Why people "choose" Windows - Linux

This is a discussion on Why people "choose" Windows - Linux ; On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:10:35 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote: > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote: > >> On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:21:50 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote: >> >>> High Plains Thumper wrote: >>>> Richard Rasker wrote: >>>> >>>>> Until ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 60

Thread: Why people "choose" Windows

  1. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:10:35 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> On Wed, 02 Jul 2008 16:21:50 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>
    >>> High Plains Thumper wrote:
    >>>> Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Until today, that is. Now, they've "modernized" the IT
    >>>>> system, and as of today, all connections from here fail,
    >>>>> with an ominous warning on the login page: "Home and laptop
    >>>>> users are required to install the IBM Domino Web Access 7
    >>>>> Control for continued access".

    >
    > ...
    >
    >>>> I noticed the following on:
    >>>>
    >>>> http://www-03.ibm.com/linux/solution...solution.shtml
    >>>>
    >>>>
    This solution is now available on Linux. Domino Web
    >>>> Access 6.5 extends messaging and collaboration to Linux
    >>>> clients with support for the Mozilla browser X making it the
    >>>> first-ever fully supported client-to-server collaboration
    >>>> solution for Linux.
    >>>>
    >>>> Have you researched yet this option? You may be able to
    >>>> remain in a Linux environment after all.
    >>>
    >>> This is just a thought. Perhaps you could check with your IT
    >>> department to see is they have the Linux version available for
    >>> your use and whether the current IBM x86 Linux 6.5 version would
    >>> work.
    >>>
    >>> I looked at the pricing for an individual license, varies from 87
    >>> to 174 EUR for Netherlands, depending on options.
    >>>
    >>> It might be worth a try to check with them first. Worst they
    >>> could say is, "no."

    >>
    >> Further proof you don't work in the Information Technology world HPT.
    >>
    >> One thing you Linux loons ignore is that people don't want to have to jump
    >> through hoops just to run Linux.

    >
    > The point is that my spouse has been using Linux for years here, without
    > having to jump through any hoops.


    Key word here....
    So why can't she use Linux now?

    >> They want to run applications that they need to perform their jobs.

    >
    > All my spouse needed to perform her job was an Internet browser; Firefox is
    > as good a browser as you can get, and everything worked perfectly fine,
    > until some genius came up with the idea to deploy a Windows-only bit of
    > software in a widely used Internet service. You don't expect to be locked
    > out all of a sudden.


    So?
    Welcome to the real world, which is why Linux is not used much as a desktop
    system.
    You are locked out using Linux.
    Things work fine with Windows.
    That's highly typical of any business setting which is why Windows commands
    90 percent and Linux a dismal 0.6 percent.


    >> Most are not interested in spending countless hours trying to shoehorn
    >> Linux into a situation where it just doesn't fit.

    >
    > So what you're saying is that Linux isn't a good choice for using Internet
    > services. Yeah, right.


    In this case no, it isn't.
    If it was, you would be using it.

    > Dumbass.


    Yes you are.

    > Richard Rasker



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  2. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 08:28:02 -0600, High Plains Thumper wrote:


    > I can understand that. Sometimes one ends up dealing with some
    > moronic toner monkey twat who as a Government employee, thinks he
    > runs the department. I usually end up going over his head and
    > talking to his supervisor. Sometimes I think having these so
    > called IT certifications breed arrogance with knowledgeless idiots.


    Speaking from experience High Plains Thumper?

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  3. Re: Why people "choose" Windows (more lies than facts)


    "Richard Rasker" wrote in message
    news:g4gsj3$j1d$1@saturn.z74.net...

    > Until today, that is. Now, they've "modernized" the IT system, and as of
    > today, all connections from here fail, with an ominous warning on the
    > login
    > page: "Home and laptop users are required to install the IBM Domino Web
    > Access 7 Control for continued access".


    Clearly the school is running IBM's Notes and Domino server. Since this
    plugin (according to IBM's website) is used to provide web based access to a
    Lotus Domino server. How was she getting access to Domino before this
    alledged change happened?


    > Great. So we need to install an ActiveX control to continue to use their
    > Internet services. And, as we all know, ActiveX controls on Web sites are
    > Microsoft's way to give any non-Windows users the middle finger. So we're
    > stuck with a simple choice: get Windows, or give up working from home.


    Take it up with IBM since Lotus Domino is their product and it's their
    Active-X control.


    > This is a perfect example why people "choose" Windows: not because they
    > have
    > a choice, but because they're forced to use it. And oh, who came up with
    > this idea to set up the college's Internet portal this way in the first
    > place? Yup, the Certified Microsoft Gold Partner bastards who sold this
    > crapware to the college.


    More BULL**** from Rasker. For starters why would a "Certified Microsoft
    Gold Partner (bastards)" install a product from IBM. Wouldn't it make sense
    for them to install Microsoft Exchange Server. More likely than not it was
    an IBM rep who installed the software.

    And more importantly... how do *YOU* know that it was a "Certified Microsoft
    Gold Partner" who sold this to the school? You don't work there. Your wife
    is a teacher there so are you claiming that the school runs all of the IT
    contratracts by her for approval? So how exactly do you know that it was a
    "MS Gold Partner" that sold and installed this software? I claim that you're
    full of **** on this one and simply making up some BS story because there is
    no way you would know who sold what to the school.


    > And, er, didn't mrs. Kroes just hand out multi-hundred-million-dollar
    > fines to Microsod for exactly this kind of practice,


    Exactly what kind of practice... for installing IBM software and requiring
    an IBM Active-X control to access the IBM software?




    > i.e. denying non-Microsoft users access
    > to the use of their products and services?


    Take it up with IBM pinhead. It's a IBM product and a IBM plugin that's used
    to access the IBM product. Microsoft has absolutely nothing to do with this.
    If IBM cared as much about lienux as you morons think they do then this
    problem wouldn't exist would it?



    > This is very, very sad indeed.


    The only thing "sad" is the lies and bull**** that the "advocates" post.
    There is absolutely nothing in your fictitous BS that has anything to do
    with Microsoft. But don't let facts and reality get in the way of your
    latest anti-MS fiction of the week story.





    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  4. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:35:27 -0400, Linonut wrote:

    > Yeah, my wife's univ is changing from a serviceable mail system that she
    > could access from pine or a web page to Exchange.


    Exchange has a web client, called Outlook Web Access. And yes, it works
    with non-Microsoft browsers.

  5. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:10:35 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    ....
    >>> One thing you Linux loons ignore is that people don't want to have to
    >>> jump through hoops just to run Linux.

    >>
    >> The point is that my spouse has been using Linux for years here, without
    >> having to jump through any hoops.

    >
    > Key word here....
    > So why can't she use Linux now?


    *SIGH* Have you read the first message of this thread? The reason why she
    can't use Linux any more to work from home is because some sysadmin at her
    work decided to deploy a Windows-only ActiveX access control. She can't log
    in any more from our Linux boxes. No login -> no work getting done.
    And oh, about jumping through hoops: all the Windows users have to jump
    through this ActiveX control installation hoop as well.

    >>> They want to run applications that they need to perform their jobs.

    >>
    >> All my spouse needed to perform her job was an Internet browser; Firefox
    >> is as good a browser as you can get, and everything worked perfectly
    >> fine, until some genius came up with the idea to deploy a Windows-only
    >> bit of software in a widely used Internet service. You don't expect to be
    >> locked out all of a sudden.

    >
    > So?
    > Welcome to the real world, which is why Linux is not used much as a
    > desktop system.
    > You are locked out using Linux.
    > Things work fine with Windows.


    No they don't -- Windows users are required to install stuff to make it
    work. And these days, they run into all sorts of problems installing
    ActiveX controls, because even Internet Explorer doesn't behave like a five
    penny dock-side whore any more. Here's how it's done:

    http://www.uwindsor.ca/units/its/hel...b!OpenDocument

    "You must click Yes or Install and allow the control to install. If you do
    not, you will not be able to reply to mail, send mail, access attachments,
    etc. If you are using Windows 2000 or XP, you must have Administrator
    rights to the workstation in order to be prompted for the control."

    Ah yes. And what if you don't ususally work with admin rights, and you don't
    even have the admin password?

    "If you are not prompted, and if you cannot send mail or see attachments,
    then your regular PC support personnel must logon to the workstation as
    Administrator in order to allow the control to install."

    Yup, get someone to help you. But even after a succesful installation,
    chances are that things still won't work properly:

    "If you have installed the ActiveX Control and it is still prompting you
    every time you log into UWindsor FacStaff Webmail, or if you are not
    receiving the prompt and cannot send mail, you will need to: ..."

    [jump jump through hoop -> lower security -- great idea!]

    Are we done yet? Well, not necessarily ...

    "If you still do not receive the prompt for the control, and if you are
    still unable to send mail, select Tools, Internet Options, General,
    Settings:"

    [jump jump jump ... delete ActiveX control ... jump jump attempt once
    again ...]

    And what if you use Firefox? Well, you get a very appropriate warning:

    "A script from International Business Machines Corporation" is requesting
    enhanced abilities that are UNSAFE and could be used to compromise your
    machine or data"

    Yup, you've read it correctly: you're supposed to allow something UNSAFE to
    happen. Great. And once you have (inadvertently, or perhaps wisely) clicked
    Deny, you're even instructed to throw away your complete prefs.js file in
    order to get things working again. Indeed, all your settings out the
    Window(s). Although luckily they explain how to edit prefs.js, so that the
    more savvy users can keep their settings intact.

    But hey, what the hell, it's still not working! Now what could be wrong?

    "Note that if you are using a pop-up blocker (such as AOL's pop-up blocker,
    ZoneAlarm, StopThePop, Google toolbar, etc.) you will not be able to use
    Domino Web Access. You will have to disable the blocker or allow
    [domain] for pop-ups."

    I don't know of anyone without a pop-up blocker, so there ya go, yet another
    hoopetie-hoop to jump through ...

    And oh, in the actual Dutch installation manual, they even tell you to check
    the "Always install software from "International Business Machines
    Corporation" radio button, not the much safer "Ask me every time" option.
    So next time these people stumble upon another ActiveX craplet from IBM,
    regardless the site it's found on, they won't even be asked whether they
    want to install it -- it's simply installed. This is SO STUPID!

    In short: the average, non-computer-savvy user with default security and
    pop-up settings will most probably fail to install this ActiveX control --
    and I just got word from my spouse that lots her Windows-using colleages
    indeed have trouble to get things working. And you know what's so funny:
    the better your security measures are, the more trouble you will have
    installing this crapware on an utterly crappy OS.

    So what do you mean "things work fine in Windows"? They don't, unless users
    and/or sysadmins spend a considerable amount of effort on making it work.

    > That's highly typical of any business setting which is why Windows
    > commands 90 percent and Linux a dismal 0.6 percent.


    No. This situation is typical of some old-school Microsoft-indoctrinated
    sysadmin where "enhanced functionality" (which I've falied to identify so
    far) always trumps "basic Internet security", and at the same time
    tossing "general interoperability" out the Window(s). I'm actually amazed
    that ActiveX controls are still used -- weren't these /the/ single biggest
    cause of countless highly critical security holes in Internet Explorer?

    >>> Most are not interested in spending countless hours trying to shoehorn
    >>> Linux into a situation where it just doesn't fit.

    >>
    >> So what you're saying is that Linux isn't a good choice for using
    >> Internet services. Yeah, right.

    >
    > In this case no, it isn't.


    Yeah, great point: if an Internet service is turned from "OS agnostic"
    to "Windows only", Linux isn't a good choice for that service -- any more,
    at least. Ghee, an open door if ever I saw one ...

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  6. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    * Erik Funkenbusch peremptorily fired off this memo:

    > On Thu, 3 Jul 2008 07:35:27 -0400, Linonut wrote:
    >
    >> Yeah, my wife's univ is changing from a serviceable mail system that she
    >> could access from pine or a web page to Exchange.

    >
    > Exchange has a web client, called Outlook Web Access. And yes, it works
    > with non-Microsoft browsers.


    True, I used it over Firefox for quite a long time, before I finally got
    sick of having to make 22 tediously-placed clicks to delete 20 emails,
    and having the damn thing time out on me. (It was useable, in
    general, though.)

    When they decided we really ought to be using certificates for our
    emails, that got me up off my ass to replace web-mail.

    So now I use Evolution (with your Precious OWA as the "server"), and
    find the experience a bit better than web-mail. 3 clicks to delete 20
    emails, for example.

    However, I still have to deal with access to corporate data folders
    through a browser. Again, tedious to use. Also very slow for some
    reason -- 40 KB/sec for over 100Mb of data, bleh.

    I could mount the folders over a Samba share, but then I'd have to run
    VPN.

    I tried wget, but all it gets back is the javascript for the login
    screen.

    I'd prefer to access the site using SSH, but I'm not sure they're hep to
    that technology.

    Why companies prefer primitive Windows technology to tried-and-true
    open-source technology is beyond my comprehension.

    --
    It's just apartment house rules,
    So all you 'partment house fools
    Remember: one man's ceiling is another man's floor.
    One man's ceiling is another man's floor.
    -- Paul Simon, "One Man's Ceiling Is Another Man's Floor"

  7. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    > mentally-ill troll wrote:
    >
    >> Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>>
    >>> All my spouse needed to perform her job was an Internet browser; Firefox
    >>> is as good a browser as you can get, and everything worked perfectly
    >>> fine, until some genius came up with the idea to deploy a Windows-only
    >>> bit of software in a widely used Internet service. You don't expect to be
    >>> locked out all of a sudden.

    >>
    >> So?
    >> Welcome to the real world, which is why Linux is not used much as a
    >> desktop system.
    >> You are locked out using Linux.


    Yet this mentally-ill fsckwit has been blubbering, for YEARS, things
    like "why is Linux only 1% after all these years" and "can 99% of
    users be wrong?" Here the mentally-ill fsckwit answers his own
    (idiotic) questions.

    You're not "wrong" when you use something that you are FORCED to use,
    due to monopolist practices, compatibility, etc.

    That doesn't mean "there's something wrong with Linux". DUH


  8. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:12:59 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:10:35 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > ...
    >>>> One thing you Linux loons ignore is that people don't want to have to
    >>>> jump through hoops just to run Linux.
    >>>
    >>> The point is that my spouse has been using Linux for years here, without
    >>> having to jump through any hoops.

    >>
    >> Key word here....
    >> So why can't she use Linux now?

    >
    > *SIGH* Have you read the first message of this thread? The reason why she
    > can't use Linux any more to work from home is because some sysadmin at her
    > work decided to deploy a Windows-only ActiveX access control. She can't log
    > in any more from our Linux boxes. No login -> no work getting done.
    > And oh, about jumping through hoops: all the Windows users have to jump
    > through this ActiveX control installation hoop as well.


    But it works for them.
    It won't work for Linux users though.


    >>>> They want to run applications that they need to perform their jobs.
    >>>
    >>> All my spouse needed to perform her job was an Internet browser; Firefox
    >>> is as good a browser as you can get, and everything worked perfectly
    >>> fine, until some genius came up with the idea to deploy a Windows-only
    >>> bit of software in a widely used Internet service. You don't expect to be
    >>> locked out all of a sudden.

    >>
    >> So?
    >> Welcome to the real world, which is why Linux is not used much as a
    >> desktop system.
    >> You are locked out using Linux.
    >> Things work fine with Windows.

    >
    > No they don't -- Windows users are required to install stuff to make it
    > work. And these days, they run into all sorts of problems installing
    > ActiveX controls, because even Internet Explorer doesn't behave like a five
    > penny dock-side whore any more. Here's how it's done:
    >
    > http://www.uwindsor.ca/units/its/hel...b!OpenDocument


    So?
    You dig up problems, who cares?
    The point is Windows users CAN use the sites etc.
    Linux users can't.

    It's a simple concept.

    If the Windows users in the company have a problem, tell them to call the
    help desk and get it resolved.




    > No. This situation is typical of some old-school Microsoft-indoctrinated
    > sysadmin where "enhanced functionality" (which I've falied to identify so
    > far) always trumps "basic Internet security", and at the same time
    > tossing "general interoperability" out the Window(s). I'm actually amazed
    > that ActiveX controls are still used -- weren't these /the/ single biggest
    > cause of countless highly critical security holes in Internet Explorer?


    Cry all you want, the point is Windows users CAN use the sites and Linux
    users can't and returning to your subject title, this is a perfect example
    of how Linux users are locked out.

    Try using a Linux based laptop in any large corporation and unless they are
    supporting Linux, which is rare, you will find these kind of hurdles
    everywhere.

    Everything from sales presentations that don't run correctly under
    OpenOffice to training materials that are CBT based that only run under
    Windows.

    Sorry, but that's the way it is with Linux.



    >>>> Most are not interested in spending countless hours trying to shoehorn
    >>>> Linux into a situation where it just doesn't fit.
    >>>
    >>> So what you're saying is that Linux isn't a good choice for using
    >>> Internet services. Yeah, right.

    >>
    >> In this case no, it isn't.

    >
    > Yeah, great point: if an Internet service is turned from "OS agnostic"
    > to "Windows only", Linux isn't a good choice for that service -- any more,
    > at least. Ghee, an open door if ever I saw one ...
    >
    > Richard Rasker


    The problem is the door has been open for 16+ years and nobosy seems to be
    walking through it.

    The point is, you can cry all you wish about standards, poor Internet
    programming (and I agree with you on that one BTW, this is ludicrous)
    however as an illustration you just proved why Linux is a poor choice.

    I can give a hundred examples on top of yours why Linux is a terrible
    choice for business unless that business has just basic needs.

    Everything from programs that interface with suppliers, automatically
    update inventory, do financials, training, inusrance billing, interfacing
    with the govt (Medicare/Medacaid etc) and so forth that need to interface
    with others who are most likely using Windows.

    Are there Linux programs to do the above?
    In some cases, yes.
    Problem is, very few are using them and if they don't interface perfectly
    with Windows, they are going to be dead in the water unless they are back
    office operations stuff that works like a black box and doesn't care what
    is on the other side.

    You choose to use Linux and that's fine if it works 100 percent for you.
    For most people it doesn't work 100 percent and they are not interested in
    wasting time trying to make it work in what amounts to a Windows world.

    They just want to do their job, get paid and go home.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  9. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:12:59 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:10:35 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    >> ...
    >>>>> One thing you Linux loons ignore is that people don't want to have to
    >>>>> jump through hoops just to run Linux.
    >>>>
    >>>> The point is that my spouse has been using Linux for years here,
    >>>> without having to jump through any hoops.
    >>>
    >>> Key word here....
    >>> So why can't she use Linux now?

    >>
    >> *SIGH* Have you read the first message of this thread? The reason why she
    >> can't use Linux any more to work from home is because some sysadmin at
    >> her work decided to deploy a Windows-only ActiveX access control. She
    >> can't log in any more from our Linux boxes. No login -> no work getting
    >> done. And oh, about jumping through hoops: all the Windows users have to
    >> jump through this ActiveX control installation hoop as well.

    >
    > But it works for them.
    > It won't work for Linux users though.


    OK, let's go over this once more. Everything /did/ work for Linux users --
    for years on end -- but now, all of a sudden it doesn't, because someone
    decided to replace a universally accessible Internet service with a problem
    (as no-one in their right mind can call this a "solution") which only works
    with Windows -- and even there requires a fair amount of hassle and
    tinkering to get working. And for what? Yup, for "enhanced functionality" I
    still haven't been able to identify. From what I've seen on a Windows
    machine, the mail interface windows still look and behave exactly the same
    as with the previous version.

    The whole point of my posting, of course, is to show that there's nothing
    inherently wrong with Linux, but that in most cases Windows is being shoved
    down people's throats for no valid reasons at all. Previously, things
    worked just fine with any OS imaginable. Now, people get the exact same
    functionality, but only if they use Windows. The use of other OS'es has
    become impossible.

    Even you can't be so thick you can't see that this is a stupid regression to
    medieveal times.

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  10. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:18:02 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >
    >> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:12:59 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:10:35 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> ...
    >>>>>> One thing you Linux loons ignore is that people don't want to have to
    >>>>>> jump through hoops just to run Linux.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The point is that my spouse has been using Linux for years here,
    >>>>> without having to jump through any hoops.
    >>>>
    >>>> Key word here....
    >>>> So why can't she use Linux now?
    >>>
    >>> *SIGH* Have you read the first message of this thread? The reason why she
    >>> can't use Linux any more to work from home is because some sysadmin at
    >>> her work decided to deploy a Windows-only ActiveX access control. She
    >>> can't log in any more from our Linux boxes. No login -> no work getting
    >>> done. And oh, about jumping through hoops: all the Windows users have to
    >>> jump through this ActiveX control installation hoop as well.

    >>
    >> But it works for them.
    >> It won't work for Linux users though.

    >
    > OK, let's go over this once more. Everything /did/ work for Linux users --
    > for years on end -- but now, all of a sudden it doesn't, because someone
    > decided to replace a universally accessible Internet service with a problem
    > (as no-one in their right mind can call this a "solution") which only works
    > with Windows -- and even there requires a fair amount of hassle and
    > tinkering to get working. And for what? Yup, for "enhanced functionality" I
    > still haven't been able to identify. From what I've seen on a Windows
    > machine, the mail interface windows still look and behave exactly the same
    > as with the previous version.


    So now it doesn't work for Linux users which is what I said.
    If it still worked you wouldn't be posting this.

    > The whole point of my posting, of course, is to show that there's nothing
    > inherently wrong with Linux, but that in most cases Windows is being shoved
    > down people's throats for no valid reasons at all. Previously, things
    > worked just fine with any OS imaginable. Now, people get the exact same
    > functionality, but only if they use Windows. The use of other OS'es has
    > become impossible.


    The only problem with Linux is that it is a Windows world and your
    experience is highly typical.
    Look at Snit's Toyota website for example.
    How about financial websites?
    Stock trading software?
    Banking?
    etc....

    The list is endless.



    > Even you can't be so thick you can't see that this is a stupid regression to
    > medieveal times.


    I'm not saying it's right, in fact I agreed with you that the ActiveX thing
    is foolish in this case.
    What I am saying is that this is life with Linux.



    > Richard Rasker



    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  11. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:

    > On Fri, 04 Jul 2008 11:18:02 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>
    >>> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 19:12:59 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> On Thu, 03 Jul 2008 11:10:35 +0200, Richard Rasker wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> ...
    >>>>>>> One thing you Linux loons ignore is that people don't want to have
    >>>>>>> to jump through hoops just to run Linux.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The point is that my spouse has been using Linux for years here,
    >>>>>> without having to jump through any hoops.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Key word here....
    >>>>> So why can't she use Linux now?
    >>>>
    >>>> *SIGH* Have you read the first message of this thread? The reason why
    >>>> she can't use Linux any more to work from home is because some sysadmin
    >>>> at her work decided to deploy a Windows-only ActiveX access control.
    >>>> She can't log in any more from our Linux boxes. No login -> no work
    >>>> getting done. And oh, about jumping through hoops: all the Windows
    >>>> users have to jump through this ActiveX control installation hoop as
    >>>> well.
    >>>
    >>> But it works for them.
    >>> It won't work for Linux users though.

    >>
    >> OK, let's go over this once more. Everything /did/ work for Linux users
    >> -- for years on end -- but now, all of a sudden it doesn't, because
    >> someone decided to replace a universally accessible Internet service with
    >> a problem (as no-one in their right mind can call this a "solution")
    >> which only works with Windows -- and even there requires a fair amount of
    >> hassle and tinkering to get working. And for what? Yup, for "enhanced
    >> functionality" I still haven't been able to identify. From what I've seen
    >> on a Windows machine, the mail interface windows still look and behave
    >> exactly the same as with the previous version.

    >
    > So now it doesn't work for Linux users which is what I said.
    > If it still worked you wouldn't be posting this.


    Sure, I won't complain about things working. And pretty much everything in
    Linux simply works -- as I found out today, installing an ancient Dell GX50
    (which didn't even support a CD-ROM player!): apart from the slighty tricky
    part of bootstrapping a Mandriva network install, the overall installation
    was a matter of perhaps ten mouse clicks, waiting for one hour (it's a slow
    beastie), and one reboot, after which everything worked fine.

    And when I hooked it up to the new user's local network, and told it to look
    for the shared printer on the Windows computer downstairs, all we had to do
    was wait a minute or two for the necessary stuff to download and install,
    after which the printer was incorrectly recognized as an HP DeskJet 940C.
    Yup, incorrectly (it was an HP DeskJet 6420), because Windows itself had
    somehow managed to set the wrong printer model, and the user had found no
    way to correct this issue. This came as no wonder, because both the
    installation of the Windows printer drivers and setting up the printer
    share had been rather problematic, and took well over half an hour.
    Somehow, HP has managed to make installing printer drivers into a
    hit-and-miss ordeal, with many possible points of user error and failure.
    Anyway, after manually selecting the correct model i nMandriva, everything
    worked right fine, and the test page came out perfect.
    Then we hooked up an HP USB scanner. I can't recall the exact model, because
    after we told Mandriva that we wanted to use a scanner, everything was
    installed automatically, and not even a minute later we were succesfully
    scanning documents.

    I could go on about sound, using the digital camera, connecting the MP3
    player, connecting the cell phone, watching video clips etcetera (OK, this
    latter required a subsequent -- but dead easy -- installation of Flash
    plugin and Windows codecs) -- everything simply worked. In half the cases,
    we only had to tell Linux what we wanted to use to have it recognized and
    supported; in the other half, simply plugging in stuff was already
    sufficient. No quirks. No freezes. No half-assed hardware support. No need
    to install driver after driver from CD's, or hunt 'em down on the Internet.
    Everything on and around this machine simply worked first go. And this is
    quite normal for Linux, in spite of the horror stories DooFuS is digging
    up.

    >> The whole point of my posting, of course, is to show that there's nothing
    >> inherently wrong with Linux, but that in most cases Windows is being
    >> shoved down people's throats for no valid reasons at all. Previously,
    >> things worked just fine with any OS imaginable. Now, people get the exact
    >> same functionality, but only if they use Windows. The use of other OS'es
    >> has become impossible.

    >
    > The only problem with Linux is that it is a Windows world and your
    > experience is highly typical.
    > Look at Snit's Toyota website for example.


    It's not a Web site. It's an HTML disaster. And no doubt, one reason for
    this is that it's been made to look sort of OK in the crappiest Web browser
    in the universe.

    > How about financial websites?


    What about them? Several of my users are dabbling in stock trading via
    specialized Web sites, and I haven't heard of any complaints in the past
    few years.
    Sure, until some five years ago, several major financial sites had
    compatibility problems (as in: Windows-only access); but upon notifying
    those webmasters, we usually received replies that they were already
    working on supporting open standards. Why? Because they knew that shutting
    out at least 5% of the market is stupid from a business point of view --
    also because standards compliance made their sites easier to build, manage
    and troubleshoot.

    > Stock trading software?


    Same as above, as long as we're talking about browser access. I don't know
    about stand-alone programs for networked stock trade access -- but for
    normal users, these are increasinlgy being surpassed by browser-based
    solutions.

    > Banking?


    There isn't a bank here in the Netherlands that I know of which doesn't work
    with Linux.

    > etc....
    >
    > The list is endless.


    Quite the contrary, your list is so short that it might be called
    insignificant -- at least here in the Netherlands. This college ****-up is
    the first Windows-only Interet crap I've encountered in several years.

    But feel free to support your point, and please come up with, say, ten
    popular and/or important sites which are only usable for Windows users.
    Then I might be inclined to change my opinion.

    >> Even you can't be so thick you can't see that this is a stupid regression
    >> to medieveal times.

    >
    > I'm not saying it's right, in fact I agreed with you that the ActiveX
    > thing is foolish in this case.
    > What I am saying is that this is life with Linux.


    My experiences are quite different. My worst Windows trouble consists of
    4,000+ spam messages sent to my mail server every day, 95% of which
    originate from zombie Windows boxes. And even in this case, Linux simply
    works: SpamAssassin on my (Linux, what else) mail server manages to reject
    spam with 99.7% accuracy. (Which still means that a dozen or so spam
    messages get through every day :-( )

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  12. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    In article ,
    Richard Rasker wrote:
    > Until today, that is. Now, they've "modernized" the IT system, and as of
    > today, all connections from here fail, with an ominous warning on the login
    > page: "Home and laptop users are required to install the IBM Domino Web
    > Access 7 Control for continued access".


    IBM is under the impression that Domino Web 7 can be accessed from Linux:

    >



    --
    --Tim Smith

  13. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    Tim Smith wrote:

    > In article ,
    > Richard Rasker wrote:
    >> Until today, that is. Now, they've "modernized" the IT system, and as of
    >> today, all connections from here fail, with an ominous warning on the
    >> login page: "Home and laptop users are required to install the IBM Domino
    >> Web Access 7 Control for continued access".

    >
    > IBM is under the impression that Domino Web 7 can be accessed from Linux:
    >
    >>



    I know, several other people have pointed me in the same direction. Too bad
    it doesn't work -- or rather, that this particular ActiveX control (for Web
    Access 7) only works for FF1.x. And sure enough, it doesn't work here, with
    FF2.0.
    It's nice to know that IBM at least tries to make the effort -- and they
    sure do wonderful things for OSS -- but in my opinion, ActiveX controls are
    A Bad Thing, and should have been thrown on history's garbage heap a decade
    ago.

    Richard Rasker
    --
    http://www.linetec.nl

  14. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    Tim Smith writes:

    > In article ,
    > Richard Rasker wrote:
    >> Until today, that is. Now, they've "modernized" the IT system, and as of
    >> today, all connections from here fail, with an ominous warning on the login
    >> page: "Home and laptop users are required to install the IBM Domino Web
    >> Access 7 Control for continued access".

    >
    > IBM is under the impression that Domino Web 7 can be accessed from Linux:
    >
    >>


    I already posted this. Rasker is an idiot.

  15. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.

    The opportunity is there, because MS Office 2007 has been such a
    disaster, but unfortunately the Linux community has not banded
    together to take advantage of it.

    Instead you keep pointing to Open Office, which the market considers
    inferior to Microsoft Office.

    Fix the damn thing, and quit blaming MIcrosoft.


  16. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On 2008-07-05, reporter wrote:
    > When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    > Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.


    It's only your opinion that MS Office is better than OOffice.

    > The opportunity is there, because MS Office 2007 has been such a
    > disaster, but unfortunately the Linux community has not banded
    > together to take advantage of it.


    Rubbish.

    > Instead you keep pointing to Open Office, which the market considers
    > inferior to Microsoft Office.


    The "market" doesn't even know that there _is_ an alternative.

    > Fix the damn thing, and quit blaming MIcrosoft.


    Tell ya what... I'll stop blaming Microsoft when they stop making dumb
    changes to their office formats, merely to stymie compatibility with
    other office suites...

    There ya go....

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  17. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:35:42 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:

    > On 2008-07-05, reporter wrote:
    >> When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    >> Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.

    >
    > It's only your opinion that MS Office is better than OOffice.
    >
    >> The opportunity is there, because MS Office 2007 has been such a
    >> disaster, but unfortunately the Linux community has not banded together
    >> to take advantage of it.

    >
    > Rubbish.
    >
    >> Instead you keep pointing to Open Office, which the market considers
    >> inferior to Microsoft Office.

    >
    > The "market" doesn't even know that there _is_ an alternative.
    >

    Well as an example, Israel does. They threw M$ Office out ages ago.
    Brazil changed to Linux, so they'll be using OOo.

    >> Fix the damn thing, and quit blaming MIcrosoft.

    >
    > Tell ya what... I'll stop blaming Microsoft when they stop making dumb
    > changes to their office formats, merely to stymie compatibility with other
    > office suites...
    >
    > There ya go....


    Quite.

    --
    The little scamps! It's the oldest trick in the book: capture your ship,
    turn it into a planet, then explore a macro universe in a laundry basket.
    How could you fall for an old scam like that?
    --Holly, Nanarchy - Red Dwarf--

  18. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    William Poaster writes:

    > On Sat, 05 Jul 2008 08:35:42 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >
    >> On 2008-07-05, reporter wrote:
    >>> When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    >>> Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.

    >>
    >> It's only your opinion that MS Office is better than OOffice.


    *WHAT*??????

    There is nothing in OO better than in Office. It is slower, has less
    features and much buggier. It is also incompatible with many existing
    documents. If you judge it being better since its "free" then fine. But
    lets be realistic here. Emacs, however, is OSS and *IS* better than any
    commercial equivalent IMO.

    >>
    >>> The opportunity is there, because MS Office 2007 has been such a
    >>> disaster, but unfortunately the Linux community has not banded together
    >>> to take advantage of it.

    >>
    >> Rubbish.


    Seems quite accurate.

    >>
    >>> Instead you keep pointing to Open Office, which the market considers
    >>> inferior to Microsoft Office.

    >>
    >> The "market" doesn't even know that there _is_ an alternative.
    >>


    So why was his comment above "Rubbish"? Of course not every one is like
    the great Gregory Shearman. Some people WANT Linux to get better and
    installed in more locations.

    > Well as an example, Israel does. They threw M$ Office out ages ago.
    > Brazil changed to Linux, so they'll be using OOo.
    >
    >>> Fix the damn thing, and quit blaming MIcrosoft.

    >>
    >> Tell ya what... I'll stop blaming Microsoft when they stop making dumb
    >> changes to their office formats, merely to stymie compatibility with other
    >> office suites...
    >>
    >> There ya go....

    >
    > Quite.


    "me too" eh Willy. Me too.

    --
    This year with the release of XP, they are actually behind. The end days
    are near for the BIOS reading inferior OS. It is inevitable.
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  19. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    William Poaster wrote:

    > Well as an example, Israel does. They threw M$ Office out ages ago.
    > Brazil changed to Linux, so they'll be using OOo.


    Thanks for adding a couple new "facts" to the list of howlers previously
    heard from cola and Linux lusers:

    * "Linux is perfect." (period)
    * "Linux is secure." (period)
    * "Linux just works"
    * Ubuntu is "perfect for laptops, desktops and servers."
    * "half of Europe dumped Windows"
    * Linux "commands almost 100% of the desktop machines in China."
    * Linux installed base is around 12% - 13%
    * "the entire German government, French government, most of Scandinavia,
    /all/ of China, much of India..." switched to Linux
    * "Linux is expanding at the rate of 1 million+ desktops per week"
    * "Linux shipping 3 million embedded devices PER DAY and increasing."
    * "Microsoft is doomed"
    * "Microsoft is dying"
    * "Microsoft is dead"
    * "Linux won"
    * "Linux is winning"
    * "Linux will win"
    * "Linux has the potential to double the world's global output every 2 years
    for 10 years."
    * "Linux is 50x faster than Windows"
    * "GOOGLE REVENUES NOW ON A PAR WITH MICOSHAFT REVENUE"
    * "Vista actually requires more ram than a 32bit cpu can address."
    * "Fedora is Linux"
    * "Ubuntu isn't Linux"
    * "Vista will probably be based on the BSD kernel"






  20. Re: Why people "choose" Windows

    reporter wrote:
    > When you Linux advocates come up with a office application better than
    > Microsoft Office, everything else will fall into place.
    >
    > The opportunity is there, because MS Office 2007 has been such a
    > disaster,


    In what way?



    > but unfortunately the Linux community has not banded
    > together to take advantage of it.


    Besides the fact that there's nothing to take advantage of (you're off your
    rocker), the "community" doesn't have anything to take advantage of it with.



    > Instead you keep pointing to Open Office, which the market considers
    > inferior to Microsoft Office.


    The market is always right - that's why Linux fails in the market.



    > Fix the damn thing, and quit blaming MIcrosoft.


    They can't and won't. It's their last excuse for failure.





+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast