and it's related applications.

  19. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:59:37 GMT, Linonut wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> A computer needed to run Win2000 was totally underpowered to run XP. W2000
    >> ran acceptably with 256MByte RAM
    >>
    >> XP choked with that RAM, it needed at least twice that amount, 512MBytes

    >
    > I can certainly attest to that, based on recent experience.
    >
    > Incredible. Gob-smackin' jaw-droppin' pants-soilin' incredible.


    Note the word "recent" in there.

    When XP was released, it ran quite well in 256MB, in fact it ran pretty
    well in 128MB. I know, i had plenty of machines that couldn't take more
    than 256MB at the time.

    SP2 really upped the bar. The firewall and various other enhancements
    raised the footprint substantially, making 128MB too limiting. 256MB is
    still just fine, so long as you disable some of the services that most
    people don't use. 512 is better, though.

    >> Vista is barely able to just *boot* on 512MBytes RAM, it needs 1GByte to
    >> just run itself (for sufficiently small values of "run")


    Vista is slow to boot on 512MB, but it runs quite well once booted. I have
    a laptop here with 512MB and Vista, and it's very snappy when running, but
    it's a pain to boot.

  20. Re: Nigeria wins and cola whines. Munich loses and cola celebrates.

    Erik Funkenbusch wrote:

    > On Sun, 04 Nov 2007 13:56:17 GMT, Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Erik Funkenbusch belched out this bit o'
    >> wisdom:
    >>
    >>> Do you really think the 30, 40, 50 million (or wever it comes out to in
    >>> the
    >>> end of the migration) will be it? No, they will have to continue to
    >>> keep paying the LiMux people to maintain and enhance the system, just
    >>> like they would have to pay for new OS licenses over the years.

    >>
    >> Are you seriously trying to claim that Munich would not have to pay for
    >> administrators for Windows systems?
    >>
    >> Get outa town, man!

    >
    > Where did I say administrators? "The system" doesn't mean the computers,
    > it means LiMux and it's related applications.


    And you don't know what you're talking about, as usual

    http://www.muenchen.de/Rathaus/dir/l...197/index.html

    And now stop your idiotic FUDding, it is getting tedious, Erik

    --
    Warning: You have moved the mouse.
    Windows will reboot now to make the change permanent


+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 2 1 2 LastLast