Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review - Linux

This is a discussion on Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review - Linux ; begin risky.vbs , Hadron writes: > mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes: > >> begin risky.vbs >> , >> Hadron writes: >>> mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes: >>> >>>> begin risky.vbs >>>> , >>>> Hadron writes: >>>>> Chris Game writes: >>>>> >>>>>> On ...

+ Reply to Thread
Results 1 to 11 of 11

Thread: Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

  1. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    begin risky.vbs
    ,
    Hadron writes:
    > mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:
    >
    >> begin risky.vbs
    >> ,
    >> Hadron writes:
    >>> mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:
    >>>
    >>>> begin risky.vbs
    >>>> ,
    >>>> Hadron writes:
    >>>>> Chris Game writes:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:14:30 -0500, Ernie Stye wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> XP comes with notepad, yes, but it also has Wordpad, which is
    >>>>>>> similar to MS Word.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> LOL!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> It also comes with Outlook Express, which has many of the features
    >>>>>>> of Outlook.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Even funnier! Keep 'em coming Ernie!
    >>>>>
    >>>>> But the point is that it's enough for the great majority of users.
    >>>>
    >>>> Interesting. Linux has so much more, out of the box. Makes you wonder
    >>>> why so many 'choose' MS? Clearly it isn't because of the SW bundled
    >>>> with windows as Wordpad and Outlook Express are pathetic compared to
    >>>> the alternatives available in Linux distros. The only intelligent
    >>>> answer to this must be that users don't have a choice. If I didn't
    >>>> know better it would smack of an illegaly maintained monopoly to me.
    >>>> Can't be. Aren't there laws about this sort of thing to protect
    >>>> consumers?
    >>>
    >>> This is a Ubuntu help group. Not a soapbox for your demented
    >>> politics.

    >>
    >> You really do have reading comprehension problems quark. You were
    >> the one saying that the pathetic tools provided by MS in windows
    >> are good enough for the majority of users. I pointed out that
    >> Linux distros offer better tools out of the box and asked why
    >> people still choose MS.
    >>
    >> You are an ignorant, ineducable imbecile. Your only 'gift' is to troll
    >> and you do it so badly.

    >
    > And yet you still fail to READ what is said. I never said Linux didn't
    > come with BETTER. I said the tools are enough for the great majority.
    >
    > I am not talking about me, or your, or others in THIS NG. I Am talking
    > about the majority of people who use Windows daily.
    >
    > I can explain further if this is too complicated for you.


    The point my poor ignorant quark is that you posted it in a linux
    newsgroup. Suggesting that inferior MS SW is adequate is simply not
    true. It isn't. The time wasted and cost of 'protecting' a Windows
    system is not acceptable.

    I have crossposted this to COLA as you did in a previous post of mine
    in this newsgroup. I think it is relevant there.

  2. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:

    >> And yet you still fail to READ what is said. I never said Linux didn't
    >> come with BETTER. I said the tools are enough for the great majority.
    >>
    >> I am not talking about me, or your, or others in THIS NG. I Am talking
    >> about the majority of people who use Windows daily.
    >>
    >> I can explain further if this is too complicated for you.

    >
    > The point my poor ignorant quark is that you posted it in a linux
    > newsgroup. Suggesting that inferior MS SW is adequate is simply not
    > true. It isn't. The time wasted and cost of 'protecting' a Windows
    > system is not acceptable.


    What ARE you talking about? I said the people find it adequate. Millions
    upon millions of people use OE with no issues. Or do you dispute that?

    Possibly you don't understand what "adequate" means?

    Personally I use emacs/gnus which are incredibly powerful. However, Mrs
    Jenkins at the corner shop is more that happy to use OE. It is adequate
    for her needs.

    > I have crossposted this to COLA as you did in a previous post of mine
    > in this newsgroup. I think it is relevant there.


    You can cross post it to wherever you like.

    You are reading what you want to read and, as usual, spewing forth lies
    and accusation with no factual backup.

    And, as usual, I am yet to see you actually help anyone in this NG. You
    are just **** stirring and propagating your crazy views on MS. This is
    off topic here. This is a Ubuntu help group.

    --
    You can tell how far we have to go, when FORTRAN is the language of
    supercomputers.
    -- Steven Feiner

  3. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    Roy Culley wrote:

    > begin risky.vbs
    > ,
    > Hadron writes:
    >> mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:
    >>
    >>> begin risky.vbs
    >>> ,
    >>> Hadron writes:
    >>>> mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> begin risky.vbs
    >>>>> ,
    >>>>> Hadron writes:
    >>>>>> Chris Game writes:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 08:14:30 -0500, Ernie Stye wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> XP comes with notepad, yes, but it also has Wordpad, which is
    >>>>>>>> similar to MS Word.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> LOL!
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> It also comes with Outlook Express, which has many of the features
    >>>>>>>> of Outlook.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Even funnier! Keep 'em coming Ernie!
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> But the point is that it's enough for the great majority of users.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Interesting. Linux has so much more, out of the box. Makes you wonder
    >>>>> why so many 'choose' MS? Clearly it isn't because of the SW bundled
    >>>>> with windows as Wordpad and Outlook Express are pathetic compared to
    >>>>> the alternatives available in Linux distros. The only intelligent
    >>>>> answer to this must be that users don't have a choice. If I didn't
    >>>>> know better it would smack of an illegaly maintained monopoly to me.
    >>>>> Can't be. Aren't there laws about this sort of thing to protect
    >>>>> consumers?
    >>>>
    >>>> This is a Ubuntu help group. Not a soapbox for your demented
    >>>> politics.
    >>>
    >>> You really do have reading comprehension problems quark. You were
    >>> the one saying that the pathetic tools provided by MS in windows
    >>> are good enough for the majority of users. I pointed out that
    >>> Linux distros offer better tools out of the box and asked why
    >>> people still choose MS.
    >>>
    >>> You are an ignorant, ineducable imbecile. Your only 'gift' is to troll
    >>> and you do it so badly.

    >>
    >> And yet you still fail to READ what is said. I never said Linux didn't
    >> come with BETTER. I said the tools are enough for the great majority.
    >>
    >> I am not talking about me, or your, or others in THIS NG. I Am talking
    >> about the majority of people who use Windows daily.
    >>
    >> I can explain further if this is too complicated for you.

    >
    > The point my poor ignorant quark is that you posted it in a linux
    > newsgroup. Suggesting that inferior MS SW is adequate is simply not
    > true. It isn't. The time wasted and cost of 'protecting' a Windows
    > system is not acceptable.
    >
    > I have crossposted this to COLA as you did in a previous post of mine
    > in this newsgroup. I think it is relevant there.


    Hello, Roy. The M$ Quack shill trolling again, saying how much better XP is
    than Ubuntu? Here's another example:-

    "....getting high performance Video cards working is a damn sight
    easier on XP because the installers are better.
    Debian/Ubuntu are a pain in the hole ┬*- you need to recompile the latest
    NVidia drivers using a set version of the compiler, for example, when
    changing kernels."

    When pulled up about it (by Stephan Rose), that in Ubuntu this is handled
    automatically when the kernel is updated so you don't have to do
    *anything*, he *suddenly* remembers the the restricted-drivers manager!!


    You're right. I forgot about the restricted driver manager now. It is a
    BIG improvement.

    Message-ID: ┬*

    Just *another* gaff from Quack the linux expert. :-)

    --
    Operating systems:
    FreeBSD 6.2, Debian 4.0
    PCLinuxOS 2007, (K)Ubuntu 7.04
    Ubuntu 7.10 "Gutsy" alpha - Tribe 5

  4. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    Hadron wrote:

    > mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:
    >
    >>> And yet you still fail to READ what is said. I never said Linux didn't
    >>> come with BETTER. I said the tools are enough for the great majority.
    >>>
    >>> I am not talking about me, or your, or others in THIS NG. I Am talking
    >>> about the majority of people who use Windows daily.
    >>>
    >>> I can explain further if this is too complicated for you.

    >>
    >> The point my poor ignorant quark is that you posted it in a linux
    >> newsgroup. Suggesting that inferior MS SW is adequate is simply not
    >> true. It isn't. The time wasted and cost of 'protecting' a Windows
    >> system is not acceptable.

    >
    > What ARE you talking about? I said the people find it adequate. Millions
    > upon millions of people use OE with no issues. Or do you dispute that?
    >
    > Possibly you don't understand what "adequate" means?
    >
    > Personally I use emacs/gnus which are incredibly powerful. However, Mrs
    > Jenkins at the corner shop is more that happy to use OE. It is adequate
    > for her needs.
    >
    >> I have crossposted this to COLA as you did in a previous post of mine
    >> in this newsgroup. I think it is relevant there.

    >
    > You can cross post it to wherever you like.
    >
    > You are reading what you want to read and, as usual, spewing forth lies
    > and accusation with no factual backup.
    >
    > And, as usual, I am yet to see you actually help anyone in this NG. You
    > are just **** stirring and propagating your crazy views on MS. This is
    > off topic here. This is a Ubuntu help group.
    >

    Who made you the moderator of this newsgroup? Why are you *always* so
    protective of M$?

    Cheers.

    --
    Sometimes, I Wake Up Grumpy.
    Sometimes, I Just Let Him Sleep In.
    -- My Wife


  5. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    NoStop writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:
    >>
    >>>> And yet you still fail to READ what is said. I never said Linux didn't
    >>>> come with BETTER. I said the tools are enough for the great majority.
    >>>>
    >>>> I am not talking about me, or your, or others in THIS NG. I Am talking
    >>>> about the majority of people who use Windows daily.
    >>>>
    >>>> I can explain further if this is too complicated for you.
    >>>
    >>> The point my poor ignorant quark is that you posted it in a linux
    >>> newsgroup. Suggesting that inferior MS SW is adequate is simply not
    >>> true. It isn't. The time wasted and cost of 'protecting' a Windows
    >>> system is not acceptable.

    >>
    >> What ARE you talking about? I said the people find it adequate. Millions
    >> upon millions of people use OE with no issues. Or do you dispute that?
    >>
    >> Possibly you don't understand what "adequate" means?
    >>
    >> Personally I use emacs/gnus which are incredibly powerful. However, Mrs
    >> Jenkins at the corner shop is more that happy to use OE. It is adequate
    >> for her needs.
    >>
    >>> I have crossposted this to COLA as you did in a previous post of mine
    >>> in this newsgroup. I think it is relevant there.

    >>
    >> You can cross post it to wherever you like.
    >>
    >> You are reading what you want to read and, as usual, spewing forth lies
    >> and accusation with no factual backup.
    >>
    >> And, as usual, I am yet to see you actually help anyone in this NG. You
    >> are just **** stirring and propagating your crazy views on MS. This is
    >> off topic here. This is a Ubuntu help group.
    >>

    > Who made you the moderator of this newsgroup? Why are you *always* so
    > protective of M$?
    >
    > Cheers.


    How am I being protective of MS?

    I am merely stating a fact of life.

    If you prefer lies and misinformation, fine. I don't.

    The facts are this : OE and similar ARE adequate for many millions of
    people.

    Nowhere did I say that the FREE OSS competition was worse.

    I even stated for the record that I use OSS competition in emacs/gnus.

    --
    ┬┐Pero qu├ę es la vida de un literato o de un hombre de ciencia, y donde
    hallaremos su historia? en sus obras.
    -- Henry Hunter.

  6. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    Hadron wrote:

    > NoStop writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> mrloy@bambot.nodomain.none (Roy Culley) writes:
    >>>
    >>>>> And yet you still fail to READ what is said. I never said Linux didn't
    >>>>> come with BETTER. I said the tools are enough for the great majority.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I am not talking about me, or your, or others in THIS NG. I Am talking
    >>>>> about the majority of people who use Windows daily.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I can explain further if this is too complicated for you.
    >>>>
    >>>> The point my poor ignorant quark is that you posted it in a linux
    >>>> newsgroup. Suggesting that inferior MS SW is adequate is simply not
    >>>> true. It isn't. The time wasted and cost of 'protecting' a Windows
    >>>> system is not acceptable.
    >>>
    >>> What ARE you talking about? I said the people find it adequate. Millions
    >>> upon millions of people use OE with no issues. Or do you dispute that?
    >>>
    >>> Possibly you don't understand what "adequate" means?
    >>>
    >>> Personally I use emacs/gnus which are incredibly powerful. However, Mrs
    >>> Jenkins at the corner shop is more that happy to use OE. It is adequate
    >>> for her needs.
    >>>
    >>>> I have crossposted this to COLA as you did in a previous post of mine
    >>>> in this newsgroup. I think it is relevant there.
    >>>
    >>> You can cross post it to wherever you like.
    >>>
    >>> You are reading what you want to read and, as usual, spewing forth lies
    >>> and accusation with no factual backup.
    >>>
    >>> And, as usual, I am yet to see you actually help anyone in this NG. You
    >>> are just **** stirring and propagating your crazy views on MS. This is
    >>> off topic here. This is a Ubuntu help group.
    >>>

    >> Who made you the moderator of this newsgroup? Why are you *always* so
    >> protective of M$?
    >>
    >> Cheers.

    >
    > How am I being protective of MS?
    >
    > I am merely stating a fact of life.
    >
    > If you prefer lies and misinformation, fine. I don't.
    >
    > The facts are this : OE and similar ARE adequate for many millions of
    > people.
    >

    In the "me me" way of thinking, you're absolutely correct. For the rest of
    us, who can appreciate just how destructive OE has been over the years,
    saying it is adequate for millions, is just so much more M$ FUD.

    Cheers.


    --
    Sometimes, I Wake Up Grumpy.
    Sometimes, I Just Let Him Sleep In.
    -- My Wife


  7. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    NoStop writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    > In the "me me" way of thinking, you're absolutely correct. For the rest of
    > us, who can appreciate just how destructive OE has been over the years,
    > saying it is adequate for millions, is just so much more M$ FUD.


    Who is the "rest of us"?

    But the facts are that most people simply don't care - it meets their
    needs. The numbers do not lie.

    And I am not necessarily supporting this - just stating a fact.

    People are happy enough in many, many cases. It works. And many, many
    people run Windows just fine. Sat here saying it isn't so is plain
    stupid. The numbers do not lie. if this SW was not "adequate" for their
    needs then they would seek out something else.

    The key things here are "adequate" and also differentiating between OSS
    and Linux.


  8. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    On 2007-09-25, Hadron wrote:
    > NoStop writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> In the "me me" way of thinking, you're absolutely correct. For the rest of
    >> us, who can appreciate just how destructive OE has been over the years,
    >> saying it is adequate for millions, is just so much more M$ FUD.

    >
    > Who is the "rest of us"?
    >
    > But the facts are that most people simply don't care - it meets their
    > needs. The numbers do not lie.
    >
    > And I am not necessarily supporting this - just stating a fact.
    >
    > People are happy enough in many, many cases. It works. And many, many
    > people run Windows just fine. Sat here saying it isn't so is plain
    > stupid. The numbers do not lie. if this SW was not "adequate" for their
    > needs then they would seek out something else.


    This is of course a bald assumption. An article of faith.

    People will put up with crap when it isn't "adequate". The fact
    that the Detriot auto makers are still around is proof enough of
    that. People are lazy and xenophobic. They are frightened by the
    idea of doing something different from the crowd even when they
    are doing their own belly-aching about the crowd endorsed product.

    >
    > The key things here are "adequate" and also differentiating between OSS
    > and Linux.
    >


    Billions and Billions Served: Statistics Don't Lie.

    --
    If you think that an 80G disk can hold HUNDRENDS of |||
    hours of DV video then you obviously haven't used iMovie either. / | \

  9. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    Hadron did eloquently scribble:
    > NoStop writes:


    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >> In the "me me" way of thinking, you're absolutely correct. For the rest of
    >> us, who can appreciate just how destructive OE has been over the years,
    >> saying it is adequate for millions, is just so much more M$ FUD.


    > Who is the "rest of us"?


    > But the facts are that most people simply don't care - it meets their
    > needs. The numbers do not lie.


    The fact that you don't see this as the root of the problem is astounding.
    Microsoft has dumbed down an entire generation of computer users.

    If those people had bothered to look up outlook express they would've
    learned quite quickly what a dangerous, steaming pile of elephant crap it
    was and run away from it en mass.


    > People are happy enough in many, many cases.


    No, they're usually frustrated, angry and UNhappy.
    "Why is my computer always getting slower?"
    Too uneducated to know their use of it and the software they use are
    allowing virus infestation after virus infestation...

    Many of these poor saps think norton protects them when all it's good at
    these days is sapping resources.

    > It works.


    by only the feeblest definition of "works".

    --
    __________________________________________________ ____________________________
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    |Andrew Halliwell BSc(hons)| "The day Microsoft makes something that doesn't |
    | in | suck is probably the day they start making |
    | Computer science | vacuum cleaners" - Ernst Jan Plugge |
    ------------------------------------------------------------------------------

  10. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    On Tue, 25 Sep 2007 01:30:19 +0200 Hadron hit the keyboard to produce the
    following:



    > The facts are this : OE and similar ARE adequate for many millions of
    > people.


    LOL this reminds me on the one and only occasion I got a virus via
    "outhouse" explorer. As I was already in the habit to backup my data, I
    didn't loose anything worth keeping. A friend of mine who got bitten by
    the same very virus wasn't that lucky.

    OK the version was the 98er version of "Microschrott", can't remember
    exactly which e-mail program it was (maybe Pegasus or so) I used then
    for awhile then I made the switch to GNU/Linux Suse 6.2 and moved on from
    there to several different distributions, ending up at Debian/UBUNTU now.

    So the point is, I know people who got viruses through Outhouse and started
    to use other e-mail SW, I think even "Netscape" offered such a feature...


    Dragomir Kollaric
    --
    I like *both* kind of music :-)

  11. Re: Ubuntu Linux vs. Windows XP -- A Review

    [snips]

    On Mon, 24 Sep 2007 23:07:27 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > What ARE you talking about? I said the people find it adequate. Millions
    > upon millions of people use OE with no issues. Or do you dispute that?
    >
    > Possibly you don't understand what "adequate" means?


    Or perhaps you don't. OE has an abysmal track record when it comes to
    security, for example. Since Joe Sixpack is _not_ presumed to be skilled
    enough to secure his system himself, it follows that the software and OS
    should be fairly secure by default; OE has failed this criterion too many
    times to count, thus cannot be considered "adequate" for Joe Sixpack. Of
    course, by the time he's skilled enough to do such things as secure his
    system, chances are he'll find OE is a little too limiting in its
    filtering and other such options, meaning it's not really adequate for the
    skilled user, either - so just who are you arguing it is adequate _for_?

    > Personally I use emacs/gnus which are incredibly powerful. However, Mrs
    > Jenkins at the corner shop is more that happy to use OE. It is adequate
    > for her needs.


    No. It is adequate for _some_ of her needs, such as getting emails. It
    has a long tradition of being less than adequate to her security needs -
    ones she has, but often doesn't realize she has.

+ Reply to Thread