Rebooting Windows Constantly - Linux

This is a discussion on Rebooting Windows Constantly - Linux ; On 2008-09-10, Hadron wrote: > JEDIDIAH writes: > >> On 2008-09-10, COLA Loons wrote: >>> nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote: >>>> >>>> The required reboots on Linux are after kernel upgrades. These are no >>>> trouble, and if Linux did require more reboots ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 47

Thread: Rebooting Windows Constantly

  1. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On 2008-09-10, Hadron wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH writes:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-10, COLA Loons wrote:
    >>> nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> The required reboots on Linux are after kernel upgrades. These are no
    >>>> trouble, and if Linux did require more reboots it would not add much
    >>>> to the hassle. From what I hear, however, Vista reboots are pretty
    >>>> slow.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> Well, you heard wrong. Vista boots and gets to the desktop quickly on
    >>> Vista compliant machines. It goes into the phase of applying updates
    >>> when it shuts down and continues to update on the restart. The time used
    >>> is minuscule.

    >>
    >> ...except it interrupts everything you might be doing.
    >>
    >> [deletia]

    >
    > Dont be such a moron. Most people turn their PCs off at night


    Like I said before... a total MS-DOS mentality.

    Windows is used by more than just grannies that due little
    more than web surf.

    > anyway. Yes, I prefer the Linux way but to keep harping on about
    > Windows reboots you would think you were losing 4 hours a day or
    > something ridiculous.


    Of course the reboot at the end is just the icing on the cake...

    The entire "update" process can be a big time sync.

    Microsoft: because a few reboots really isn't a big deal afterall.

    --

    Linux: Because I don't want to push pretty buttons. |||
    I want the pretty buttons to push themelves. / | \

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

  2. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    [snips]

    On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:51:34 -0400, COLA Loons wrote:

    >> Dont be such a moron. Most people turn their PCs off at night anyway.
    >> Yes, I prefer the Linux way but to keep harping on about Windows
    >> reboots you would think you were losing 4 hours a day or something
    >> ridiculous.
    >>
    >>

    > That person is blowing smoke and will come out with any excuse. The part
    > about it disrupting everything one is doing is nonsense.


    Really? So how do you configure Windows update to download and install
    the updates - including the ones which require a reboot - such that they
    are applied and active, *without* a reboot?

    You can't.

    Your choices are between leaving the system insecure, or interrupting the
    job that's running. Only Microsoft would think this was a sensible
    choice to foist upon a user.

    Meanwhile, Linux snarfs updates regularly, and applies them regularly,
    and lets me know about 'em, and does so without interrupting the tasks
    being performed, and maybe once or twice a year I have to reboot due to a
    significant kernel or similar update.

    Oh, and four hours? Yes, a reboot could _easily_ cost me four hours'
    work. See, I use tools designed on the assumption that an OS's prime job
    in life is to _keep running_, not to reset itself just because someone
    released a web browser update.


  3. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On 2008-09-10, COLA Loons wrote:
    > JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >> On 2008-09-10, COLA Loons wrote:
    >>> Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >>>> Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Constant rebooting of windows is just not the case anymore.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Here is one of Roy's latest spams.
    >>>>>
    >>>> http://computingtech.blogspot.com/20...out-linux.html
    >>>>> They act like they reboot windows, constantly. Here is a quote from
    >>>>> the latest article.
    >>>>> "you should not have to reboot your computer every time someone
    >>>>> sneezes. "
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I think the last version of windows, many linux nuts used, was 3.1
    >>>> Strange then that my windows box demands a reboot after practically *every*
    >>>> update. Even just simply *installing* software will often ask for a reboot.
    >>>> Including software from MS
    >>>>
    >>>> And no, this is not Win3.1
    >>>> It is WinXP SP2
    >>> So the world is going to end for you, because the O/S reboots itself
    >>> after an update? It's lame thinking. I have installed a lot of software

    >>
    >> At best, it is an unecessary inconvenience that should have gone
    >> extinct along with MS-DOS.
    >>
    >>> on Vista, and no, the O/S doesn't need to be rebooted. It does get
    >>> rebooted for Windows updates, but that depends upon what the update is
    >>> about, because all updates do not require that the O/S reboots itself.

    >>
    >> Lame things like updated system libraries will require a restart.
    >>

    >
    > I am beginning to see that common sense is beyond you. And about the
    > only thing you really know how to do is and talk nonsense.


    What "common sense"?

    MY OS doesn't require that crap.

    It's just another little piece of bull**** that the captive audience
    of Lemmings has to put up with. It all adds up after awhile.

    What are the required reboot events in MacOS?

    It's time for you Lemmings to stop living in 1983.

    --

    Linux: Because I don't want to push pretty buttons. |||
    I want the pretty buttons to push themelves. / | \

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

  4. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    > [snips]
    >
    > On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 12:51:12 -0400, COLA Loons wrote:
    >
    >>> World end? No. Still, it's annoying, counter-productive and
    >>> completely unnecessary except in a few, comparatively rare cases, as
    >>> Linux demonstrates.

    >> It's not useless that's the way the O/S is designed to work.

    >
    > Right - the OS is designed, from the ground up, to *not* allow for long-
    > running tasks. This drastically limits its utility in many roles - as a
    > server platform, for rendering, video processing, pretty much anything
    > which involves long-duration processing which shouldn't be interrupted.


    This is not correct. What are Windows NT service applications in a
    business environment? Well, they are long running programs/tasks that
    run back-end transaction processing. Those Windows workstation and
    server machines run those processes un-interrupted for long periods of
    time 24/7*365.

    >
    > Linux, on the other hand, is designed so simply do what one expects an OS
    > to do: stay up and running. Yeah, there's issues and imperfections here
    > and there, but the design is right; Windows' design is broken from word
    > go.


    I don't agree with it.
    >
    >>> Some of us actually _use_ our computers, you do realize. Mine, for
    >>> example, is pretty much constantly transcoding videos, a somewhat time-
    >>> consuming task, one I would rather _not_ have interrupted just because
    >>> a security patch came down the pipe - but I'll take the security patch,
    >>> as I'd rather have an updated system than not.

    >> One can be notified about the updates, and one can control when it
    >> happens. I choose when it takes place.


    >
    > Yes, one can - but again, a symptom of a broken system design. I like
    > being notified of the updates, but if there _are_ updates - at least for
    > security updates from trusted sources - they should simply install, no
    > interaction required, and no rebooting or other work-halting nonsense.


    I don't agree with you, and my work is not halted. Maybe, you have
    timing issues you need to address.

    >
    >>> Linux lets me get those updates without disrupting the processing the
    >>> machine is doing. Windows, by and large, doesn't.

    >> So does Windows Update, if one configures the O/S to do.

    >
    > Really? How do you configure Windows Update to download and install the
    > updates - including the ones requiring rebooting to activate - and have
    > them activated *without* a reboot?


    I never said anything about rebooting. All I said is that I can choose
    when the updates can take place on Windows, because I have the control
    as to when it happens, which is at my convince, including the reboot.
    >
    > Right, you can't. The entire design is broken.


    When did you become some kind of an expert on anything? Show me
    somewhere that your name is up in lights, you are an expert's expert and
    I should take your word as gospel.

    >
    >
    >>> The funny part is, I keep hearing how Linux is a "hobbyist OS", yet
    >>> when it comes to technical merits, such as simply being able to keep
    >>> the machine updated without halting all your ongoing work, Linux wins
    >>> in virtually every case.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> Ok and what are you smoking?

    >
    > At the moment, Peter Jackson "lights". Sorry, did you have something to
    > offer? Seems not.


    Do you think I care?

    You are becoming very tiresome. And since I don't agree with you on
    anything, I am waiting for the name calling to start happening.


  5. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:



    You're not talking about anything.

  6. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On 2008-09-10, COLA Loons wrote:
    > Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    >
    >
    >
    > You're not talking about anything.


    He's talking about a great deal.

    He's talking about you giving the details of what you
    previously claimed. Go go about it. Tell us how it's
    done.

    --
    Nothing quite gives you an understanding of Oracle's |||
    continued popularity as does an attempt to do some / | \
    simple date manipulations in postgres.

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

  7. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    JEDIDIAH wrote:



    PFFFFT, you're not even worth a read anymore.

  8. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    JEDIDIAH wrote:
    > On 2008-09-10, COLA Loons wrote:
    >> Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> You're not talking about anything.

    >
    > He's talking about a great deal.
    >
    > He's talking about you giving the details of what you
    > previously claimed. Go go about it. Tell us how it's
    > done.
    >


    It's only what you are brainwashed on, so let him talk to you.

  9. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    JEDIDIAH wrote:



    You keep-up pulling your bible out, and you preach to them, don't preach
    to me.

  10. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 12:29:21 -0400, Linonut wrote:

    > * JEDIDIAH peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-10, DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>> And after hard freezes caused by bogus reasons, such as moving the mouse or
    >>> launching a few apps together, or after changing the video driver.

    >>
    >> You can beat that dead horse as much as you like. It's not going
    >> anywhere.

    >
    > It's not even a horse. It's a sack of straw tied up to resemble a
    > horse.
    >
    > I really don't understand why DFS thinks these loony statements will
    > fly.


    Because DFS is dumb, & has proved it time & again.
    The troll is just trotting out the same old crap.
    BORING!

    > The same goes for replies:




  11. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:



    You're not worth reading anymore, and all you have is a lot of lip
    service. You your talk.

  12. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    Linonut wrote:
    > * JEDIDIAH peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-10, DFS wrote:
    >>>
    >>> And after hard freezes caused by bogus reasons, such as moving the
    >>> mouse or launching a few apps together, or after changing the video
    >>> driver.

    >>
    >> You can beat that dead horse as much as you like. It's not going
    >> anywhere.


    You can deny the slopware problems all you want. Many hundreds (or
    thousands) of Linux victims will still experience them.



    > It's not even a horse. It's a sack of straw tied up to resemble a
    > horse.
    >
    > I really don't understand why DFS thinks these loony statements will
    > fly.


    Every statement I made is 100% true, and I've posted plenty of evidence of
    the crapware freezing up when you move the mouse, or open a few apps, or
    even while it sits there doing nothing.






  13. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    DFS wrote:
    > Linonut wrote:
    >> * JEDIDIAH peremptorily fired off this memo:
    >>
    >>> On 2008-09-10, DFS wrote:
    >>>> And after hard freezes caused by bogus reasons, such as moving the
    >>>> mouse or launching a few apps together, or after changing the video
    >>>> driver.
    >>> You can beat that dead horse as much as you like. It's not going
    >>> anywhere.

    >
    > You can deny the slopware problems all you want. Many hundreds (or
    > thousands) of Linux victims will still experience them.
    >
    >
    >
    >> It's not even a horse. It's a sack of straw tied up to resemble a
    >> horse.
    >>
    >> I really don't understand why DFS thinks these loony statements will
    >> fly.

    >
    > Every statement I made is 100% true, and I've posted plenty of evidence of
    > the crapware freezing up when you move the mouse, or open a few apps, or
    > even while it sits there doing nothing.
    >


    You can't talk to people that have rose colored blinders on, because
    it's too late for them. The brainwashing in complete, and it is
    irreversible.

    The loons in this NG would be susceptible to joining a cult. They have a
    neediness and a madness that's in their mental make-up, and they are
    that messed-up. It's the hive mentality.

  14. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    Kelsey Bjarnason writes:

    > [snips]
    >
    > On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:51:34 -0400, COLA Loons wrote:
    >
    >>> Dont be such a moron. Most people turn their PCs off at night anyway.
    >>> Yes, I prefer the Linux way but to keep harping on about Windows
    >>> reboots you would think you were losing 4 hours a day or something
    >>> ridiculous.
    >>>
    >>>

    >> That person is blowing smoke and will come out with any excuse. The part
    >> about it disrupting everything one is doing is nonsense.

    >
    > Really? So how do you configure Windows update to download and install
    > the updates - including the ones which require a reboot - such that they
    > are applied and active, *without* a reboot?
    >
    > You can't.


    And most people do not care.

    Concentrate on an integrated desktop and application suite which works,
    stuff to sync your phone and pda, entertainment SW and maybe, just
    maybe, the mind set will change.

    Frankly, a 2 minute reboot once a month doesnt really impact most
    peoples lives.

    But I forgot, you're so busy making backups for the programmers you
    probably cant afford that "downtime".


    *chuckle*

  15. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    Hadron wrote:

    > Kelsey Bjarnason writes:
    >
    >> [snips]
    >>
    >> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:51:34 -0400, COLA Loons wrote:
    >>
    >>>> Dont be such a moron. Most people turn their PCs off at night anyway.
    >>>> Yes, I prefer the Linux way but to keep harping on about Windows
    >>>> reboots you would think you were losing 4 hours a day or something
    >>>> ridiculous.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> That person is blowing smoke and will come out with any excuse. The part
    >>> about it disrupting everything one is doing is nonsense.

    >>
    >> Really? So how do you configure Windows update to download and install
    >> the updates - including the ones which require a reboot - such that they
    >> are applied and active, *without* a reboot?
    >>
    >> You can't.

    >
    > And most people do not care.


    Wrong. "Most people" don't know any better

    > Concentrate on an integrated desktop and application suite which works,
    > stuff to sync your phone and pda, entertainment SW and maybe, just
    > maybe, the mind set will change.
    >
    > Frankly, a 2 minute reboot once a month doesnt really impact most
    > peoples lives.


    You seem to forget that installing apps also often requires a reboot

    > But I forgot, you're so busy making backups for the programmers you
    > probably cant afford that "downtime".
    >
    >
    > *chuckle*


    Well, you naturally had to defend the "MS partyline"
    --
    If a listener nods his head when you're explaining your program, wake
    him up.


  16. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Kelsey Bjarnason writes:
    >>
    >>> [snips]
    >>>
    >>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:51:34 -0400, COLA Loons wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>> Dont be such a moron. Most people turn their PCs off at night anyway.
    >>>>> Yes, I prefer the Linux way but to keep harping on about Windows
    >>>>> reboots you would think you were losing 4 hours a day or something
    >>>>> ridiculous.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>> That person is blowing smoke and will come out with any excuse. The part
    >>>> about it disrupting everything one is doing is nonsense.
    >>> Really? So how do you configure Windows update to download and install
    >>> the updates - including the ones which require a reboot - such that they
    >>> are applied and active, *without* a reboot?
    >>>
    >>> You can't.

    >> And most people do not care.

    >
    > Wrong. "Most people" don't know any better


    Wrong. They don't care even if they knew better. They just want to turn
    it on, use the computer and not care about it. Only people like you care.

    >
    >> Concentrate on an integrated desktop and application suite which works,
    >> stuff to sync your phone and pda, entertainment SW and maybe, just
    >> maybe, the mind set will change.
    >>
    >> Frankly, a 2 minute reboot once a month doesnt really impact most
    >> peoples lives.

    >
    > You seem to forget that installing apps also often requires a reboot


    So I guess it's install application galore for someone. They are
    installing/rebooting, installing/rebooting, installing/rebooting,
    installing/rebooting and it goes on and on for him or her. It's a
    vicious cycle, and it's counter productive in his or her life. :-P
    >
    >> But I forgot, you're so busy making backups for the programmers you
    >> probably cant afford that "downtime".
    >>
    >>
    >> *chuckle*

    >
    > Well, you naturally had to defend the "MS partyline"


    What are you defending? I don't even think you know. You're in drone mode.

  17. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On 2008-09-10 14:53, Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
    > Constant rebooting of windows is just not the case anymore.
    >
    > Here is one of Roy's latest spams.
    > http://computingtech.blogspot.com/20...out-linux.html
    >
    > They act like they reboot windows, constantly. Here is a quote from
    > the latest article.
    > "you should not have to reboot your computer every time someone
    > sneezes. "
    >
    > I think the last version of windows, many linux nuts used, was 3.1
    >
    >
    >
    >


    Then I must be one of those nuts.
    I had windows 3.11 but upgraded to Slackware instead
    of win95, and never looked back after that.

    /bb

  18. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On 2008-09-11, Hadron wrote:
    > Kelsey Bjarnason writes:
    >
    >> [snips]
    >>
    >> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:51:34 -0400, COLA Loons wrote:
    >>
    >>>> Dont be such a moron. Most people turn their PCs off at night anyway.
    >>>> Yes, I prefer the Linux way but to keep harping on about Windows
    >>>> reboots you would think you were losing 4 hours a day or something
    >>>> ridiculous.
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>> That person is blowing smoke and will come out with any excuse. The part
    >>> about it disrupting everything one is doing is nonsense.

    >>
    >> Really? So how do you configure Windows update to download and install
    >> the updates - including the ones which require a reboot - such that they
    >> are applied and active, *without* a reboot?
    >>
    >> You can't.

    >
    > And most people do not care.
    >
    > Concentrate on an integrated desktop and application suite which works,
    > stuff to sync your phone and pda, entertainment SW and maybe, just
    > maybe, the mind set will change.
    >
    > Frankly, a 2 minute reboot once a month doesnt really impact most
    > peoples lives.


    ...if it were only that.

    There are the email viruses.
    There are the msword document viruses.
    There are the viruses in image files.
    There are the rogue browser addons.
    There are the USB devices that don't install as advertised.
    There are the multimedia formats that end up being a bother.

    ...and you are concentrating on an artifically deflated number
    for reboots.

    >
    > But I forgot, you're so busy making backups for the programmers you
    > probably cant afford that "downtime".


    A system is always bound to be doing something. Somoene will
    probably want to use it just as you decide it needs to be taken
    down. This is pretty obvious if you've ever "worked" with computers.
    Oddly enough, that principle even works for "personal" machines too
    when more than just one person is involved. (IOW, you don't just
    live by yourself in your mother's basement)

    "Sorry honey bunny. I know you were having insomnia. But the
    media server decided it was it's maintenance window."

    --
    Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is! |||
    / | \

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

  19. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On 2008-09-11, Sudden Impact wrote:
    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Kelsey Bjarnason writes:
    >>>
    >>>> [snips]
    >>>>
    >>>> On Wed, 10 Sep 2008 13:51:34 -0400, COLA Loons wrote:

    [deletia]
    >>> Concentrate on an integrated desktop and application suite which works,
    >>> stuff to sync your phone and pda, entertainment SW and maybe, just
    >>> maybe, the mind set will change.
    >>>
    >>> Frankly, a 2 minute reboot once a month doesnt really impact most
    >>> peoples lives.

    >>
    >> You seem to forget that installing apps also often requires a reboot

    >
    > So I guess it's install application galore for someone. They are


    Why the HELL not.

    This is the OS "that runs everything" we're talking about here?

    It's supposed to be all available and all easy.

    Why not expect the end user to be messing with stuff all the time?

    > installing/rebooting, installing/rebooting, installing/rebooting,
    > installing/rebooting and it goes on and on for him or her. It's a
    > vicious cycle, and it's counter productive in his or her life. :-P
    >>
    >>> But I forgot, you're so busy making backups for the programmers you
    >>> probably cant afford that "downtime".
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> *chuckle*

    >>
    >> Well, you naturally had to defend the "MS partyline"

    >
    > What are you defending? I don't even think you know. You're in drone mode.


    What idea is he defending?

    The Unix notion that you don't force the box down unless you need to
    alter the currently running kernel. Even THAT may not be a good enough
    reason. Better Unixen don't even need that as an excuse.

    If you tolerate ****, **** will be heaped upon you. This starts from
    the engineers and trickles down to the end users to the point where
    everyone is used to the idea that computers are inherently unreliable.

    --
    Apple: because TRANS.TBL is an mp3 file. It really is! |||
    / | \

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

  20. Re: Rebooting Windows Constantly

    On Sep 11, 5:57 am, bb wrote:
    > On 2008-09-10 14:53, Psyc Geek (TAB) wrote:
    >
    > > Constant rebooting of windows is just not the case anymore.

    >
    > > Here is one of Roy's latest spams.
    > >http://computingtech.blogspot.com/20...eat-about-linu...

    >
    > > They act like they reboot windows, constantly. Here is a quote from
    > > the latest article.
    > > "you should not have to reboot your computer every time someone
    > > sneezes. "

    >
    > > I think the last version of windows, many linux nuts used, was 3.1

    >
    > Then I must be one of those nuts.
    > I had windows 3.11 but upgraded to Slackware instead
    > of win95, and never looked back after that.
    >
    > /bb


    I'll do you better than that. I used DOS, but couldn't stomach what I
    saw about Windows 3.1, and never used it. In 1997, I switched to
    Linux and never looked back.

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