How simple are newbies anyway? - Linux

This is a discussion on How simple are newbies anyway? - Linux ; Chris Ahlstrom writes: > After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o' wisdom: > >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message >> news:RQxAk.37726$De7.26782@bignews7.bellsouth.net. .. >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o' ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 21 ... LastLast
Results 201 to 220 of 422

Thread: How simple are newbies anyway?

  1. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >> news:RQxAk.37726$De7.26782@bignews7.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>> wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>> news:JHsAk.35185$XT1.24409@bignews5.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>>>> wisdom:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> That doesn't mean that Windows will know what to do with it.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Attaching a windows network printer to a windows box can be
    >>>>>>> very illuminating.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Plug and play as far as I can tell. Do you know how to make it more
    >>>>>> complicated?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Here's how:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> http://uis.georgetown.edu/software/d...k.printer.html
    >>>>>
    >>>> Do you consider that complicated or not?
    >>>
    >>> Do you consider that plug-and-play?
    >>>

    >> Essentially, yes.

    >
    > Bwahahahah.


    This is why you're such a laughing stock Liarnut. What is so
    Bwahaha? Are you fixated on P&P that everything must match your
    definition exactly? It certainly doesn't work that well in Linux most of
    the time. Witness the hoops you go through to compile a kernel and
    install a nvidia driver for instance. And it most certainly doesnt work
    for my HP OfficeJet - I had to manually set it up and then accept the
    default printer name since when I renamed it the f*cking system kept
    reinstalling a new printer under the old name too causing clashes on the
    one usb device.


    --
    Bwahahahahahahahah - Anyone else think that this announcement from the MS
    marketing machine was anything other than a last ditch attempt to try and
    foster *some* interest in XP ?
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  2. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

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

    > "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    > news:_9PAk.38123$vX2.18056@bignews6.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>
    >> Bwahahahah.
    >>

    > Are you really that immature?


    What makes you think that is immature? It's simply a (rather
    predictable) response to you thinking a long series of wizard dialogs
    that require you to track down key pieces of information is
    "plug-and-play".

    Thanks for the opportunity to have another laugh.

    Idiot.

    --
    Do not handicap your children by making their lives easy.
    -- Robert Heinlein

  3. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    On 2008-09-19, amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    > "Moshe Goldfarb." wrote in message
    > news:1i4hfh859kjo9.1sl6q6br80770.dlg@40tude.net...
    >>
    >> Linux is free...
    >> People don't seem to care though.
    >>

    > Does Windows cost anything? Avoiding an expense is only useful if the cost
    > can be recovered. To buy a Linux-based computer is commonly as expensive as
    > or even more expensive than to buy a Windows computer. Regardless of why


    Why be limited to just "Windows computers"?

    > that might be the case, it is fact and makes the price of Linux immaterial
    > to any decision in regard to cost.


    Only the most basic version of Windows will be free. Anything
    beyond that will be an extra visible line item cost that you see
    when ordering the machine.

    ...but you are essentially correct: OS cost isn't the driving factor.

    When Solaris x86 first came around, I was willing to pay the asking
    price for it.

    --


    The average IT manager is a less effective mentor than a
    Spongebob Squarepants cartoon.


    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  4. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    On 2008-09-19, Hadron wrote:
    > Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>> news:RQxAk.37726$De7.26782@bignews7.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>>> wisdom:
    >>>>
    >>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:JHsAk.35185$XT1.24409@bignews5.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>>>>> wisdom:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> That doesn't mean that Windows will know what to do with it.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Attaching a windows network printer to a windows box can be
    >>>>>>>> very illuminating.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Plug and play as far as I can tell. Do you know how to make it more
    >>>>>>> complicated?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Here's how:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://uis.georgetown.edu/software/d...k.printer.html
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Do you consider that complicated or not?
    >>>>
    >>>> Do you consider that plug-and-play?
    >>>>
    >>> Essentially, yes.

    >>
    >> Bwahahahah.

    >
    > This is why you're such a laughing stock Liarnut. What is so
    > Bwahaha? Are you fixated on P&P that everything must match your
    > definition exactly? It certainly doesn't work that well in Linux most of
    > the time. Witness the hoops you go through to compile a kernel and
    > install a nvidia driver for instance. And it most certainly doesnt work


    If YOU personally need to build a kernel to use the nvidia driver
    then it is YOU personally creating problems for yourself.

    > for my HP OfficeJet - I had to manually set it up and then accept the
    > default printer name since when I renamed it the f*cking system kept
    > reinstalling a new printer under the old name too causing clashes on the
    > one usb device.


    Sounds like you borked the part that includes the serial number.

    You're whining that you can't tweak the configuration, not that
    it was inherently difficult to setup. Between that and the 24 step
    install procedure, or my own gripes with HP, that's not a bad tradeoff.

    --


    The average IT manager is a less effective mentor than a
    Spongebob Squarepants cartoon.


    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  5. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    JEDIDIAH writes:

    > On 2008-09-19, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >> news:slrngd5ei2.7qb.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>> On 2008-09-18, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    >>>> news:48d2961c$0$6671$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net...
    >>>>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:JHsAk.35185$XT1.24409@bignews5.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>>>>>> wisdom:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> That doesn't mean that Windows will know what to do with it.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Attaching a windows network printer to a windows box can be
    >>>>>>>>> very illuminating.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Plug and play as far as I can tell. Do you know how to make it more
    >>>>>>>> complicated?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Here's how:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>> http://uis.georgetown.edu/software/d...k.printer.html
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Do you consider that complicated or not?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Compared to linux? You bet
    >>>>
    >>>> Well, you are skipping the next to impossible step of having Linux
    >>>> installed
    >>>> to begin with. Installing Linux to make selecting a network printer
    >>>> allegedly easier is not going to win many votes.
    >>>
    >>> You don't even want to go there.
    >>>
    >>> OEM or full install of Windows? Talk about a usability disaster.
    >>>

    >> Well, I do not agree with that. I have installed both Linux and Windows on
    >> a number of occasions and the effort is about the same. Linux often
    >> requires some exact knowledge to configure and Windows pretty much tries to
    >> do a default and can fail when the configuration does not match what it is
    >> setup to detect. But that was not the point. The key point is that Windows

    >
    > Well... that idea has one REALLY BIG problem.
    >
    > Windows doesn't "come with drivers". The user has to fend for
    > themselves. This has to be one of the single biggest usability
    > myths about Windows.
    >
    > It's not so bad when you get a new device and you have everying
    > readily available. It quickly gets a lot hairier when you are working
    > with something you may no longer have the driver disks for.


    And yet 95% of the worlds office desktops and home desktops manage just
    fine. Strange eh?

    You really need to stop exaggerating issues just because you are unable
    to deal with trivial stuff.

    FWIW, yes, Linux does make a LOT of the install a lot easier. And yes, I
    love the repository management and the inclusion of most drivers in the
    kernel.

  6. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

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

    > On 2008-09-19, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Do you consider that plug-and-play?
    >>>>>
    >>>> Essentially, yes.
    >>>
    >>> Bwahahahah.

    >>
    >> This is why you're such a laughing stock Liarnut.


    Wrong again, Hadrone. I'm no laughing stock in any shape form or
    fashion.

    And you don't count.

    >> What is so
    >> Bwahaha? Are you fixated on P&P that everything must match your
    >> definition exactly? It certainly doesn't work that well in Linux most of
    >> the time. Witness the hoops you go through to compile a kernel and
    >> install a nvidia driver for instance. And it most certainly doesnt work

    >
    > If YOU personally need to build a kernel to use the nvidia driver
    > then it is YOU personally creating problems for yourself.


    Hadron's funny. He calls it "hoops" to compile a kernel. You know how
    much time I invest in compiling a kernel? Plus downloading and
    installing Nvidia and VMware?

    Roughly 15 minutes.

    Sure, that's even longer than it takes to use a distro's way of doing
    it.

    But guess what? Almost no thinking involved. I can do all the steps
    without much thought.

    I consider a problem in no way whatsoever for myself. It's easy!

    And then Hadron says "And it most certainly doesn't work"?

    What a lying mother****er. Silly bastard, self-important prick, and,
    totally, utterly wrong. Wrong, and, worse, /wrong-headed/.

    >> for my HP OfficeJet - I had to manually set it up and then accept the
    >> default printer name since when I renamed it the f*cking system kept
    >> reinstalling a new printer under the old name too causing clashes on the
    >> one usb device.

    >
    > Sounds like you borked the part that includes the serial number.
    >
    > You're whining that you can't tweak the configuration, not that
    > it was inherently difficult to setup. Between that and the 24 step
    > install procedure, or my own gripes with HP, that's not a bad tradeoff.


    Hadron is simply an idiot, Jed.

    He can't even do the stock stuff without encountering problems, which he
    then comes here to complain about.

    He's here to trash Linux and to trash its advocates. Nothing more.

    At least in the Debian groups, he's decent and helpful.

    When he comes here, though, he turns into a raving asshole.

    S.Heenan was like that, too.

    --
    There's always free cheese in a mousetrap.

  7. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    On 2008-09-19, Hadron wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH writes:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-19, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>> news:slrngd5ei2.7qb.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>>> On 2008-09-18, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "Peter Köhlmann" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:48d2961c$0$6671$9b4e6d93@newsspool2.arcor-online.net...
    >>>>>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:JHsAk.35185$XT1.24409@bignews5.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>>>>>>> wisdom:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> That doesn't mean that Windows will know what to do with it.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Attaching a windows network printer to a windows box can be
    >>>>>>>>>> very illuminating.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Plug and play as far as I can tell. Do you know how to make it more
    >>>>>>>>> complicated?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Here's how:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>> http://uis.georgetown.edu/software/d...k.printer.html
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Do you consider that complicated or not?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Compared to linux? You bet
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Well, you are skipping the next to impossible step of having Linux
    >>>>> installed
    >>>>> to begin with. Installing Linux to make selecting a network printer
    >>>>> allegedly easier is not going to win many votes.
    >>>>
    >>>> You don't even want to go there.
    >>>>
    >>>> OEM or full install of Windows? Talk about a usability disaster.
    >>>>
    >>> Well, I do not agree with that. I have installed both Linux and Windows on
    >>> a number of occasions and the effort is about the same. Linux often
    >>> requires some exact knowledge to configure and Windows pretty much tries to
    >>> do a default and can fail when the configuration does not match what it is
    >>> setup to detect. But that was not the point. The key point is that Windows

    >>
    >> Well... that idea has one REALLY BIG problem.
    >>
    >> Windows doesn't "come with drivers". The user has to fend for
    >> themselves. This has to be one of the single biggest usability
    >> myths about Windows.
    >>
    >> It's not so bad when you get a new device and you have everying
    >> readily available. It quickly gets a lot hairier when you are working
    >> with something you may no longer have the driver disks for.

    >
    > And yet 95% of the worlds office desktops and home desktops manage just
    > fine. Strange eh?


    Yeah... the 95% that go running to their local geek anytime
    they want something simple but non-appliance done with their box.

    >
    > You really need to stop exaggerating issues just because you are unable
    > to deal with trivial stuff.


    Denial isn't just a river in Egypt.

    >
    > FWIW, yes, Linux does make a LOT of the install a lot easier. And yes, I
    > love the repository management and the inclusion of most drivers in the
    > kernel.




    --


    The average IT manager is a less effective mentor than a
    Spongebob Squarepants cartoon.


    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  8. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    On 2008-09-19, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, JEDIDIAH belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-19, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Do you consider that plug-and-play?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Essentially, yes.
    >>>>
    >>>> Bwahahahah.
    >>>
    >>> This is why you're such a laughing stock Liarnut.

    >
    > Wrong again, Hadrone. I'm no laughing stock in any shape form or
    > fashion.
    >
    > And you don't count.
    >
    >>> What is so
    >>> Bwahaha? Are you fixated on P&P that everything must match your
    >>> definition exactly? It certainly doesn't work that well in Linux most of
    >>> the time. Witness the hoops you go through to compile a kernel and
    >>> install a nvidia driver for instance. And it most certainly doesnt work

    >>
    >> If YOU personally need to build a kernel to use the nvidia driver
    >> then it is YOU personally creating problems for yourself.

    >
    > Hadron's funny. He calls it "hoops" to compile a kernel. You know how
    > much time I invest in compiling a kernel? Plus downloading and
    > installing Nvidia and VMware?


    It is "hoops". There are a gawdawful lot of options in the current
    kernels. Just sorting through that would put most people off. Although
    that distracts us from the point that it isn't necessary.

    A guy runs a libre purity distro and then whines when there is
    a conflict with commercial software. I would call this a self
    inflicted wound. Although I am still not conceding that it is a
    real problem. I suspect that Hadron just chooses to do it the most
    difficult way possible (even under Debian).

    [deletia]
    >>> for my HP OfficeJet - I had to manually set it up and then accept the
    >>> default printer name since when I renamed it the f*cking system kept
    >>> reinstalling a new printer under the old name too causing clashes on the
    >>> one usb device.

    >>
    >> Sounds like you borked the part that includes the serial number.
    >>
    >> You're whining that you can't tweak the configuration, not that
    >> it was inherently difficult to setup. Between that and the 24 step
    >> install procedure, or my own gripes with HP, that's not a bad tradeoff.

    >
    > Hadron is simply an idiot, Jed.
    >
    > He can't even do the stock stuff without encountering problems, which he
    > then comes here to complain about.
    >
    > He's here to trash Linux and to trash its advocates. Nothing more.
    >
    > At least in the Debian groups, he's decent and helpful.
    >
    > When he comes here, though, he turns into a raving asshole.
    >
    > S.Heenan was like that, too.
    >



    --


    The average IT manager is a less effective mentor than a
    Spongebob Squarepants cartoon.


    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  9. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

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

    > On 2008-09-19, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>
    >> Hadron's funny. He calls it "hoops" to compile a kernel. You know how
    >> much time I invest in compiling a kernel? Plus downloading and
    >> installing Nvidia and VMware?

    >
    > It is "hoops". There are a gawdawful lot of options in the current
    > kernels. Just sorting through that would put most people off.


    Actually, given that the kernel .config file is in /boot in Debian, and
    that the configuration can also be part of the kernel itself,
    configuration is not such as issue lately.

    I put the steps in a post not too long ago.

    Seriously, anybody with some facility and confidence can figure it out.
    It's even easier than it used to be.

    > Although that distracts us from the point that it isn't necessary.


    Indeed. The reason I do it is I got into Linux early enough that you
    kind of had to download the source and compile it. I've not seen
    that the True Debian Way is easy enough (and, just as importantly,
    transparent enough) to make me want to change.

    Plus, I can get the very latest kernel before the Debian maintainer
    packages it.

    > A guy runs a libre purity distro and then whines when there is
    > a conflict with commercial software. I would call this a self
    > inflicted wound. Although I am still not conceding that it is a
    > real problem. I suspect that Hadron just chooses to do it the most
    > difficult way possible (even under Debian).


    Who knows? He's obtuse, a thick plank, and a serial confabulator (at
    least in COLA).

    I got a chuckle when your emacs quip sailed right over his head.

    --
    If we suffer tamely a lawless attack upon our liberty, we encourage it,
    and involve others in our doom.
    -- Samuel Adams

  10. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?


    "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    news:slrngd7nrr.nk1.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    > On 2008-09-19, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> "Moshe Goldfarb." wrote in message
    >> news:1i4hfh859kjo9.1sl6q6br80770.dlg@40tude.net...
    >>>
    >>> Linux is free...
    >>> People don't seem to care though.
    >>>

    >> Does Windows cost anything? Avoiding an expense is only useful if the
    >> cost
    >> can be recovered. To buy a Linux-based computer is commonly as expensive
    >> as
    >> or even more expensive than to buy a Windows computer. Regardless of why

    >
    > Why be limited to just "Windows computers"?
    >
    >> that might be the case, it is fact and makes the price of Linux
    >> immaterial
    >> to any decision in regard to cost.

    >
    > Only the most basic version of Windows will be free. Anything
    > beyond that will be an extra visible line item cost that you see
    > when ordering the machine.
    >

    Various models come with various versions of Windows. For retail outlet
    packages, the user gets what's in the box. No option to pick and choose.

    That is a major reason why you are not going to see Linux on the shelves
    since it is an all or nothing kind of selection by the distributor. If they
    order the wrong version and people don't want to buy it in comparison with
    another version, it is no sale. Dell could perhaps offer a better choice
    since the merchandise is not shipped until sold, but there is still an
    inventory issue. Retail stores don't want the problem. It is like having
    two different products.

    > ...but you are essentially correct: OS cost isn't the driving factor.
    >
    > When Solaris x86 first came around, I was willing to pay the asking
    > price for it.
    >

    You must have wanted it badly.


  11. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?


    "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    news:slrngd7kt5.hg4.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    > On 2008-09-19, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >> news:slrngd5e74.7qb.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>> On 2008-09-18, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>> That assumes that all goes according to your propaganda claims.
    >>>

    >> All goes well enough often enough to suit the commercial need for
    >> success.

    >
    > That is based on a 20 year old idea that it's "the only option
    > really".
    >
    > You don't want to go there.
    >
    > We can all take a stroll down memory lane and recount our own
    > personal experiences with manual memory management in MS-DOS.
    >
    >> Certainly there are those who fail to get what they want and I know that
    >> happens with Windows, with Linux, and with Macintosh OS. It is a small
    >> percentage and the common wisdom is that it is never going to go away
    >> entirely. At some point, one has to relegate the comparative few
    >> dissidents
    >> to the arms of the competition. My own view is that they are welcome to
    >> them. A dissident is a dissident regardless and will soon enough turn on
    >> their new found friend. It is in their nature.

    >
    > The clock is ticking here T + 12 years.
    >

    And the world is changed not one whit.
    >>
    >> You criticize DFS and others who post scenarios gleaned from the Linux
    >> support groups, but you do the same thing with scenarios from Windows
    >> failures. The people complaining of Linux are probably many of the same

    >
    > The big difference here is that I am recounting PERSONAL experiences.
    >
    > What DFS does would in a different context be considered hearsay and
    > would be declared useless as evidence.
    >

    Anecdote vs anecdote.

    >> people who used to complain of Windows.
    >>

    >
    >
    > --
    >
    >
    > The average IT manager is a less effective mentor than a
    > Spongebob Squarepants cartoon.
    >

    Said like a non-manager, eh?


  12. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?


    "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    news:LNQAk.36245$Ep1.27240@bignews2.bellsouth.net. ..
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    > wisdom:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >> news:_9PAk.38123$vX2.18056@bignews6.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>
    >>> Bwahahahah.
    >>>

    >> Are you really that immature?

    >
    > What makes you think that is immature?


    Maybe it is the image that it conveys of a small child sticking his tongue
    out and patting his fanny. Maybe it is using derision instead of adult
    language. What do you think?



  13. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?


    "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    news:slrngd7lig.hg4.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    > On 2008-09-19, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> "Matt" wrote in message
    >> news_yAk.14318$Jp6.10657@fe103.usenetserver.com...
    >>> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>> news:slrngd04u9.ecq.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>>>> On 2008-09-16, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:slrngcvmm6.osq.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>>>>>> On 2008-09-16, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>> news:slrngcu5de.i9m.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>>>>>>>> On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> "Matt" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>> news:9svzk.2141$4u4.976@fe097.usenetserver.com...
    >>>>>>>>> [deletia]
    >>>>>>>>>>> I have an old scanner that I haven't been able to get to work
    >>>>>>>>>>> with
    >>>>>>>>>>> XP
    >>>>>>>>>>> although it works immediately when I plug it into my Ubuntu box.
    >>>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>>> Is the Ubuntu design that ancient?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Why would it need to be updated?
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> What is different now?
    >>>>>>>>> What do OS designers know now that they didn't then?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> I don't know offhand, but there must have been some progress over
    >>>>>>>> the
    >>>>>>>> years.
    >>>>>>>> They don't call it high tech for no reason.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> IOW: You have no clue whatsoever.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> I wouldn't say that exactly, but what constitutes advanced knowledge
    >>>>>> for an
    >>>>>> OS designer today vs a decade or more ago is surely specialized
    >>>>>> information
    >>>>>> known mostly to OS designers. Do you profess to know a lot about it?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Well, then you have no business saying anything definitive about it
    >>>>> one way or another. So proclamations like "oh, I may be ignorant but
    >>>>> there just must have been SOME progress made" are just so much white
    >>>>> noise.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Taking it as an element of faith that there's a good reason for
    >>>>> the degree of change in the Windows driver models is just assnine.
    >>>>>
    >>>> That is a lot of words just to say "No"!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> He pointed out your error in reasoning.
    >>>

    >> I don't think that is the case at all. He said that my assumption that
    >> OS
    >> designers had surely made some progress in the last decade was assinine
    >> and
    >> white noise, but other than the derision, he offered no logic to counter
    >> it.

    >
    > You can't describe why in even the most abstract of terms.
    >
    > You treat it as an article of faith. That's enough for derision.
    >

    So you admit that there was nothing logical in your response, only claiming
    that you are justified due to your inability to provide an argument?

    >>>
    >>>> You are the one saying that there has been no advances in the
    >>>> technology
    >>>> over such a long period of time in such a high-profile industry, so it
    >>>> would be your responsibility to prove that. Perhaps you cannot see
    >>>> that.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I don't see much increase in basic capability in XP or Linux today
    >>> compared to Unix and X in 1990.
    >>>

    >> Would you go back to that? My memory of 1990 Unix and X-windows is that
    >> they were rather colorless and there was no multimedia and the internet
    >> was
    >> a newsgroup text kind of thing. Also, they were not personally
    >> affordable

    >
    > X had color in 1990.
    >
    > There was "multi-media" in 1990. If you weren't some Lemming running
    > an MS-DOS based kludge clone, you would have been WELL aware of this.
    >
    > The "internet" was only a newsgroup sort of thing if you had the sort
    > of slow internet connection that most people had. You could run X
    > across the net if you really wanted to.
    >

    Not with the personal computer I owned.

    >> as are computers today. I believe that is what motivated Linus to start
    >> his
    >> project in the early 1990s.

    >
    > No, what motivated Linux to start HIS project is the fact that the
    > state of the art coming out of Redmond at the time didn't reflect the
    > state of the art in the hardware. The hardware was capable of better.
    >
    > Serious kludge clones were by no means cheap in those days
    > either.
    >
    >>
    >> I'll keep what I have now in comparison.
    >>
    >>> Maybe you think that there have been recent breakthroughs in OS because
    >>> MS
    >>> OSes started out with so little use of long-established OS concepts such
    >>> as multitasking, virtual memory, hardware abstraction, and software
    >>> layering.

    >>
    >> Well, I didn't have them on my IBM PC then. I do now, so that is
    >> progress
    >> as far as I am concerned. Someone invented the wheel and such basic
    >> ideas

    >
    > That's sandbagging, not progress.
    >
    > THIS is why Linus started his OS. Redmond were a bunch of sandbaggers
    > and the Lemmings that made up most of their customers were more than
    > willing
    > to go along with this crap.
    >
    > THIS is why you think there was no multi-media in 1990.
    >
    > Your view of computing reality was distorted by an inferior product.
    >

    Tell me that you had a Unix computer in your home with color displays and
    used it for multimedia viewing. Otherwise admit to the facts.

    >> years ago, but there is always a new car that is believed to be better
    >> than
    >> any that has gone before.
    >>

    >
    > Ok, then name it?
    >

    Vista, certainly. Also the most recent version of any of the Linux
    distributions in vogue. Or do you claim that the new Ubuntu is not an
    improvement over the previous? Or that the new Linux kernel is not an
    improvement over the one from 10 years ago?


  14. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, JEDIDIAH belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-19, Hadron wrote:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Do you consider that plug-and-play?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> Essentially, yes.
    >>>>
    >>>> Bwahahahah.
    >>>
    >>> This is why you're such a laughing stock Liarnut.

    >
    > Wrong again, Hadrone. I'm no laughing stock in any shape form or
    > fashion.
    >
    > And you don't count.
    >
    >>> What is so
    >>> Bwahaha? Are you fixated on P&P that everything must match your
    >>> definition exactly? It certainly doesn't work that well in Linux most of
    >>> the time. Witness the hoops you go through to compile a kernel and
    >>> install a nvidia driver for instance. And it most certainly doesnt work

    >>
    >> If YOU personally need to build a kernel to use the nvidia driver
    >> then it is YOU personally creating problems for yourself.

    >
    > Hadron's funny. He calls it "hoops" to compile a kernel. You know
    > how


    I question the need when YOU make it sound like doing so somehow makes
    installing the NVidia driver easier. it doesn't. You then went on to
    advise using Nvidia-installer. Which is wrong. It screws up debian
    machines in a lot of cases. You were wrong. I corrected you. I posted
    links as to why. Stop trying to rewrite history.

    > much time I invest in compiling a kernel? Plus downloading and
    > installing Nvidia and VMware?
    >
    > Roughly 15 minutes.


    15 minutes? Not too bad ....

    >
    > Sure, that's even longer than it takes to use a distro's way of doing
    > it.


    It was also the wrong "non debian" way.

    >
    > But guess what? Almost no thinking involved. I can do all the steps
    > without much thought.


    Almost no thinking?!?!?! Are you mad or simply drunk. The procedure you
    listed is certainly not trivial. OK, its a one liner if you put it all
    in a bash script but the contents is not trivial.

    > I consider a problem in no way whatsoever for myself. It's easy!
    >
    > And then Hadron says "And it most certainly doesn't work"?
    >
    > What a lying mother****er. Silly bastard, self-important prick, and,
    > totally, utterly wrong. Wrong, and, worse, /wrong-headed/.


    Lay off the sauce Liarnut. You're losing it again.

    You way was not the correct "debian" way to build and install a kernel.

    >
    >>> for my HP OfficeJet - I had to manually set it up and then accept the
    >>> default printer name since when I renamed it the f*cking system kept
    >>> reinstalling a new printer under the old name too causing clashes on the
    >>> one usb device.

    >>
    >> Sounds like you borked the part that includes the serial number.


    What are you talking about? There is no part where I entered a serial
    number. None.

    >>
    >> You're whining that you can't tweak the configuration, not that


    I'm not whining. I'm pointing out a documented registered bug.

    >> it was inherently difficult to setup. Between that and the 24 step
    >> install procedure, or my own gripes with HP, that's not a bad tradeoff.

    >
    > Hadron is simply an idiot, Jed.
    >
    > He can't even do the stock stuff without encountering problems, which he
    > then comes here to complain about.


    You're a liar. And you are trying to rewrite history.

    >
    > He's here to trash Linux and to trash its advocates. Nothing more.


    You are a liar and a fraud.

    >
    > At least in the Debian groups, he's decent and helpful.


    As I was in the Ubuntu groups for the arsekissing COLA gang arrived.

    >
    > When he comes here, though, he turns into a raving asshole.


    Unfortunately Liarnut, I can back up everything I have said in this
    thread. You can not.

    >
    > S.Heenan was like that, too.


    Whoever that was. You seem to be obsessed and seeing reds under every
    bed.


    --
    "Hey, who needs mp3, wma, acc when we can have ogg?"
    -- "Moshe Goldfarb." in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  15. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    amicus_curious wrote:
    >
    > "Matt" wrote in message
    > news_yAk.14318$Jp6.10657@fe103.usenetserver.com...
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>> news:slrngd04u9.ecq.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>>> On 2008-09-16, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>> news:slrngcvmm6.osq.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>>>>> On 2008-09-16, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>>> news:slrngcu5de.i9m.jedi@nomad.mishnet...
    >>>>>>>> On 2008-09-15, amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> "Matt" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>> news:9svzk.2141$4u4.976@fe097.usenetserver.com...
    >>>>>>>> [deletia]
    >>>>>>>>>> I have an old scanner that I haven't been able to get to work
    >>>>>>>>>> with XP
    >>>>>>>>>> although it works immediately when I plug it into my Ubuntu box.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Is the Ubuntu design that ancient?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Why would it need to be updated?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> What is different now?
    >>>>>>>> What do OS designers know now that they didn't then?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> I don't know offhand, but there must have been some progress over
    >>>>>>> the
    >>>>>>> years.
    >>>>>>> They don't call it high tech for no reason.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> IOW: You have no clue whatsoever.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>> I wouldn't say that exactly, but what constitutes advanced
    >>>>> knowledge for an
    >>>>> OS designer today vs a decade or more ago is surely specialized
    >>>>> information
    >>>>> known mostly to OS designers. Do you profess to know a lot about it?
    >>>>
    >>>> Well, then you have no business saying anything definitive about it
    >>>> one way or another. So proclamations like "oh, I may be ignorant but
    >>>> there just must have been SOME progress made" are just so much white
    >>>> noise.
    >>>>
    >>>> Taking it as an element of faith that there's a good reason for
    >>>> the degree of change in the Windows driver models is just assnine.
    >>>>
    >>> That is a lot of words just to say "No"!

    >>
    >>
    >> He pointed out your error in reasoning.
    >>

    > I don't think that is the case at all. He said that my assumption that
    > OS designers had surely made some progress in the last decade was
    > assinine and white noise, but other than the derision, he offered no
    > logic to counter it.
    >>
    >>> You are the one saying that there has been no advances in the
    >>> technology over such a long period of time in such a high-profile
    >>> industry, so it would be your responsibility to prove that. Perhaps
    >>> you cannot see that.

    >>
    >>
    >> I don't see much increase in basic capability in XP or Linux today
    >> compared to Unix and X in 1990.
    >>

    > Would you go back to that? My memory of 1990 Unix and X-windows is that
    > they were rather colorless and there was no multimedia and the internet
    > was a newsgroup text kind of thing. Also, they were not personally
    > affordable as are computers today. I believe that is what motivated
    > Linus to start his project in the early 1990s.



    You are all over the place. We were talking about operating system
    technology, design, and timeliness of implementation. Not color
    monitors, multimedia applications, proliferation of websites, or prices.


    > I'll keep what I have now in comparison.
    >
    >> Maybe you think that there have been recent breakthroughs in OS
    >> because MS OSes started out with so little use of long-established OS
    >> concepts such as multitasking, virtual memory, hardware abstraction,
    >> and software layering.

    >
    > Well, I didn't have them on my IBM PC then. I do now, so that is
    > progress as far as I am concerned.



    The question is why it took MS so long to achieve those things.


    > Someone invented the wheel and such
    > basic ideas years ago, but there is always a new car that is believed to
    > be better than any that has gone before.


  16. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    JEDIDIAH wrote:

    > It is "hoops". There are a gawdawful lot of options in the current
    > kernels. Just sorting through that would put most people off. Although
    > that distracts us from the point that it isn't necessary.
    >
    > A guy runs a libre purity distro and then whines when there is
    > a conflict with commercial software. I would call this a self
    > inflicted wound. Although I am still not conceding that it is a
    > real problem. I suspect that Hadron just chooses to do it the most
    > difficult way possible (even under Debian).
    >
    > [deletia]
    >>>> for my HP OfficeJet - I had to manually set it up and then accept the
    >>>> default printer name since when I renamed it the f*cking system kept
    >>>> reinstalling a new printer under the old name too causing clashes on the
    >>>> one usb device.
    >>> Sounds like you borked the part that includes the serial number.
    >>>
    >>> You're whining that you can't tweak the configuration, not that
    >>> it was inherently difficult to setup. Between that and the 24 step
    >>> install procedure, or my own gripes with HP, that's not a bad tradeoff.

    >> Hadron is simply an idiot, Jed.
    >>
    >> He can't even do the stock stuff without encountering problems, which he
    >> then comes here to complain about.
    >>
    >> He's here to trash Linux and to trash its advocates. Nothing more.
    >>
    >> At least in the Debian groups, he's decent and helpful.
    >>
    >> When he comes here, though, he turns into a raving asshole.
    >>
    >> S.Heenan was like that, too.
    >>

    >
    >


  17. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    JEDIDIAH wrote:
    > On 2008-09-19, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:


    >> Hadron's funny. He calls it "hoops" to compile a kernel. You know how
    >> much time I invest in compiling a kernel? Plus downloading and
    >> installing Nvidia and VMware?

    >
    > It is "hoops". There are a gawdawful lot of options in the current
    > kernels. Just sorting through that would put most people off. Although
    > that distracts us from the point that it isn't necessary.



    I think I compiled a kernel once around 1995, before we started using
    Red Hat. Not since.

  18. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    Verily I say unto thee, that Chris Ahlstrom spake thusly:

    > Actually, given that the kernel .config file is in /boot in Debian,
    > and that the configuration can also be part of the kernel itself,
    > configuration is not such as issue lately.


    It's the same with Fedora/RH, and I'd imagine many other distros.

    The Trolls make far to much fuss over the kernel, like it's some kind of
    absolute necessity to rebuild at least once a day. I can't even remember
    the last time I looked at a kernel source, but then I have a buildsystem
    that builds stuff in the background anyway, and only mails me if there's
    a problem. I don't do kernel upgrades any more (if it ain't broke...) so
    it's something I almost never even think about ... if I did then I'd use
    the RPM target (available for some time now) or better yet a Fedora SRPM
    which includes all the downstream patches. I can't actually think of any
    reason why I'd bother, short of aggressive optimisation, or to try a new
    scheduler, but the 10 seconds it takes to "make menuconfig"; put the new
    config into the ~/rpmbuild/SOURCES/ directory; then run rpmbuild, is not
    exactly going to keep me up all night worrying, especially as I'll be in
    bed dreaming of electric sheep while the server does all the hard work.

    --
    K.
    http://slated.org

    ..----
    | By bucking Microsoft for open source, says Gunderloy, "I'm no
    | longer contributing to the eventual death of programming."
    | ~ http://www.linux.com/feature/142083
    `----

    Fedora release 8 (Werewolf) on sky, running kernel 2.6.25.11-60.fc8
    06:00:32 up 35 days, 3:13, 5 users, load average: 0.07, 0.02, 0.03

  19. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    On 2008-09-20, Matt wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >> On 2008-09-19, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    >
    >>> Hadron's funny. He calls it "hoops" to compile a kernel. You know how
    >>> much time I invest in compiling a kernel? Plus downloading and
    >>> installing Nvidia and VMware?

    >>
    >> It is "hoops". There are a gawdawful lot of options in the current
    >> kernels. Just sorting through that would put most people off. Although
    >> that distracts us from the point that it isn't necessary.

    >
    >
    > I think I compiled a kernel once around 1995, before we started using
    > Red Hat. Not since.


    Oh dear! I've always compiled my own kernel. Been doing it for more than
    a decade... second nature, and takes me no time at all. The only time
    needed is when there's a major version bump. I still remember moving
    from a 2.0 to 2.2 to 2.4 then 2.6. Generally there's a decent migration
    guide before taking the plunge. Minor version bumps are hardly a problem
    at all. Just answer the questions and experiment with new features.

    Takes me one command to Configure,Compile and install the kernel,
    including initrd and grub config.

    You really don't need to compile a kernel if you don't want to. The
    Distros all provide kernels that can plug just about every built module
    into it. They're a bit large and cumbersome for a Gentoo fan such as
    myself.

    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  20. Re: How simple are newbies anyway?

    On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 12:28:01 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:

    > On 2008-09-19, Hadron wrote:
    >> Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >>
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>> wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>> news:RQxAk.37726$De7.26782@bignews7.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>>>> wisdom:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>>> news:JHsAk.35185$XT1.24409@bignews5.bellsouth.net. ..
    >>>>>>> After takin' a swig o' grog, amicus_curious belched out this bit o'
    >>>>>>> wisdom:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> "JEDIDIAH" wrote in message
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> That doesn't mean that Windows will know what to do with
    >>>>>>>>> it.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Attaching a windows network printer to a windows box can
    >>>>>>>>> be
    >>>>>>>>> very illuminating.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Plug and play as far as I can tell. Do you know how to make it
    >>>>>>>> more complicated?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Here's how:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> http://uis.georgetown.edu/software/d...k.printer.html
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>> Do you consider that complicated or not?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Do you consider that plug-and-play?
    >>>>>
    >>>> Essentially, yes.
    >>>
    >>> Bwahahahah.

    >>
    >> This is why you're such a laughing stock Liarnut. What is so Bwahaha?
    >> Are you fixated on P&P that everything must match your definition
    >> exactly? It certainly doesn't work that well in Linux most of the time.
    >> Witness the hoops you go through to compile a kernel and install a
    >> nvidia driver for instance. And it most certainly doesnt work

    >
    > If YOU personally need to build a kernel to use the nvidia driver
    > then it is YOU personally creating problems for yourself.


    We've been though this before with Quack about installing nVIDIA drivers
    (either here or in aolu).

    ---------------start-----------------------
    "....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, (reminded about the restricted drivers manager &
    the use of 'Envy')that 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: *
    --------------------end---------------------

    Looks like he forgot again!

    >> for my HP OfficeJet - I had to manually set it up and then accept the
    >> default printer name since when I renamed it the f*cking system kept
    >> reinstalling a new printer under the old name too causing clashes on the
    >> one usb device.

    >
    > Sounds like you borked the part that includes the serial number.
    >
    > You're whining that you can't tweak the configuration, not that
    > it was inherently difficult to setup. Between that and the 24 step install
    > procedure, or my own gripes with HP, that's not a bad tradeoff.


    --
    ɐ ɯoɹɟ ʇuǝs sɐʍ ǝƃɐssǝɯ sıɥʇ
    pǝǝʇuɐɹɐnƃ sı ɥɔıɥʍ ɹǝʇndɯoɔ
    ˙snɹıʌ ǝzopuıʍ $ɯ ǝɥʇ ɟo ǝǝɹɟ %00⇂
    -- sɯǝʇsʎs xnuıl/nuƃ --


+ Reply to Thread
Page 11 of 22 FirstFirst ... 9 10 11 12 13 21 ... LastLast