Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus - Linux

This is a discussion on Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus - Linux ; Chris Ahlstrom wrote: > After takin' a swig o' grog, Andrew Halliwell belched out > this bit o' wisdom: > >> amicus_curious wrote: >>> >>> "Andrew Halliwell" wrote in message >>> news s5hs5-gn6.ln1@ponder.sky.com... >>>> >>>> inability to recognise even the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 57

Thread: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

  1. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Andrew Halliwell belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> amicus_curious wrote:
    >>>
    >>> "Andrew Halliwell" wrote in message
    >>> newss5hs5-gn6.ln1@ponder.sky.com...
    >>>>
    >>>> inability to recognise even the simplest of sums and accusations of
    >>>> innumeracy against people who can, noted.
    >>>>
    >>> Not to mention the original poster's sloppiness in including a total
    >>> that wasn't visually differentiated from the components.
    >>>

    >> Everyone else seemed to be able to recognise that "Windows" is a total of
    >> all the windows variants below it.

    >
    > That's because they can add, quickly.
    >


    Even if you can add very slowly only, it does not take much to recognize
    what the numbers were about.

    It takes a DFS to completely miss the point
    And, naturally, a Bill Weisgerber (amicus_curious)
    --
    I hear if you play the Windows XP CD backward you'll hear satanic
    messages. But even scarier, if you play it forward it installs
    Windows XP!!


  2. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >>> Here is the breakdown of Windows hits from my personal website over
    >>> the last few days. It shows XP is about four times as common as
    >>> Vista.
    >>>
    >>> Windows 49814 73.5 %
    >>> Windows XP 37620 55.5 %
    >>> Windows Vista 10290 15.1 %
    >>> Windows CE 4 0 %
    >>> Windows 98 59 0 %
    >>> Windows 2003 1021 1.5 %
    >>> Windows 2000 820 1.2 %

    >>
    >> Total = 147%. Congrats! You really are a Linux "advocate*": as
    >> innumerate as they come.

    >
    > Oh doofy, poor poor doofy...
    > poor dear old doofy. Since when did
    > 55.5
    > 15.1+
    > 1.5
    > 1.2
    > ------
    > 147.0?
    >
    > inability to recognise even the simplest of sums and accusations of
    > innumeracy against people who can, noted.


    Lookie here. Now spike1 has a piece of "ammo" he can use against me for 6
    months. Are you happy?

    Oh, btw, let me tidy it up the way it should have been presented in the
    first place:

    Windows XP, 37620, 55.5 %
    Windows Vista, 10290, 15.1 %
    Windows 2003, 1021, 1.5 %
    Windows 2000, 820, 1.2 %
    Windows 98, 59, 0 %
    Windows CE, 4, 0 %
    ======================
    Windows Total, 49814, 73.5 %


    I hate having to fix slopware posts...




  3. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    DFS wrote:
    >>> Total = 147%. Congrats! You really are a Linux "advocate*": as
    >>> innumerate as they come.

    >>
    >> Oh doofy, poor poor doofy...
    >> poor dear old doofy. Since when did
    >> 55.5
    >> 15.1+
    >> 1.5
    >> 1.2
    >> ------
    >> 147.0?
    >>
    >> inability to recognise even the simplest of sums and accusations of
    >> innumeracy against people who can, noted.

    >
    > Lookie here. Now spike1 has a piece of "ammo" he can use against me for 6
    > months. Are you happy?


    Yep. But unlike you, I done store up "ammo" like that.

    --
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc | "ARSE! GERLS!! DRINK! DRINK! DRINK!!!" |
    | in | "THAT WOULD BE AN ECUMENICAL MATTER!...FECK!!!! |
    | Computer Science | - Father Jack in "Father Ted" |

  4. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    On Oct 15, 4:18 am, "amicus_curious" wrote:
    > "Terry Porter" wrote in message
    > news:SvOdnbgYptRKqmjVnZ2dnUVZ_ofinZ2d@netspace.net .au...
    >
    > > Hi All,

    >
    > > I wonder if MS Windows realise that the most widely used OS on this
    > > planet was released in October 2001?

    >
    > > Here is the breakdown of Windows hits from my personal website over the
    > > last few days. It shows XP is about four times as common as Vista.

    >
    > > Windows 49814 73.5 %
    > > Windows XP 37620 55.5 %
    > > Windows Vista 10290 15.1 %
    > > Windows CE 4 0 %
    > > Windows 98 59 0 %
    > > Windows 2003 1021 1.5 %
    > > Windows 2000 820 1.2 %


    Only 73% for Windows. The rest was Linux and Mac?

    > You must have an unusual website to have such a low percentage of Windows
    > based visitors. You must attract a lot of odd-ball Linux users. However,
    > the relative values are not so surprising, given the lack of controls on
    > your statistics.


    I'd agree. I'm used to seeing a range that's pretty broad, but
    normally, I look at
    http://www.w3counter.com/globalstats.php
    The survey is flawed - but shows Linux growing from 0.9% to 1.99% and
    Other at 3.7%

    and:

    http://www.w3schools.com/browsers/browsers_stats.asp
    Which shows Linux at 3.8% and Other is about 1%.

    Mac is about 5% in both cases.

    That would put Windows at about 90%

    Much higher than your site, with a much larger sample.

    > Vista is replacing XP as people acquire new machines and
    > decommission old ones. If XP was in vogue for 6 years and garnered a fair
    > amount of updates as well, it is reasonable for it to trail the installed
    > base of XP by a ratio on the order of what you are observing. You cannot
    > draw any real conclusions from that data.


    Many of the XP machines being replaced as still fully functional,
    they've just been so riddled with viruses and malware that they need
    to be replaced. XP malware infections gave rise to the notion of the
    "Disposable computer". - a computer that you could use for 6 months
    to a year, and then trade in for another one. In corporate IT, the
    old computer is re-imaged using a corporate disk image, and shipped to
    the next guy who has a corrupted computer.

    Consumers have been getting the Vista computers because they have no
    choice. Corporate customers have been ordering XP compatible
    computers and installing corporate XP images, replacing the Vista
    image.

    The economic crisis may also trigger a moratorium on upgrades to Vista
    as well. Corporations may even consider switches of more systems to
    Linux.

    Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess
    real TCO for Linux without committing the entire company's resources
    to a transition that might not be the best choice.

    According to a survey conducted by Information week (sept 8, 2008, pg
    28), about 30% of the respondents were using Linux Desktop system of
    some sort (similar to those described above),

    There has been very good results thus far, and many corporations are
    now looking at migrating other desktop systems.

    In the one market where Linux competes directly with Windows in the
    Retail space, Linux units outsell Windows units 6 to 4.

    Vista may be the best thing to happen to Vista since Windows NT 3.1
    and Windows ME. Windows NT 3.1 was such a disappointment that people
    started looking at Linux more seriously and developers began providing
    support for Linux, both as a server platform, and as a desktop
    system. Windows ME was so disappointing that many people scuttled it
    for Linux. This trend had Microsoft sufficiently concerned that they
    began shipping Windows 98 "upgrade" kits designed to downgrade ME
    systems.



  5. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    Rex Ballard writes:

    > Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    > workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    > workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    > Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess


    Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.


    --
    - "Just think, consumers are not sold on XP, and Microsoft shelled out
    some major $$$ to develop this thing. This is a great opportunity for
    alternative operating systems to intercept the ball, and run it back for a
    touchdown.": comp.os.linux.advocacy - where they put the lunacy in advocacy

  6. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    On Oct 15, 8:07*am, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, cc belched out
    > * this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    > > On Oct 14, 8:22*pm, Terry Porter wrote:
    > >> Hi All,

    >
    > >> I wonder if MS Windows realise that the most widely used OS on this
    > >> planet was released in October 2001?

    >
    > > Does Apple? Do Linux developer? Seems to me like such an obvious bit
    > > of information is going unnoticed by the main competition as well
    > > since they aren't taking advantage of it. With the exception of the
    > > eye-candy you mentioned, what has happened in the past 7+ years that
    > > XP can't handle? Off of the top of my head, security issues are one
    > > thing I can think of. But say you keep your XP up-to-date with AV
    > > software, then what reason would you have to "upgrade" to Vista,
    > > Linux, or a Mac besides the fact that they are newer?

    >
    > Because Linux and Mac are simply faster, and Linux of course is more
    > free.
    >
    > (Not to mention I really love the way Linux operates, much better than
    > XP.)
    >


    That's fine. My point is that if my system is fast enough, secure
    enough, and runs the software I want/need (and mine is a yes to all
    three, as are most XP users I imagine), then why would I switch? Terry
    Porter seems to think it's a travesty that a majority of people are
    running an 8 year old OS, but what major advances have there been in
    SW or HW over that time that would necessitate an upgrade?

  7. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    On Oct 15, 4:04*pm, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    > [snips]
    >
    > On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:22:47 -0500, Terry Porter wrote:
    > > I wonder if MS Windows realise that the most widely used OS on this
    > > planet was released in October 2001?

    >
    > 1984, actually. *Well, that's assuming that by "most widely used OS" you
    > mean the one with the most actual installed copies. *With something over
    > 3 billion copies in use, it ain't Linux. *Nor Windows, OSX or *BSD.


    You know most of the talk centers on desktops around here, and ITRON
    is not a desktop.


    > > Here is the breakdown of Windows hits from my personal website

    >
    > Funny thing... I suspect google probably gets a _few_ more hits than your
    > pet site does, meaning they have a somewhat greater statistical universe
    > to draw conclusions from, but last I heard they'd given up counting OSen
    > by web hits as completely unreliable.



    You heard wrong.

  8. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    Kelsey Bjarnason writes:

    > [snips]
    >
    > On Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:22:47 -0500, Terry Porter wrote:
    >
    >> I wonder if MS Windows realise that the most widely used OS on this
    >> planet was released in October 2001?

    >
    > 1984, actually. Well, that's assuming that by "most widely used OS" you
    > mean the one with the most actual installed copies. With something over
    > 3 billion copies in use, it ain't Linux. Nor Windows, OSX or *BSD.
    >
    >> Here is the breakdown of Windows hits from my personal website

    >
    > Funny thing... I suspect google probably gets a _few_ more hits than your
    > pet site does, meaning they have a somewhat greater statistical universe
    > to draw conclusions from, but last I heard they'd given up counting OSen
    > by web hits as completely unreliable.


    You did? Where did you get this?

    >
    > Of course, *your* pet site gets it all right. Of course.


    He can only report the numbers. The fact that they dont tie in with your
    hysterically funny guess at numbers is besides the point. Oh yes! You're
    the one who wondered my people needed 4 Gigs for telephone numbers!!!
    *chuckle*

    >
    >> Those of us who use Linux know how old XP is, how dated and so
    >> *yesterday* it is.

    >
    > Yes, we do - which means we don't need to resort to nonsense such as web
    > stats to make a case for Linux.


    Nonsense? Why nonsense?

    >
    >> Long uptimes (RELIABLE!)

    >
    > Going for redundancy there?
    >
    >> tp@gronk1 ~ $ uptime
    >> 11:10:12 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users, load average: 2.09, 2.10, 2.11

    >
    > 56 days is not particularly impressive, even for a Windows box.
    >
    >> Over 30.000 Free applications, easily installed i.e. "emerge firefox"
    >> "apt-get install firefox"

    >
    > Even more beneficial: 30,000 free applications which are easily
    > *updated*. Not to mention a social environment which encourages
    > releasing updates regularly, as opposed to getting 150 of them as a new
    > dot version six months or a year down the road.


    You still have not managed to understand the difference between OSS and
    Linux. I find this disturbing. All the best OSS apps are installed on
    FAR more Windows machines than Linux machines. Please TRY to understand
    the difference.

    --
    "What's wrong, (p)Rick? Were you defending the innocence of Hans "The
    Linux Butcher" Reiser, and now that he's about to give up the body
    you're embarrassed at being an idiot?"
    -- DFS in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  9. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

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

    > On Oct 15, 8:07*am, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>
    >> Because Linux and Mac are simply faster, and Linux of course is more
    >> free.
    >>
    >> (Not to mention I really love the way Linux operates, much better than
    >> XP.)

    >
    > That's fine. My point is that if my system is fast enough, secure
    > enough, and runs the software I want/need (and mine is a yes to all
    > three, as are most XP users I imagine), then why would I switch? Terry
    > Porter seems to think it's a travesty that a majority of people are
    > running an 8 year old OS, but what major advances have there been in
    > SW or HW over that time that would necessitate an upgrade?


    No killer advances. However, machines do wear out. The OS gets
    replaced. It's a shame that Microsoft got so full of itself that it
    thought it could yet again gavage the latest Windows on a compliant
    populace.

    I agree, though, many people are not deeply affected by the limitations
    of Windows XP systems, and, of those that are, the thought of change is
    very disquieting to many.

    Some people that I've talked to about Linux, you can see the "fear"
    in their eyes, that I'm going to insist they change to it. It's pretty
    strange. They deal a little better with the thought of switching to a
    Mac. But, in the final analysis, they're fine with what they have, even
    if it just screwed the pooch on 'em and I had to recover their data for
    them.

    --
    Love means having to say you're sorry every five minutes.

  10. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

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

    > On Oct 15, 4:04*pm, Kelsey Bjarnason wrote:
    >>
    >> Funny thing... I suspect google probably gets a _few_ more hits than your
    >> pet site does, meaning they have a somewhat greater statistical universe
    >> to draw conclusions from, but last I heard they'd given up counting OSen
    >> by web hits as completely unreliable.

    >
    > You heard wrong.


    Actually, he's partly correct:

    http://googlesystem.blogspot.com/200...fic-stats.html

    One interesting tidbit: you can't see traffic data for most Google
    sites, although there are some exceptions. "We have policy of not
    providing interim financial guidance, and have decided not to release
    Google numbers in accordance with that policy," explained a Google
    spokesperson. I don't think this makes sense, as Google wouldn't
    release its internal traffic data, but only a rough estimation.

    Google's blog for webmasters warns that the data may not be very
    accurate. "Keep in mind that Trends for Websites is a Google Labs
    product and that we are experimenting with ways to improve the
    quality of the data. Because data is estimated and aggregated over a
    variety of sources, it may not match the other data sources you rely
    on for web traffic information."

    There are other services that show web traffic stats: Compete,
    Quantcast (for US traffic), Alexa, but it's difficult to compare
    Google's data with the information provided by those services because
    they use different measures: daily uniques vs monthly uniques, actual
    numbers vs reach, worldwide visitors vs US visitors.

    Try this, too, just for fun:

    http://trends.google.com/

    You can get an idea of the geographical distribution of searches, for
    example.

    --
    Ctrl+Option+Command + P + R
    dracus - YE GODS! That's worse than EMACS!
    hehehehe
    don't ask what that does :P

  11. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    Hadron wrote:

    > Rex Ballard writes:
    >
    >> Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    >> workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    >> workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    >> Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess

    >
    > Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.
    >
    >


    The same way *you* provide links? Never?
    --
    Who the **** is General Failure, and why is he reading my harddisk?


  12. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus


    "Hadron" wrote in message
    news:gd7952$kpp$1@registered.motzarella.org...
    > Rex Ballard writes:
    >
    >> Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    >> workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    >> workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    >> Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess

    >
    > Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.
    >

    Windows is the far and away winner in the market when the situation requires
    more or less general purpose computing, whether it is desktop, laptop, or
    even palmtop devices like PDAs or cell phones. But there is a far different
    set of selection criteria imposed for single purpose, fixed function devices
    such as a point of sale terminal or a a controller workstation. If the
    manufacturer of such a product is selling it as a software item, it may
    still be advantageous to design it for Windows, since the customer would
    likely perceive that as being conventional and likely to succeed. But if it
    is a turnkey as many point of sale units are since they integrate cash
    drawers, card readers, fingerprint readers, and other specialized devices
    that require selling hardware as well as software, Linux or freeBSD can
    easily have a home. The customer does not commonly see the OS at all and
    the device autostarts the application and remains in that application as
    long as the device is in use.


  13. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

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

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Rex Ballard writes:
    >>
    >>> Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    >>> workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    >>> workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    >>> Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess

    >>
    >> Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.

    >
    > The same way *you* provide links? Never?


    He is too busy finding links to show how he consistently "corrects" me.

    Hadron is just a useless gasbag.

    --
    backups: always in season, never out of style.

  14. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    On Wed, 15 Oct 2008 21:11:00 +0100, Andrew Halliwell wrote:

    > amicus_curious wrote:
    >>
    >> "Andrew Halliwell" wrote in message
    >> newss5hs5-gn6.ln1@ponder.sky.com...
    >>>
    >>> inability to recognise even the simplest of sums and accusations of
    >>> innumeracy against people who can, noted.
    >>>

    >> Not to mention the original poster's sloppiness in including a total that
    >> wasn't visually differentiated from the components.
    >>

    > Everyone else seemed to be able to recognise that "Windows" is a total of
    > all the windows variants below it.


    I thought it was self explanatory. Seems the wintrolls have to be hand led
    through everything, & someone else to do the thinking for them...just like
    their OS.

    --
    Did you know?
    Hardon Quack & his wife divorced over religious differences.
    He thought he was God, but she didn't.


  15. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    Peter Köhlmann writes:

    > Hadron wrote:
    >
    >> Rex Ballard writes:
    >>
    >>> Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    >>> workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    >>> workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    >>> Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess

    >>
    >> Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.
    >>
    >>

    >
    > The same way *you* provide links? Never?


    Erm I do. All the time. Just not to you. Why? You openly admit to not
    following any thing which might correct you.

    --
    "Every piece of evidence I've heard from developers inside Microsoft
    supports my theory that the company has become completely tangled up in..."
    -- William Poaster boring people again in comp.os.linux.advocacy

  16. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    "amicus_curious" writes:

    > "Hadron" wrote in message
    > news:gd7952$kpp$1@registered.motzarella.org...
    >> Rex Ballard writes:
    >>
    >>> Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    >>> workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    >>> workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    >>> Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess

    >>
    >> Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.
    >>

    > Windows is the far and away winner in the market when the situation
    > requires more or less general purpose computing, whether it is
    > desktop, laptop, or even palmtop devices like PDAs or cell phones.
    > But there is a far different set of selection criteria imposed for
    > single purpose, fixed function devices such as a point of sale
    > terminal or a a controller workstation. If the manufacturer of such a


    I know. But let me tell you - DOS was far and away the most popular OS
    for POS back in the early 90s. OS/2 existed on some and certainly in the
    back office. Most POS run a variant now.

    > product is selling it as a software item, it may still be advantageous
    > to design it for Windows, since the customer would likely perceive
    > that as being conventional and likely to succeed. But if it is a
    > turnkey as many point of sale units are since they integrate cash
    > drawers, card readers, fingerprint readers, and other specialized
    > devices that require selling hardware as well as software, Linux or
    > freeBSD can easily have a home. The customer does not commonly see
    > the OS at all and the device autostarts the application and remains in
    > that application as long as the device is in use.


    I do not disagree. I just can tell you that people don't arbitrarily
    install Linux or ANY other OS on something like a POS. You need the
    application SW available first.

    I believe Rexx is fabricating again.

    --
    - "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: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 02:16:11 -0400, DFS wrote:

    > Andrew Halliwell wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>>> Here is the breakdown of Windows hits from my personal website over
    >>>> the last few days. It shows XP is about four times as common as
    >>>> Vista.
    >>>>
    >>>> Windows 49814 73.5 %
    >>>> Windows XP 37620 55.5 %
    >>>> Windows Vista 10290 15.1 %
    >>>> Windows CE 4 0 %
    >>>> Windows 98 59 0 %
    >>>> Windows 2003 1021 1.5 %
    >>>> Windows 2000 820 1.2 %
    >>>
    >>> Total = 147%. Congrats! You really are a Linux "advocate*": as
    >>> innumerate as they come.

    >>
    >> Oh doofy, poor poor doofy...
    >> poor dear old doofy. Since when did
    >> 55.5
    >> 15.1+
    >> 1.5
    >> 1.2
    >> ------
    >> 147.0?
    >>
    >> inability to recognise even the simplest of sums and accusations of
    >> innumeracy against people who can, noted.

    >
    > Lookie here. Now spike1 has a piece of "ammo" he can use against me for 6
    > months. Are you happy?



    It's the best they can come up with.

    > Oh, btw, let me tidy it up the way it should have been presented in the
    > first place:
    >
    > Windows XP, 37620, 55.5 %
    > Windows Vista, 10290, 15.1 %
    > Windows 2003, 1021, 1.5 %
    > Windows 2000, 820, 1.2 %
    > Windows 98, 59, 0 %
    > Windows CE, 4, 0 %
    > ======================
    > Windows Total, 49814, 73.5 %
    >
    >
    > I hate having to fix slopware posts...


    Their posts are a sloppy as their distributions.

    BTW you should take a look in the mandriva groups.
    They are having TONS OF PROBLEMS with the newly released 2009.

    I can confirm that it was released way before it's time.
    Very buggy in fact.

    Hopefully the upcoming Ubuntu isn't as bad, but I'm not too confident that
    all the major problems will be fixed before release day.

    --
    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

  18. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    On Thu, 16 Oct 2008 13:39:26 +0200, Hadron wrote:

    > Rex Ballard writes:
    >
    >> Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    >> workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    >> workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    >> Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess

    >
    > Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.


    Rex should know better.

    The Kiosks at Jetblue, Air Lingus and several major hotel chains are
    actually supported by IBM and they run Windows 2000.


    --
    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

  19. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    Hadron wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann writes:
    >
    >> Hadron wrote:
    >>
    >>> Rex Ballard writes:
    >>>
    >>>> Keep in mind that many corporations have been converting "non-public"
    >>>> workstations such as point-of-sale units (cash registers, teller
    >>>> workstations, hotel desks, etc.) and call center workstations, to
    >>>> Linux. This has given corporations a much better ability to assess
    >>>
    >>> Please provide some links which even partially back this statement up.
    >>>
    >>>

    >>
    >> The same way *you* provide links? Never?

    >
    > Erm I do. All the time.


    Nope. Practically never

    > Just not to you.


    As if I had been the only one asking for proof. You make up your claims, and
    then, no matter who asks for proof, they get nothing.

    > Why? You openly admit to not
    > following any thing which might correct you.
    >


    That's fine. May I have the Msg-ID for that claim, Hadron Quark?

    You know, you just lied again. You are a lying asshole, nearly as dishonest
    as that CSMA troll Snot Michael Glasser
    --
    Law of Probable Dispersal:
    Whatever it is that hits the fan will not be evenly distributed.


  20. Re: Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus

    On 2008-10-16, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, cc belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> On Oct 15, 8:07*am, Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Because Linux and Mac are simply faster, and Linux of course is more
    >>> free.
    >>>
    >>> (Not to mention I really love the way Linux operates, much better than
    >>> XP.)

    >>
    >> That's fine. My point is that if my system is fast enough, secure
    >> enough, and runs the software I want/need (and mine is a yes to all
    >> three, as are most XP users I imagine), then why would I switch? Terry
    >> Porter seems to think it's a travesty that a majority of people are
    >> running an 8 year old OS, but what major advances have there been in
    >> SW or HW over that time that would necessitate an upgrade?


    The only advance that really affect Windows XP is the fact that multicore
    cpu's are becomming much more common. XP Home can not make use of more then
    one cpu, XP Pro only 2. So, if you have a quad core system, then you may have
    1 or 3 cpus basically sitting idle.

    So, if you have multicore hardware, there is a definated advantage to
    upgrading either to Vista or another OS that can actually make use of your
    hardware.

    --
    Tom Shelton

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