Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges. - Linux

This is a discussion on Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges. - Linux ; On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:21:39 +0800, Ian Hilliard wrote: > Roger wrote: > >> I decided to boot my laptop into Ubuntu today. I was probably due for a >> few updates and I wanted to check out a ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast
Results 41 to 60 of 71

Thread: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

  1. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:21:39 +0800, Ian Hilliard wrote:

    > Roger wrote:
    >
    >> I decided to boot my laptop into Ubuntu today. I was probably due for a
    >> few updates and I wanted to check out a few things. I start Ubuntu, log in
    >> and the first thing that I notice is that some of the gDesklets that I
    >> installed didn't start. Logging out then logging back in fixed this and
    >> now I have the CPU, Memory, network and Analog Clock desklet running
    >> again.
    >>
    >> A few seconds later the notifier pops up telling me that I have 20-Megs of
    >> updates to download and install. The list looks good so I type in my
    >> password and start the download. A couple of the downloads that it tells
    >> me that are available are these Firefox updates:
    >>
    >>
    >> Version 2.0.0.15+1nobinonly-0ubuntu0.7.10:
    >>
    >> * New security/stability upstream release (v2.0.0.15)
    >> - see USN-619-1
    >>
    >>
    >> Great except that the download fails. It tells me that the downloads are
    >> available but apparently they aren't.
    >>
    >>
    >> W: Failed to fetch
    >>

    > http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/po....7.10_i386.deb
    >> 404 Not Found
    >>
    >> W: Failed to fetch
    >>

    > http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/po....7.10_i386.deb
    >> 404 Not Found
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> ***** Suddenly I notice that the cooling fan on the laptop is roaring. I
    >> run PS and see that some 'scrollkeeper-up' application is pegging my CPU.
    >>
    >>
    >> top - 15:55:42 up 36 min, 2 users, load average: 2.12, 3.19, 2.68
    >> Tasks: 113 total, 2 running, 111 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
    >> Cpu(s): 52.0%us, 4.2%sy, 13.9%ni, 22.0%id, 7.3%wa, 0.4%hi, 0.3%si,
    >> 0.0%st
    >> Mem: 507596k total, 501904k used, 5692k free, 13500k buffers
    >> Swap: 1052248k total, 34700k used, 1017548k free, 140912k cached
    >>
    >> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
    >> 6553 root 35 10 58232 55m 1464 R 69.3 11.1 5:09.34
    >> scrollkeeper-up
    >> 12946 zeke 15 0 43660 27m 11m S 7.9 5.6 0:09.14 python
    >> 1 root 18 0 2952 1856 532 S 0.0 0.4 0:01.34 init
    >> 2 root 14 -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd
    >> 3 root RT -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 migration/0
    >> 4 root 34 19 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 ksoftirqd/0
    >> 5 root RT -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/0
    >> 6 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.01 events/0
    >> 7 root 17 -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 khelper
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> I decide to capture all of this into a file so that I can post it here. So
    >> I run gedit 2.20.3. I then press "Ctrl+S" to save the file and even this
    >> is screwed up.
    >>
    >> Focus appears to be at top of the dialog where you type in the filename
    >> for the document. But you can't even type in the filename because even
    >> though it "looks" like that's where the input focus is when you start
    >> typing chars the list of folders/subdirectories is getting selected as you
    >> type. You have to explicitly set the focus to the filename control before
    >> you can enter the name of the file.
    >>
    >> Absolutely terrible!!!!
    >>
    >>
    >> Generally I like Linux and would use it more but right now there are way
    >> too many rough edges for the general consumer to use this OS on a regular
    >> basis.

    >
    > You're a poor sad case. I've just recently installed Ubuntu 8.04 on an MSI
    > Wind. Throughout the whole process, the computer was not stressed in the
    > slightest. The whole installation process, including copying across my home
    > directory, took around an hour. It is now a really great little travel
    > partner.
    >


    Not very good at reading are you? Good for your new install. Except that
    I'm not talking about installing anything since I already have Ubuntu 7.10
    on my laptop. I just want to update the system and not have it try to cook
    the CPU in my laptop every time I run it. And if it tells me that an
    upgrade is available then it shouldn't fail a few seconds later when the
    'available' upgrade really isn't available.


    > For what I have to do, Ubuntu has far fewer rough edges than Windows.



    By overwhelming majority most people in the world feel the other way
    around. If Ubuntu can't even get a simple "File-Open" dialog to work right
    or if it can't run for more than a few minutes without some app taking up
    100% of the CPU then those edges are more than rough enough for people to
    return back to Windows.>
    > Ian



  2. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    Paul Montgumdrop wrote:

    >Roger wrote:
    >>

    >
    >You are funny!


    *plonk*


  3. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On 2008-09-19, Roger wrote:
    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:19:33 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-17, Roger wrote:
    >>> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:59:50 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> On Wed, 17 Sep 2008 15:38:42 -0400, Roger wrote:


    [deletia]
    >>> I'd upgrade but I don't want to see all of my custom settings wiped out
    >>> where I have to go through that **** all over again.

    >> So backup /etc... problem solved.

    >
    >
    > Not solved at all. Then I should do what after I install the new OS.
    > Simply overwrite every new file in /etc with the older version from my
    > previous install? That's a sure way to create a entire set of new
    > problems.


    That could work. Although it's unecessary. Generally, related
    stuff is not strewn all over the '/etc tree'. So relevant configuation
    items are going to be well isolated.

    >
    >
    >> You sure sound like a troll to me.

    >
    > You sure sound like a clueless idiot to me. Tell me again how Ubuntu's failure to detect my wireless adapter is a configuration issue with my network. Or tell me oh-wise-one how DHCP is going to configure Samba file sharing for me.


    How will another OS for that matter?

    >
    >>
    >>> And why did Ubuntu drop support for 7.10 less than a year after it was
    >>> released. I've heard morons wining that MS was dropping support for
    >>> Win98. That's TEN freaking YEARS ago. Ubuntu won't support their ****
    >>> for 10 months.

    >>
    >> You obviously have no clue at all about running a system. Give it away,
    >> so we don't have to see your whining.

    >
    >
    > You obviously have no clue about anything. Hey Greggy boy... tell me how DHCP automatically configures printer sharing for me you moron.
    >


    It doesn't. It doesn't need to. There are 2 whole checkboxes involved.

    --


    Some people have this nutty idea that in 1997 |||
    reading to a hard disk and writing to a hard disk / | \
    both at the same time was something worth patenting.


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

  4. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On 2008-09-19, Roger wrote:
    > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 19:21:39 +0800, Ian Hilliard wrote:
    >
    >> Roger wrote:
    >>
    >>> I decided to boot my laptop into Ubuntu today. I was probably due for a
    >>> few updates and I wanted to check out a few things. I start Ubuntu, log in
    >>> and the first thing that I notice is that some of the gDesklets that I
    >>> installed didn't start. Logging out then logging back in fixed this and
    >>> now I have the CPU, Memory, network and Analog Clock desklet running
    >>> again.
    >>>
    >>> A few seconds later the notifier pops up telling me that I have 20-Megs of
    >>> updates to download and install. The list looks good so I type in my
    >>> password and start the download. A couple of the downloads that it tells
    >>> me that are available are these Firefox updates:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Version 2.0.0.15+1nobinonly-0ubuntu0.7.10:
    >>>
    >>> * New security/stability upstream release (v2.0.0.15)
    >>> - see USN-619-1
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Great except that the download fails. It tells me that the downloads are
    >>> available but apparently they aren't.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> W: Failed to fetch
    >>>

    >> http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/po....7.10_i386.deb
    >>> 404 Not Found
    >>>
    >>> W: Failed to fetch
    >>>

    >> http://security.ubuntu.com/ubuntu/po....7.10_i386.deb
    >>> 404 Not Found
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> ***** Suddenly I notice that the cooling fan on the laptop is roaring. I
    >>> run PS and see that some 'scrollkeeper-up' application is pegging my CPU.
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> top - 15:55:42 up 36 min, 2 users, load average: 2.12, 3.19, 2.68
    >>> Tasks: 113 total, 2 running, 111 sleeping, 0 stopped, 0 zombie
    >>> Cpu(s): 52.0%us, 4.2%sy, 13.9%ni, 22.0%id, 7.3%wa, 0.4%hi, 0.3%si,
    >>> 0.0%st
    >>> Mem: 507596k total, 501904k used, 5692k free, 13500k buffers
    >>> Swap: 1052248k total, 34700k used, 1017548k free, 140912k cached
    >>>
    >>> PID USER PR NI VIRT RES SHR S %CPU %MEM TIME+ COMMAND
    >>> 6553 root 35 10 58232 55m 1464 R 69.3 11.1 5:09.34
    >>> scrollkeeper-up
    >>> 12946 zeke 15 0 43660 27m 11m S 7.9 5.6 0:09.14 python
    >>> 1 root 18 0 2952 1856 532 S 0.0 0.4 0:01.34 init
    >>> 2 root 14 -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 kthreadd
    >>> 3 root RT -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 migration/0
    >>> 4 root 34 19 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 ksoftirqd/0
    >>> 5 root RT -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 watchdog/0
    >>> 6 root 10 -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.01 events/0
    >>> 7 root 17 -5 0 0 0 S 0.0 0.0 0:00.00 khelper
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I decide to capture all of this into a file so that I can post it here. So
    >>> I run gedit 2.20.3. I then press "Ctrl+S" to save the file and even this
    >>> is screwed up.
    >>>
    >>> Focus appears to be at top of the dialog where you type in the filename
    >>> for the document. But you can't even type in the filename because even
    >>> though it "looks" like that's where the input focus is when you start
    >>> typing chars the list of folders/subdirectories is getting selected as you
    >>> type. You have to explicitly set the focus to the filename control before
    >>> you can enter the name of the file.
    >>>
    >>> Absolutely terrible!!!!
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> Generally I like Linux and would use it more but right now there are way
    >>> too many rough edges for the general consumer to use this OS on a regular
    >>> basis.

    >>
    >> You're a poor sad case. I've just recently installed Ubuntu 8.04 on an MSI
    >> Wind. Throughout the whole process, the computer was not stressed in the
    >> slightest. The whole installation process, including copying across my home
    >> directory, took around an hour. It is now a really great little travel
    >> partner.
    >>

    >
    > Not very good at reading are you? Good for your new install. Except that
    > I'm not talking about installing anything since I already have Ubuntu 7.10
    > on my laptop. I just want to update the system and not have it try to cook
    > the CPU in my laptop every time I run it. And if it tells me that an


    ....you know that's really funny considering that I managed to SAVE
    an old laptop by running Ubuntu 7.10 on it. When running it's
    original OS (XP) it was running hot to the point of the BIOS
    shutting the system down. When running Ubuntu 7.10 (and now 8.04)
    it runs cool enough to operate indefintely.

    More importantly it's usable.

    Thought the laptop was dying when it was still running XP.

    > upgrade is available then it shouldn't fail a few seconds later when the
    > 'available' upgrade really isn't available.
    >
    >
    >> For what I have to do, Ubuntu has far fewer rough edges than Windows.

    >
    >
    > By overwhelming majority most people in the world feel the other way
    > around. If Ubuntu can't even get a simple "File-Open" dialog to work right


    The overwhelming majority of most people in the world simply don't
    care and would perhaps think you a basement dwelling troll for bringing
    this sort of stuff up.

    [deletia]

    --


    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: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On 2008-09-19, Roger wrote:
    > On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 06:42:47 -0500, Sinister Midget wrote:
    >
    >> On 2008-09-19, Ian Hilliard claimed:
    >>> Roger wrote:

    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> You're a poor sad case. I've just recently installed Ubuntu 8.04 on an MSI
    >>> Wind. Throughout the whole process, the computer was not stressed in the
    >>> slightest. The whole installation process, including copying across my home
    >>> directory, took around an hour. It is now a really great little travel
    >>> partner.
    >>>
    >>> For what I have to do, Ubuntu has far fewer rough edges than Windows.

    >>
    >> It was the cheesy (motzarella) moron. Probably pieced together a bunch
    >> of crap discovered on search engines so s/h/it could have "problems"
    >> like that.

    >
    >
    >
    > Yeah right moron. According to your 'midget brain' nobody has "problems" with
    > Ubuntu. Ubuntu is perfect and all of these reported problems are people just
    > finding stuff on the web to complain about.


    In a wretched hive of scum and villany... it's a very reasonable
    default assumption to start out with.

    [deletia]

    --


    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

  6. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On 2008-09-19, Roger wrote:
    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:19:33 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >>
    >>> I would upgrade but it was such a PITA to configure and get everything working with 7.10 that I don't want to have to go through that again... ever.

    >>
    >> Why should you have to "got through" anything?
    >>

    >
    > You have no idea what you're talking about.


    Of course I don't... and yet I'm not the one who cannot run Ubuntu.

    >>> It's been a while now (obvious since 7.10 is fairly old) but I had to make all sorts of tweaks and changes to get wireless and the video working properly. There's a bunch of other changes I made that are mostly network related to control access to the other machines on the network, DNS, file sharing, printing etc.

    >>
    >> Ah! I see why things are so much trouble for you. You have a badly
    >> configured network.

    >
    > Ubuntu didn't recognize the wireless adapter in my laptop. What the hell
    > does my network configuration have to do with anything if Linux can't
    > properly detect or configure my wireless adapter?


    So Ubuntu didn't recognise your wireless? So what.. plug it into a wired
    network and get the driver you need.

    Really, this is basic stuff. If you can't handle an install then pay
    someone to do it for you or get it pre-installed. No need to whine about
    it here.

    >
    >> DNS, printing, file "sharing" etc should be automatically configured via
    >> DHCP etc...

    >
    > You are beyond cleuless. How is DHCP going to automatically configure my
    > printing or file sharing? DHCP will retrieve the DNS information but DHCP
    > has absolutely nothing to do with printer and file sharing.


    via DHCP, etc.

    Did you deliberately ignore the ", etc" bit so that you could sling
    another insult? Pathetic really.

    CUPS just needs to know which address the printer is served from...
    everything else is automatic. File sharing? NFS is easy to set up... or
    http or whatever damn protocol you like.

    >>> I'd upgrade but I don't want to see all of my custom settings wiped out
    >>> where I have to go through that **** all over again.

    >> So backup /etc... problem solved.

    >
    >
    > Not solved at all. Then I should do what after I install the new OS.
    > Simply overwrite every new file in /etc with the older version from my
    > previous install? That's a sure way to create a entire set of new
    > problems.


    Probably... diff each /etc file before installing. Gentoo doesn't have
    upgrades so I don't have your problem. Why not take these problems to
    the Ubuntu forums, where they can help you? No good whining about it
    here.

    Gentoo uses an "etc-update" program to diff /etc files that might be
    overwritten by a package upgrade.

    I'm sure Ubuntu has a similar way of doing things. Ask in the
    appropriate forum.
    >
    >
    >> You sure sound like a troll to me.

    >
    > You sure sound like a clueless idiot to me. Tell me again how Ubuntu's failure to detect my wireless adapter is a configuration issue with my network. Or tell me oh-wise-one how DHCP is going to configure Samba file sharing for me.


    Let's see.. If I was installing an OS I'd plug it _physically_ into the
    network. Wifi is always going to be problematic. It's new technology and
    takes work to install. I use Madwifi on two of my machines.. they both
    run Atheros chipsets. These drivers are never included in a base
    install, therefore I always use do a hard wired install.

    The simple fact is that you don't have a wired port to plug your new
    computers into, in order to install your OS. That's a network
    misconfiguration.

    Samba file sharing? Who cares?

    I don't do windows. Work it out for yourself or pay someone to work it
    out for you.

    >>
    >>> And why did Ubuntu drop support for 7.10 less than a year after it was
    >>> released. I've heard morons wining that MS was dropping support for
    >>> Win98. That's TEN freaking YEARS ago. Ubuntu won't support their ****
    >>> for 10 months.

    >>
    >> You obviously have no clue at all about running a system. Give it away,
    >> so we don't have to see your whining.

    >
    >
    > You obviously have no clue about anything. Hey Greggy boy... tell me how DHCP automatically configures printer sharing for me you moron.


    Hey Roger.. you need reading comprehension lessons...

    Remember "configured by DHCP, _etc_"

    But I don't think this can go any further.

    You are an insulting little twerp. A simple-minded troll, wishing merely
    to disrupt linux groups with your idiocy. **** off. No good being polite
    to a troll.



    --
    Regards,

    Gregory.
    Gentoo Linux - Penguin Power

  7. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    JEDIDIAH wrote:

    > nym-shifting, fsckwitted troll:
    >>
    >> Yeah right moron. According to your 'midget brain' nobody has "problems" with
    >> Ubuntu. Ubuntu is perfect and all of these reported problems are people just
    >> finding stuff on the web to complain about.


    Dumb****. Saying a distro works pretty well for most people is not
    saying that it's "perfect", or that "nobody" has any problems.

    Your idiocy and lies are *quite* transparent, troll. Have you no
    shame?

    >In a wretched hive of scum and villany... it's a very reasonable
    >default assumption to start out with.


    With anything posted by a nym-shifting troll, certainly.


  8. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On 2008-09-19, JEDIDIAH claimed:
    > On 2008-09-19, Roger wrote:


    >> Yeah right moron. According to your 'midget brain' nobody has "problems" with
    >> Ubuntu. Ubuntu is perfect and all of these reported problems are people just
    >> finding stuff on the web to complain about.

    >
    > In a wretched hive of scum and villany... it's a very reasonable
    > default assumption to start out with.


    Add to that the fact that nothing useful has been posted to this group
    by anyone using motzarella as a posting host, plus there being no
    record of "Roger" before 9/17, and we find the well-established recipe
    for a troll.

    The Motzarella Moron fails to garner credibility due to 2 majors
    points: 1) motzerella; and, 2) recycling Ubuntu problems from 2005 and
    early 2008 that can be found by any script kiddy wanting to troll.

    Make that 3 points: poor reading comprehension as well. I didn't say
    anything about Ubunutu's quality. I talked about the content and source
    of the troll's post, not the veracity of the posts by other people that
    s/h/it lifted from a search engine and pretended were original
    experiences.

    --
    Windows: Proof that P.T. Barnum was right.

    ---- Posted via Pronews.com - Premium Corporate Usenet News Provider ----
    http://www.pronews.com offers corporate packages that have access to 100,000+ newsgroups

  9. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

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

    > On Thu, 18 Sep 2008 05:19:33 +0000, Gregory Shearman wrote:
    >
    > You obviously have no clue about anything. Hey Greggy boy... tell me
    > how DHCP automatically configures printer sharing for me you moron.


    *plonk*

    --
    Avoid gunfire in the bathroom tonight.

  10. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

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

    > On 2008-09-19, Roger wrote:
    >>> Roger wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>> ***** Suddenly I notice that the cooling fan on the laptop is roaring.
    >>>>
    >>>> Absolutely terrible!!!!

    >>
    >> By overwhelming majority most people in the world feel the other way
    >> around. If Ubuntu can't even get a simple "File-Open" dialog to work right

    >
    > The overwhelming majority of most people in the world simply don't
    > care and would perhaps think you a basement dwelling troll for bringing
    > this sort of stuff up.


    I dub him "Roger Dodger".

    An absolutely transparent troll, following the script to a T, including
    the gradual descent into insult.

    --
    Glib's Fourth Law of Unreliability:
    Investment in reliability will increase until it exceeds the
    probable cost of errors, or until someone insists on getting
    some useful work done.

  11. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > I dub him "Roger Dodger".
    >
    > An absolutely transparent troll, following the script to a T, including
    > the gradual descent into insult.


    Gradual?


  12. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On Sep 19, 8:10 am, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, JEDIDIAH belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    > > On 2008-09-19, Roger wrote:
    > >>> Roger wrote:

    >
    > >>>> ***** Suddenly I notice that the cooling fan on the laptop is roaring.

    >
    > >>>> Absolutely terrible!!!!

    >
    > >> By overwhelming majority most people in the world feel the other way
    > >> around. If Ubuntu can't even get a simple "File-Open" dialog to work right

    >
    > > The overwhelming majority of most people in the world simply don't
    > > care and would perhaps think you a basement dwelling troll for bringing
    > > this sort of stuff up.

    >
    > I dub him "Roger Dodger".
    >
    > An absolutely transparent troll, following the script to a T, including
    > the gradual descent into insult.


    Gradual? His first post was reasonably decent, I'll grant you---in
    the mold of "I love Linux but it hosed my hard disk so regretfully
    I'll have to go back to Windows(tm)"---but as soon as anyone called
    him on it, he turned into the same nasty little troll as all the other
    thousands of nyms that have posted stories like that here over the
    last 15 years.

  13. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

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

    > Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >
    >> I dub him "Roger Dodger".
    >>
    >> An absolutely transparent troll, following the script to a T, including
    >> the gradual descent into insult.

    >
    > Gradual?


    Okay, a couple posts.

    What's really funny is those people who say that the presence of
    problems on forums such as Ubuntu is a bad thing for Linux.

    Far from it! The presence of active problem-solving forums is a great
    sign of life for any technology. Especially one with some many
    variations in implementation, GNU/Linux.

    Another point, too: Why do people decry the increasing number of
    distributions? It is simply /another/ indicator that, not only /can/
    people take this technology, tweak it to their preference, and share it
    with like-minded souls, they actually take the time to /do/ it!

    You might as well quibble about all the hundreds of models of
    automobiles and trucks out there.

    --
    BE ALOOF! (There has been a recent population explosion of lerts.)

  14. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    On Fri, 19 Sep 2008 13:04:59 -0400, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, chrisv belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>
    >>> I dub him "Roger Dodger".
    >>>
    >>> An absolutely transparent troll, following the script to a T, including
    >>> the gradual descent into insult.

    >>
    >> Gradual?

    >
    > Okay, a couple posts.
    >
    > What's really funny is those people who say that the presence of
    > problems on forums such as Ubuntu is a bad thing for Linux.


    It's not a bad thing for Linux.
    It's a bad thing for the Linux zealot loons who for years have been
    cataghorically denying said problems.

    > Far from it! The presence of active problem-solving forums is a great
    > sign of life for any technology. Especially one with some many
    > variations in implementation, GNU/Linux.


    Of course it is.
    Nobody is saying anything different.
    At least I'm not.

    > Another point, too: Why do people decry the increasing number of
    > distributions? It is simply /another/ indicator that, not only /can/
    > people take this technology, tweak it to their preference, and share it
    > with like-minded souls, they actually take the time to /do/ it!


    Because it's hindering Linux IMHO.
    I've posted why many times before.

    > You might as well quibble about all the hundreds of models of
    > automobiles and trucks out there.


    Different.


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

  15. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    nessuno@wigner.berkeley.edu wrote:

    > Gradual? *His first post was reasonably decent, I'll grant you---in
    > the mold of "I love Linux but it hosed my hard disk so regretfully
    > I'll have to go back to Windows(tm)"---but as soon as anyone called
    > him on it, he turned into the same nasty little troll as all the other
    > thousands of nyms that have posted stories like that here over the
    > last 15 years.


    This is most definetly a signature of a typical Flatfoot (Gary Stewart) post
    when he creates a new nym. he Always starts out as a seemingly legitimate
    post regarding what may (or may not) be, a legitimate problem. he even uses
    what appears to be a real name to make the post look like a legitimate post
    but, he gives it away when he states, that "he is going to go back to
    windows" & / or "linux is not ready for the desktop". this is a dead
    giveaway that it is a Gary Stewart post.



  16. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, chrisv belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>
    >>> I dub him "Roger Dodger".
    >>>
    >>> An absolutely transparent troll, following the script to a T, including
    >>> the gradual descent into insult.

    >>
    >> Gradual?

    >
    > Okay, a couple posts.
    >
    > What's really funny is those people who say that the presence of
    > problems on forums such as Ubuntu is a bad thing for Linux.


    Huh? Wrong. What some of say in COLA is "SW is SW and there are many
    issues with Linux which need fixing". Unfortunately the COLA loons reply
    with "works fine for me Quack, you could **** up a boiled egg". And yes,
    you do too.

    >
    > Far from it! The presence of active problem-solving forums is a great
    > sign of life for any technology. Especially one with some many
    > variations in implementation, GNU/Linux.


    Exactly. We agree. And you implicitly agree that more variations in
    implementation (distros and branches) leads to more problems. We agree.

    >
    > Another point, too: Why do people decry the increasing number of
    > distributions? It is simply /another/ indicator that, not only /can/
    > people take this technology, tweak it to their preference, and share it
    > with like-minded souls, they actually take the time to /do/ it!


    It should be obvious. You are a SW developer. You know full well that if
    your team breaks up into 5 teams and then generates their own version
    then there will be issues.

    > You might as well quibble about all the hundreds of models of
    > automobiles and trucks out there.


    Not the same thing at all. There WOULD be a quibble if there were 10000
    versions of the Ford Escort for example with each having slightly
    different fuel lines or spark plugs or whatever.

    --
    - "Thats what I have been saying for 5 years. Consumers are tired, they
    want something new and more exciting."
    comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  17. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    Hadron wrote:

    > That strange. I always thought your chose the OS after you did what
    > you had to do :-;
    >


    I choose the OS based on the requirements and constraints. My requirement is
    to have a reliable OS with good support for off-the-shelf hardware, that is
    safe in uncontrolled environments. Linux meets those requirements and meets
    them well.

    Ian

  18. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    Ian Hilliard writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> That strange. I always thought your chose the OS after you did what
    >> you had to do :-;
    >>

    >
    > I choose the OS based on the requirements and constraints. My requirement is
    > to have a reliable OS with good support for off-the-shelf hardware, that is
    > safe in uncontrolled environments. Linux meets those requirements and meets
    > them well.
    >
    > Ian


    Which "off the shelf HW" could you not get working with Windows?

    --
    "For example, user interfaces are _usually_ better in commercial software.
    I'm not saying that this is always true, but in many cases the user
    interface to a program is the most important part for a commercial
    company..." Linus Torvalds

  19. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    Hadron wrote:

    >> I choose the OS based on the requirements and constraints. My requirement
    >> is to have a reliable OS with good support for off-the-shelf hardware,
    >> that is safe in uncontrolled environments. Linux meets those requirements
    >> and meets them well.
    >>
    >> Ian

    >
    > Which "off the shelf HW" could you not get working with Windows?


    Windows fails the "safe in uncontrolled environments" criteria.

    Ian

  20. Re: Linux works - If you ignore the rough edges.

    Ian Hilliard writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >>> I choose the OS based on the requirements and constraints. My requirement
    >>> is to have a reliable OS with good support for off-the-shelf hardware,
    >>> that is safe in uncontrolled environments. Linux meets those requirements
    >>> and meets them well.
    >>>
    >>> Ian

    >>
    >> Which "off the shelf HW" could you not get working with Windows?

    >
    > Windows fails the "safe in uncontrolled environments" criteria.
    >
    > Ian


    You did not answer the question. Now define a controlled environment.


+ Reply to Thread
Page 3 of 4 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 LastLast