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

This is a discussion on Windows XP is all back-o-the-bus - Linux ; 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 ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 57

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

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

    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 %

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

    Amongst the long list of advantages Linux has the following:

    Remote X windows

    Compiz Fusion (rotating desktop cube)

    Long uptimes (RELIABLE!)
    tp@gronk1 ~ $ uptime
    11:10:12 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users, load average: 2.09, 2.10, 2.11

    Multiple cpus, that are actually *used*
    top - 11:10:30 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users
    Tasks: 283 total, 2 running, 280 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
    Cpu0 : 8.8%us, 1.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.5%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    Cpu1 : 9.4%us, 0.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    Cpu2 : 4.2%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.9%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    Cpu3 : 20.5%us, 2.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 76.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.3%si
    Mem: 3368216k total, 2701680k used, 666536k free, 647408k buffers
    Swap: 19535032k total, 200k used, 19534832k free, 372200k cached

    Over 30.000 Free applications, easily installed i.e.
    "emerge firefox"
    "apt-get install firefox"

    The very latest in hi tech applications, multimedia apps, browsers etc
    etc, the list is HUGE.

    So if you're still using Windows XP out there, why not try a *modern* OS
    like Linux.

    Grab a Free CD online such as Debian Lenny, or Ubuntu, or Fedora9 or any
    of the popular Linux distros shown on http://distrowatch.com and have a
    look, you may just be astounded by what Linux offers


    Cheers
    Terry

    --
    Linux full time, on the desktop, since August 1997

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


    "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 %
    >

    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. 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.

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

    Of course it is kind of dweeby to consider an OS to be a source of chic.

    > Amongst the long list of advantages Linux has the following:
    >
    > Remote X windows
    >
    > Compiz Fusion (rotating desktop cube)
    >
    > Long uptimes (RELIABLE!)
    > tp@gronk1 ~ $ uptime
    > 11:10:12 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users, load average: 2.09, 2.10, 2.11
    >
    > Multiple cpus, that are actually *used*
    > top - 11:10:30 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users
    > Tasks: 283 total, 2 running, 280 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
    > Cpu0 : 8.8%us, 1.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.5%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    > Cpu1 : 9.4%us, 0.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    > Cpu2 : 4.2%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.9%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    > Cpu3 : 20.5%us, 2.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 76.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.3%si
    > Mem: 3368216k total, 2701680k used, 666536k free, 647408k buffers
    > Swap: 19535032k total, 200k used, 19534832k free, 372200k cached
    >
    > Over 30.000 Free applications, easily installed i.e.
    > "emerge firefox"
    > "apt-get install firefox"
    >
    > The very latest in hi tech applications, multimedia apps, browsers etc
    > etc, the list is HUGE.
    >
    > So if you're still using Windows XP out there, why not try a *modern* OS
    > like Linux.
    >

    What does it do that makes it worthwhile? You have yet to name anything
    that might motivate someone to take a chance on Linux. That has been a
    challenge around here for years with nothing forthcoming from the COLA
    mavens that stands up to any discussion.


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

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, Terry Porter

    wrote
    on Tue, 14 Oct 2008 19:22:47 -0500
    :
    > 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 %
    >
    > Those of us who use Linux know how old XP is, how dated and so
    > *yesterday* it is.


    Not sure Vista's much better, though the UAC might help in
    forestalling certain hacks -- if the user's paying attention.

    >
    > Amongst the long list of advantages Linux has the following:
    >
    > Remote X windows


    Not sure that's much of an advantage, as vnc has been around for
    a very long time. I'll admit I like 'ssh -CXY', though.

    One drawback: OpenGL does not go over the network. (I doubt
    Direct3D is much better in that regard.)

    >
    > Compiz Fusion (rotating desktop cube)


    Cool eye candy, might be useful. I've not gotten it to work
    yet on my laptop so can't say. Gentoo does offer a Compiz-Fusion
    setup page; I'll give that a whirl.

    Apparently there's some bugs in the python setup; I'm compiling
    all of the modules in the suggested order in

    http://gentoo-wiki.com/HOWTO_compiz-fusion

    so we'll see if that helps; attempting to run
    'ccsm' fails with missing modules. If I'm lucky
    a rebuild will fix most of the issues.

    >
    > Long uptimes (RELIABLE!)
    > tp@gronk1 ~ $ uptime
    > 11:10:12 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users, load average: 2.09, 2.10, 2.11


    Apparently microsoft.com and live.com
    are both having issues. However,
    http://uptime.netcraft.com/up/today/top.avg.html does show
    www.dececco.it having an uptime of 1513 days, running
    Win2003, placing second place to a certain FreeBSD server.

    (Apparently, they sell pasta. Not sure they have any
    dynamic content [Flash doesn't count, as it's a static
    download as far as the server's concerned].)

    >
    > Multiple cpus, that are actually *used*
    > top - 11:10:30 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users
    > Tasks: 283 total, 2 running, 280 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
    > Cpu0 : 8.8%us, 1.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.5%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    > Cpu1 : 9.4%us, 0.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    > Cpu2 : 4.2%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.9%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    > Cpu3 : 20.5%us, 2.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 76.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.3%si
    > Mem: 3368216k total, 2701680k used, 666536k free, 647408k buffers
    > Swap: 19535032k total, 200k used, 19534832k free, 372200k cached


    Heh. 20 gig swap and you're using 200k of it. ;-) Still, I do
    wonder about XP's paging algorithm, even without the AV software
    trying to read every file on disk to look for malware.

    >
    > Over 30.000 Free applications, easily installed i.e.
    > "emerge firefox"
    > "apt-get install firefox"


    And more coming in on a weekly, if not daily, basis. It
    boggles the mind, actually -- though one also has to note
    that the amount of Windows shareware is considerable too.

    Still:

    $ cd /usr/portage
    $ find . -name Manifest | wc -l
    12988
    $

    as of a few days ago -- and that's just for the stuff Gentoo's
    bothered to sift through; there's quite a few apps they've not
    gotten to yet.

    >
    > The very latest in hi tech applications, multimedia apps, browsers etc
    > etc, the list is HUGE.


    And growing slightly unwieldly, though that's a given with that amount
    of data anyway. 12988 seconds is more than 3 and a half hours.
    30000 seconds is more than 8 hours.

    >
    > So if you're still using Windows XP out there, why not try a *modern* OS
    > like Linux.
    >
    > Grab a Free CD online such as Debian Lenny, or Ubuntu, or Fedora9 or any
    > of the popular Linux distros shown on http://distrowatch.com and have a
    > look, you may just be astounded by what Linux offers
    >
    >
    > Cheers
    > Terry
    >


    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Linux. Because it's there and it works.
    Windows. It's there, but does it work?
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

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

    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?

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

    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.)

    --
    If love is the answer, could you rephrase the question?
    -- Lily Tomlin

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

    Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, cc belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> On Oct 14, 8:22Â*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.


    Well, everything is faster than Vista
    Even OSX is, although that is slow compared to linux

    > (Not to mention I really love the way Linux operates, much better than
    > XP.)


    Well, XP is not quite as fast as linux, but certainly faster than OSX.
    Except when hampered by AV scanners and other malware avoidance bloat
    --
    Linux is like a wigwam: no windows, no gates and an apache inside!


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

    DFS wrote:

    > 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?

    >
    > Of course everyone realizes it. And of course the "modern, Free,
    > up-to-date, and outstanding Linux OS" can't compete against 8-year old
    > technology.
    >
    > The overwhelming majority of buyers would rather pay for Windows than get
    > Linux for free...
    > and that tells you all you need to know about the crapware.
    >
    >
    >
    >> 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.


    Your severe reading comprehension problems how up again
    Read the first line. It says: Windows 49814 73.5 %

    Thats all of windows, with a breakdown of the different types following
    You are not related to Hadron Quark? He also shows this severe reading
    comprehension problem

    >
    >
    >> Those of us who use Linux know how old XP is, how dated and so
    >> *yesterday* it is.
    >>
    >> Amongst the long list of advantages Linux has the following:
    >>
    >> Remote X windows

    >
    > yawn


    The grapes are sour and hang high, do they?
    It is a feature I use every day, and one if windows many shortcomings

    >
    >> Compiz Fusion (rotating desktop cube)

    >
    > unstable, useless mess
    >
    >
    >> Long uptimes (RELIABLE!)
    >> tp@gronk1 ~ $ uptime
    >> 11:10:12 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users, load average: 2.09, 2.10, 2.11

    >
    >
    > "Try Fedora 9. I've got about 33 minutes out of this install so far and
    > that triples the uptime I've been seeing with Hardy."
    >
    > #99 at
    > http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...freeze&page=10
    >
    >
    >
    >
    >> Multiple cpus, that are actually *used*

    >
    > huh?


    Well, install XP Home on a multi-CPU machine. Like 4 X quad core ones.
    Now tell us how many of those cores are actually running
    Linux uses them all. Even when *much* more than the 16 core example

    >
    >> top - 11:10:30 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users
    >> Tasks: 283 total, 2 running, 280 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie

    >
    > 280 of 283 are sleeping? You power user you.
    >
    >
    >
    >> Cpu0 : 8.8%us, 1.6%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.5%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    >> Cpu1 : 9.4%us, 0.9%sy, 0.0%ni, 89.6%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    >> Cpu2 : 4.2%us, 1.0%sy, 0.0%ni, 94.9%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.0%si
    >> Cpu3 : 20.5%us, 2.5%sy, 0.0%ni, 76.7%id, 0.0%wa, 0.0%hi, 0.3%si
    >> Mem: 3368216k total, 2701680k used, 666536k free, 647408k
    >> buffers Swap: 19535032k total, 200k used, 19534832k free,
    >> 372200k cached
    >>
    >> Over 30.000 Free applications, easily installed i.e.
    >> "emerge firefox"
    >> "apt-get install firefox"

    >
    > 30000? Other times it's 20000, or 25000. Guess it depends on which
    > nutjob you ask.


    No. It depends on the distro you use.

    >
    >> The very latest in hi tech applications, multimedia apps, browsers etc
    >> etc, the list is HUGE.

    >
    > I think maybe 30 of the 30000 are any good.


    And none of them were written by you
    Not even the worst ones

    --
    No trees were destroyed in the sending of this message, however, a
    significant number of electrons were terribly inconvenienced.


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

    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.

    *rest snipped*
    It had to be downhill from there.
    --
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | Windows95 (noun): 32 bit extensions and a |
    | | graphical shell for a 16 bit patch to an 8 bit |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc | operating system originally coded for a 4 bit |
    | in |microprocessor, written by a 2 bit company, that|
    | Computer Science | can't stand 1 bit of competition. |

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

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

    > 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.

    >
    > Well, everything is faster than Vista
    > Even OSX is, although that is slow compared to linux
    >
    >> (Not to mention I really love the way Linux operates, much better than
    >> XP.)

    >
    > Well, XP is not quite as fast as linux, but certainly faster than OSX.
    > Except when hampered by AV scanners and other malware avoidance bloat


    Or Microsoft's own Windows Explorer.

    Or Active Directory.

    Or SAN drivers.

    Or Windows Messenger Service.

    And how about them CALs?


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

    Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    > DFS wrote:


    >> The overwhelming majority of buyers would rather pay for Windows
    >> than get Linux for free...
    >> and that tells you all you need to know about the crapware.


    Dumbkopf skipped what he couldn't answer.



    >>> 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.

    >
    > Your severe reading comprehension problems how up again
    > Read the first line. It says: Windows 49814 73.5 %


    Whoops



    >>> Remote X windows

    >>
    >> yawn

    >
    > The grapes are sour and hang high, do they?
    > It is a feature I use every day, and one if windows many shortcomings


    Every single day I use Remote Desktop Connection to log into any one of a
    half-dozen Windows Servers I work with.

    Being a Windows developer, I'm sure you know about this feature.




    >>> Compiz Fusion (rotating desktop cube)

    >>
    >> unstable, useless mess


    Glad you agree. Another reason to stay away from Linux.



    >>> Long uptimes (RELIABLE!)
    >>> tp@gronk1 ~ $ uptime
    >>> 11:10:12 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users, load average: 2.09, 2.10,
    >>> 2.11

    >>
    >>
    >> "Try Fedora 9. I've got about 33 minutes out of this install so far
    >> and that triples the uptime I've been seeing with Hardy."
    >>
    >> #99 at
    >> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...freeze&page=10


    11 minutes of uptime with Ubuntu Hardy! Ain't Linux great?



    >>> Multiple cpus, that are actually *used*

    >>
    >> huh?

    >
    > Well, install XP Home on a multi-CPU machine. Like 4 X quad core ones.
    > Now tell us how many of those cores are actually running
    > Linux uses them all. Even when *much* more than the 16 core example


    XP Home supports 1
    XP Pro supports 2
    Server supports 128

    A win for Linux - it's meaningless, of course, since nobody needs a 4-cpu on
    their desktop.

    Meanwhile, there's no user-friendly database for Linux, and virtually all
    the office apps are bogus compared to what's available for Windows.

    This is a perfect example of why MS is on top: they segment and market their
    products for different needs, and price them accordingly.




    >>> top - 11:10:30 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users
    >>> Tasks: 283 total, 2 running, 280 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie

    >>
    >>> Over 30.000 Free applications, easily installed i.e.
    >>> "emerge firefox"
    >>> "apt-get install firefox"

    >>
    >> 30000? Other times it's 20000, or 25000. Guess it depends on which
    >> nutjob you ask.

    >
    > No. It depends on the distro you use.


    So he's lying.




    >>> The very latest in hi tech applications, multimedia apps, browsers
    >>> etc etc, the list is HUGE.

    >>
    >> I think maybe 30 of the 30000 are any good.

    >
    > And none of them were written by you
    > Not even the worst ones


    Nor did you write any OSS apps, or do anything but freeload.





  11. 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.
    >
    >*rest snipped*
    >It had to be downhill from there.


    He's a fsckwit.


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

    DFS wrote:

    > Peter Köhlmann wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:

    >
    >>> The overwhelming majority of buyers would rather pay for Windows
    >>> than get Linux for free...
    >>> and that tells you all you need to know about the crapware.

    >
    > Dumbkopf skipped what he couldn't answer.
    >


    As if I have to answer everything of your idiocy

    >
    >>>> 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.

    >>
    >> Your severe reading comprehension problems how up again
    >> Read the first line. It says: Windows 49814 73.5 %

    >
    > Whoops
    >

    Right.

    >
    >>>> Remote X windows
    >>>
    >>> yawn

    >>
    >> The grapes are sour and hang high, do they?
    >> It is a feature I use every day, and one if windows many shortcomings

    >
    > Every single day I use Remote Desktop Connection to log into any one of a
    > half-dozen Windows Servers I work with.
    >
    > Being a Windows developer, I'm sure you know about this feature.
    >


    Yes. It is ****e compared to remote X

    >
    >>>> Compiz Fusion (rotating desktop cube)
    >>>
    >>> unstable, useless mess

    >
    > Glad you agree. Another reason to stay away from Linux.
    >


    Since when is not commenting your bull**** "agreeing"?

    >
    >>>> Long uptimes (RELIABLE!)
    >>>> tp@gronk1 ~ $ uptime
    >>>> 11:10:12 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users, load average: 2.09, 2.10,
    >>>> 2.11
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> "Try Fedora 9. I've got about 33 minutes out of this install so far
    >>> and that triples the uptime I've been seeing with Hardy."
    >>>
    >>> #99 at
    >>> http://ubuntuforums.org/showthread.p...freeze&page=10

    >
    > 11 minutes of uptime with Ubuntu Hardy! Ain't Linux great?
    >


    Feel free to repeat that nonsense ad nauseam
    You make windows users look just as moronic as they often are

    >
    >>>> Multiple cpus, that are actually *used*
    >>>
    >>> huh?

    >>
    >> Well, install XP Home on a multi-CPU machine. Like 4 X quad core ones.
    >> Now tell us how many of those cores are actually running
    >> Linux uses them all. Even when *much* more than the 16 core example

    >
    > XP Home supports 1


    Wow. What numbers

    > XP Pro supports 2


    Well, there is a reason it is called "Pro".
    It knows to handle 2...

    > Server supports 128


    Unbelievable, isn't it?
    Not that it would do any good, though, as any processor after 32 is simply
    not doing anything useful at all. The scheduler seems to be of MS "quality"

    > A win for Linux - it's meaningless, of course, since nobody needs a 4-cpu
    > on their desktop.


    Ah yes. So because windows does not support it, nobody needs it.
    Good that we cleared that little tidbit

    > Meanwhile, there's no user-friendly database for Linux, and virtually all
    > the office apps are bogus compared to what's available for Windows.


    So says a windows fanboi. Not exactly the unbiased opinion, I guess
    It is bull****, naturally

    > This is a perfect example of why MS is on top: they segment and market
    > their products for different needs, and price them accordingly.
    >


    Strange that they fail so completely to serve my needs

    >
    >>>> top - 11:10:30 up 56 days, 18:17, 32 users
    >>>> Tasks: 283 total, 2 running, 280 sleeping, 0 stopped, 1 zombie
    >>>
    >>>> Over 30.000 Free applications, easily installed i.e.
    >>>> "emerge firefox"
    >>>> "apt-get install firefox"
    >>>
    >>> 30000? Other times it's 20000, or 25000. Guess it depends on which
    >>> nutjob you ask.

    >>
    >> No. It depends on the distro you use.

    >
    > So he's lying.


    Since when is "using a different distro" lying? Are you somehow related to
    Hadron Quark?

    >>>> The very latest in hi tech applications, multimedia apps, browsers
    >>>> etc etc, the list is HUGE.
    >>>
    >>> I think maybe 30 of the 30000 are any good.

    >>
    >> And none of them were written by you
    >> Not even the worst ones

    >
    > Nor did you write any OSS apps, or do anything but freeload.


    How would you know?
    --
    We are Linux. Resistance is measured in Ohms.


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

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

    > DFS wrote:
    >
    >> XP Pro supports 2

    >
    > Well, there is a reason it is called "Pro".
    > It knows to handle 2...
    >
    >> Server supports 128

    >
    > Unbelievable, isn't it?
    > Not that it would do any good, though, as any processor after 32 is simply
    > not doing anything useful at all. The scheduler seems to be of MS "quality"


    Besides, if he's referring to Win 2003 server, then Win Server
    scalability has /decreased/ with 2008:

    http://www.microsoft.com/windowsserv...ility-ent.aspx

    Scale-up features exclusive to the high-end editions of Windows
    Server 2008 include:

    * Support for up to 64 processors and 2 terabytes of RAM.

    2008 Server Standard? 4 processors, 32 Gb.
    2008 Server Enterprise? 8 processors, 2 Tb.

    And still beaten by Win 2003 in transaction processing:

    http://www.tpc.org/tpcc/results/tpcc_perf_results.asp

    I'll assume DFS just brain-farted on this one.

    >> Nor did you write any OSS apps, or do anything but freeload.

    >
    > How would you know?


    It's lie lie lie with DFS. Do so consistently. Don't back down. Never
    recant. Never show a trace of doubt, a trace of balance. Even when
    posting facts, use them to lie. The bigger the lie, the better. When
    they call you on it, insist you are not lying. Talk louder!

    --
    You can go anywhere you want if you look serious and carry a clipboard.

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


    "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.


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

    [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.

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

    > 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.

    > 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.


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

    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.
    --
    | spike1@freenet.co.uk | "I'm alive!!! I can touch! I can taste! |
    | Andrew Halliwell BSc | I can SMELL!!! KRYTEN!!! Unpack Rachel and |
    | in | get out the puncture repair kit!" |
    | Computer Science | Arnold Judas Rimmer- Red Dwarf |

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

    Andrew Halliwell wrote:

    > Rat wrote:
    >>
    >> "Andrew Halliwell" wrote:
    >>>
    >>> 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.


    Only the truly fsckwitted, like Rat and DumFSck, had a problem with it.


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


    "Andrew Halliwell" wrote in message
    news:kbvhs5-gn6.ln1@ponder.sky.com...
    > 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.
    > --

    Several did, one, at least, did not. That is still sloppy.


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


    "Kelsey Bjarnason" wrote in message
    news:vvuhs5-rkl.ln1@spanky.work.net...
    >
    > 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 always ignore the fact that there are even more free applications for
    Windows, including all the ones available for Linux.


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

    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.

    --
    If only you knew she loved you, you could face the uncertainty of
    whether you love her.

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