Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad - Linux

This is a discussion on Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad - Linux ; On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote: > Ben wrote: > > DFS wrote: > >> Ben wrote: > With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to Linux or > "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 3 FirstFirst 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 51

Thread: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

  1. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    > Ben wrote:
    > > DFS wrote:
    > >> Ben wrote:


    > With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to Linux or
    > "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux flatline market
    > share stays flat year after year after year?


    You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.

    How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH more
    receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.

    1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    defective IP address only surveys.

    1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads

    1/4 billion VMware player downloads

    1 billion Linux downloads.

    80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.

    Notice a pattern here?


  2. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Rex Ballard wrote:
    > On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >> Ben wrote:
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>> Ben wrote:

    >
    >> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?

    >
    > You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    > that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    > that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >
    > How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    > (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    > Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH more
    > receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >
    > 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    > defective IP address only surveys.
    >
    > 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >
    > 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >
    > 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >
    > 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >
    > Notice a pattern here?



    Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary stuff by
    day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by night.

    As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total bull****, but
    even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:

    1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,
    2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet
    3) nearly all get discouraged at the clumsiness and sheer instability
    4) nearly all permanently delete the crud




  3. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Rex Ballard wrote:
    > On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >> Ben wrote:
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>> Ben wrote:

    >
    >> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to Linux or
    >> "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux flatline market
    >> share stays flat year after year after year?

    >
    > You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    > that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    > that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >
    > How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    > (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    > Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH more
    > receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >
    > 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    > defective IP address only surveys.
    >
    > 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >
    > 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >
    > 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >
    > 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >
    > Notice a pattern here?
    >


    Of course, even these statistics are unreliable, but they're the bare
    minimum. As Stallman rightly said, it's impossible to know how many
    times free software has been redistributed. You can only really estimate
    based on how many times it's obtained from the official source.

  4. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    DFS wrote:
    > Rex Ballard wrote:
    >> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>> Ben wrote:
    >>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?

    >> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>
    >> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH more
    >> receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>
    >> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>
    >> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>
    >> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>
    >> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>
    >> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>
    >> Notice a pattern here?

    >
    >
    > Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary stuff by
    > day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by night.
    >
    > As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total bull****, but
    > even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >
    > 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,


    Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...

    > 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet


    Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty easy
    to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT or RPM
    package managers, making it even easier.

    > 3) nearly all get discouraged at the clumsiness and sheer instability


    Not really; nearly everyone I know who has tried Firefox has stuck with
    it. The same goes for Open Office. Most people I know who have tried
    Ubuntu or Kubuntu have stayed with it, too. Others still have gone on to
    try other distributions. None have complained about a lack of stability
    or "clumsiness". Most see Firefox as a blessing compared to Internet
    Explorer, Open Office far more lightweight but just as usable as MS
    Office, and Ubuntu far smoother than Windows Vista.

    > 4) nearly all permanently delete the crud


    Nope. Not in my experience.

  5. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Ben wrote:
    > DFS wrote:
    >> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?
    >>> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >>> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >>> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>>
    >>> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >>> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >>> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH
    >>> more receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>>
    >>> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >>> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>>
    >>> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>>
    >>> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>>
    >>> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>>
    >>> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>>
    >>> Notice a pattern here?

    >>
    >>
    >> Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary
    >> stuff by day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by
    >> night. As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total
    >> bull****, but even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >>
    >> 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,

    >
    > Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...


    No. A *lot* of people run Windows. Some people download Linux/OSS
    crapware. Don't be so naive as to believe a single word or number posted by
    Rex Kingmaker Ballard.



    >> 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet

    >
    > Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty
    > easy to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT
    > or RPM package managers, making it even easier.


    The Linux forums are chock full of installation trouble victims.


    >> 3) nearly all get discouraged at the clumsiness and sheer instability

    >
    > Not really; nearly everyone I know who has tried Firefox has stuck
    > with it. The same goes for Open Office. Most people I know who have
    > tried Ubuntu or Kubuntu have stayed with it, too.


    Sample of two!


    > Others still have
    > gone on to try other distributions. None have complained about a lack
    > of stability or "clumsiness".


    Why else would they remove the crapware?



    > Most see Firefox as a blessing compared
    > to Internet Explorer,


    I like Firefox myself.


    > Open Office far more lightweight but just as
    > usable as MS Office,


    You don't know what you're talking about. Anyone who claims OpenOffice can
    replace MS Office doesn't know what they're talking about.


    > and Ubuntu far smoother than Windows Vista.


    What does 'smoother' mean?



    >> 4) nearly all permanently delete the crud

    >
    > Nope. Not in my experience.


    Nearly 100%, or Linux would have a usage share far above 1%.




  6. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    DFS wrote:
    > Ben wrote:
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>>>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>>>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?
    >>>> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >>>> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >>>> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>>>
    >>>> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >>>> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >>>> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH
    >>>> more receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>>>
    >>>> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >>>> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>>>
    >>>> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>>>
    >>>> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>>>
    >>>> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>>>
    >>>> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>>>
    >>>> Notice a pattern here?
    >>>
    >>> Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary
    >>> stuff by day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by
    >>> night. As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total
    >>> bull****, but even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >>>
    >>> 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,

    >> Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...

    >
    > No. A *lot* of people run Windows. Some people download Linux/OSS
    > crapware. Don't be so naive as to believe a single word or number posted by
    > Rex Kingmaker Ballard.


    I was focusing more on software like Firefox and Open Office, since your
    wording was Linux *slash* OSS. They are undeniably popular, and yes, a
    *lot* of people download them.

    >
    >
    >
    >>> 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet

    >> Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty
    >> easy to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT
    >> or RPM package managers, making it even easier.

    >
    > The Linux forums are chock full of installation trouble victims.


    Windows users are choked by DLL hell after installing their programs.
    Poor Windows users.

    >
    >
    >>> 3) nearly all get discouraged at the clumsiness and sheer instability

    >> Not really; nearly everyone I know who has tried Firefox has stuck
    >> with it. The same goes for Open Office. Most people I know who have
    >> tried Ubuntu or Kubuntu have stayed with it, too.

    >
    > Sample of two!


    Anecdotally? More like 30-40 at least.

    >
    >
    >> Others still have
    >> gone on to try other distributions. None have complained about a lack
    >> of stability or "clumsiness".

    >
    > Why else would they remove the crapware?


    How many such people can *you* prove? Given that you were quick to point
    out a small sample size from my claims.

    >
    >
    >
    >> Most see Firefox as a blessing compared
    >> to Internet Explorer,

    >
    > I like Firefox myself.


    Well then, not all F/OSS software is ****ty, is it?

    >
    >
    >> Open Office far more lightweight but just as
    >> usable as MS Office,

    >
    > You don't know what you're talking about. Anyone who claims OpenOffice can
    > replace MS Office doesn't know what they're talking about.


    Most people I know who use Open Office do so very comfortably. Most
    schools and colleges where I live offer Open Office as an alternative to
    MS Office, and teachers/tutors/professors accept .odt files as well as
    ..doc files.

    >
    >
    >> and Ubuntu far smoother than Windows Vista.

    >
    > What does 'smoother' mean?


    Working in general without causing a headache.


  7. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    On Mon, 03 Nov 2008 15:57:55 -0500, Erik Funkenbusch wrote:


    > Don't be so disingenuous.


    PLEASE ... I was eating!

    The master of disingenuous himself, uses it to lead into a paragraph,
    very smooth, but of course I don't buy your nonsense for one second.

    > All commercial (and even many open source)
    > software providers EOL their products. Red Hat, Ubuntu, Apple, IBM,
    > etc.. And, they EOL their products much quicker than Microsoft does. XP
    > still isn't EOL after almost 8 years!


    And probably won't be for another decade, ... unfortunately for Microsoft.



    XP it turns out, is Microsofts worst enemy.




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

  8. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:36:52 -0500, Ezekiel wrote:

    > "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    > news:TnmQk.55837$XT1.8544@bignews5.bellsouth.net.. .
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>> Obviously it's not a big deal for IBM or HP to support their own
    >>> distro. Hell... these companies have written and maintained their own
    >>> propreitary OS's for years. But for a company like Caterpillar or
    >>> Walmart sure as hell
    >>> isn't going to start maintaining their own distro - source code or
    >>> not.

    >>
    >> Why would they have to?

    >
    > Read up the thread a few posts. Someone said that having the source code
    > gives companies the option of maintaining the OS themselves instead of
    > having to upgrade. My point is that maintaining the OS themselves
    > because they happen to have the source code is only beneficial to very
    > few companies.


    You are such a uninformed Wintroll Ezekiel, that one day if you *ever*
    get a clue, come back to COLA and we can have a laugh about it.

    I don't even know where to start with you, will it be "basic Linux
    advantages 101" or maybe you just get to wear the Linux Dunce Hat for a
    month.


    Lets just look at Linux Embedded shall we ?

    You know what I mean, the *millions* of small boxes doing duty as
    routers, wifi APs etc, the sort of stuff that Microsoft OSes will *never*
    be used in ?

    The kind of products that most Internet users have half a dozen at home ?

    Many run the Linux 2.4.18 kernel, which came out when exactly ... hmm
    around 25 Feb 2002, not much later than your beloved XP.

    Yet that same kernel is being used in brand new products today, and the
    companies are laughing all the way to the bank.

    Maintaining an old Linux OS isn't like writing your own from scratch, and
    it's probably a minimum $500K cheaper.




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

  9. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Ben writes:

    > DFS wrote:
    >> Ben wrote:
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>>>>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>>>>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?
    >>>>> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >>>>> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >>>>> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >>>>> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >>>>> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH
    >>>>> more receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >>>>> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Notice a pattern here?
    >>>>
    >>>> Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary
    >>>> stuff by day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by
    >>>> night. As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total
    >>>> bull****, but even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >>>>
    >>>> 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,
    >>> Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...

    >>
    >> No. A *lot* of people run Windows. Some people download Linux/OSS
    >> crapware. Don't be so naive as to believe a single word or number
    >> posted by Rex Kingmaker Ballard.

    >
    > I was focusing more on software like Firefox and Open Office, since
    > your wording was Linux *slash* OSS. They are undeniably popular, and
    > yes, a *lot* of people download them.
    >
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>>> 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet
    >>> Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty
    >>> easy to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT
    >>> or RPM package managers, making it even easier.

    >>
    >> The Linux forums are chock full of installation trouble victims.

    >
    > Windows users are choked by DLL hell after installing their
    > programs. Poor Windows users.


    Actually most Windows user never come across this. So do try to be
    honest. You appear, like this Chris guy, to make things up in order to
    pursue some sort of anti MS vendetta.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>>> 3) nearly all get discouraged at the clumsiness and sheer instability
    >>> Not really; nearly everyone I know who has tried Firefox has stuck
    >>> with it. The same goes for Open Office. Most people I know who have
    >>> tried Ubuntu or Kubuntu have stayed with it, too.

    >>
    >> Sample of two!

    >
    > Anecdotally? More like 30-40 at least.


    I do not believe you. Open Office is a great alternative for creating
    the parish magazine but that would be about it. A super initiative and
    one day it might well get there. However I think its a long away from
    being adopted in offices - it is missing too much.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> Others still have
    >>> gone on to try other distributions. None have complained about a lack
    >>> of stability or "clumsiness".

    >>
    >> Why else would they remove the crapware?

    >
    > How many such people can *you* prove? Given that you were quick to
    > point out a small sample size from my claims.


    One only has to look around I think. You do not need to be a genius to
    realise Linux is a very, very minority operating system. There are more
    apple shops near me than linux users. And that says something I think.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >>> Most see Firefox as a blessing compared
    >>> to Internet Explorer,

    >>
    >> I like Firefox myself.

    >
    > Well then, not all F/OSS software is ****ty, is it?


    No. Some is very good. Firefox is great.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> Open Office far more lightweight but just as
    >>> usable as MS Office,

    >>
    >> You don't know what you're talking about. Anyone who claims
    >> OpenOffice can replace MS Office doesn't know what they're talking
    >> about.

    >
    > Most people I know who use Open Office do so very comfortably. Most
    > schools and colleges where I live offer Open Office as an alternative
    > to MS Office, and teachers/tutors/professors accept .odt files as well
    > as .doc files.


    I do not believe you. They might accept doc files produced by Open
    Office but they do not or most do not accept odt.

    >
    >>
    >>
    >>> and Ubuntu far smoother than Windows Vista.

    >>
    >> What does 'smoother' mean?

    >
    > Working in general without causing a headache.


    What headache? Did you get a virus. If you need help setting up and
    securing your system I can help you as I have a lot of experience. There
    is no reason any half sensible person can not keep their windows clean.


  10. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad


    "Terry Porter" wrote in message
    news:IqmdnVllgq-YVI_UnZ2dnUVZ_rvinZ2d@netspace.net.au...
    > On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:36:52 -0500, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >> news:TnmQk.55837$XT1.8544@bignews5.bellsouth.net.. .
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>> Obviously it's not a big deal for IBM or HP to support their own
    >>>> distro. Hell... these companies have written and maintained their own
    >>>> propreitary OS's for years. But for a company like Caterpillar or
    >>>> Walmart sure as hell
    >>>> isn't going to start maintaining their own distro - source code or
    >>>> not.
    >>>
    >>> Why would they have to?

    >>
    >> Read up the thread a few posts. Someone said that having the source code
    >> gives companies the option of maintaining the OS themselves instead of
    >> having to upgrade. My point is that maintaining the OS themselves
    >> because they happen to have the source code is only beneficial to very
    >> few companies.

    >
    > You are such a uninformed Wintroll Ezekiel, that one day if you *ever*
    > get a clue, come back to COLA and we can have a laugh about it.


    Given that I've never insulted or attacked you and the best that you can do
    to support your position is to call me a "Wintroll" we can end this
    discussion right here and now.








  11. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Terry Porter espoused:
    > On Wed, 05 Nov 2008 14:36:52 -0500, Ezekiel wrote:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >> news:TnmQk.55837$XT1.8544@bignews5.bellsouth.net.. .
    >>> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >>> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>>
    >>>> Obviously it's not a big deal for IBM or HP to support their own
    >>>> distro. Hell... these companies have written and maintained their own
    >>>> propreitary OS's for years. But for a company like Caterpillar or
    >>>> Walmart sure as hell
    >>>> isn't going to start maintaining their own distro - source code or
    >>>> not.
    >>>
    >>> Why would they have to?

    >>
    >> Read up the thread a few posts. Someone said that having the source code
    >> gives companies the option of maintaining the OS themselves instead of
    >> having to upgrade. My point is that maintaining the OS themselves
    >> because they happen to have the source code is only beneficial to very
    >> few companies.

    >
    > You are such a uninformed Wintroll Ezekiel, that one day if you *ever*
    > get a clue, come back to COLA and we can have a laugh about it.
    >
    > I don't even know where to start with you, will it be "basic Linux
    > advantages 101" or maybe you just get to wear the Linux Dunce Hat for a
    > month.
    >
    >
    > Lets just look at Linux Embedded shall we ?
    >
    > You know what I mean, the *millions* of small boxes doing duty as
    > routers, wifi APs etc, the sort of stuff that Microsoft OSes will *never*
    > be used in ?
    >
    > The kind of products that most Internet users have half a dozen at home ?
    >
    > Many run the Linux 2.4.18 kernel, which came out when exactly ... hmm
    > around 25 Feb 2002, not much later than your beloved XP.
    >
    > Yet that same kernel is being used in brand new products today, and the
    > companies are laughing all the way to the bank.
    >
    > Maintaining an old Linux OS isn't like writing your own from scratch, and
    > it's probably a minimum $500K cheaper.
    >


    You're right, it's a somewhat orthogonal point, however, I'd add to the
    list both Red Hat (unbreakable) and Nokia (maemo) and Tomtom (whatever
    they use) and Garmin (whatever version they use) as quick and simple
    examples of other companies which maintain their own versions.

    However, the point was with respect to "End Of life". You cannot EOL
    linux distributions, packages, or whatever, you can only EOL your
    support for them.

    If a large company, medium company, small one or individual wishes to
    continue to use a product, they can either do their own maintenance, or
    they can buy some in from someone else. This is the singular,
    fundamental business advantage of open-source, it ends vendor lock-in,
    and in doing so, ends the End Of Life concept in its tracks.

    I don't expect "Ezekiel" (Gary? Scott?) to ever grasp this, of course,
    but anyone with a brain and a budget will see it immediately.

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  12. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Steve Townsend espoused:
    > Ben writes:
    >
    >> DFS wrote:
    >>> Ben wrote:
    >>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>>> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>>>>>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>>>>>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?
    >>>>>> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >>>>>> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >>>>>> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >>>>>> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >>>>>> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH
    >>>>>> more receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >>>>>> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Notice a pattern here?
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary
    >>>>> stuff by day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by
    >>>>> night. As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total
    >>>>> bull****, but even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >>>>>
    >>>>> 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,
    >>>> Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...
    >>>
    >>> No. A *lot* of people run Windows. Some people download Linux/OSS
    >>> crapware. Don't be so naive as to believe a single word or number
    >>> posted by Rex Kingmaker Ballard.

    >>
    >> I was focusing more on software like Firefox and Open Office, since
    >> your wording was Linux *slash* OSS. They are undeniably popular, and
    >> yes, a *lot* of people download them.
    >>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>> 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet
    >>>> Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty
    >>>> easy to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT
    >>>> or RPM package managers, making it even easier.
    >>>
    >>> The Linux forums are chock full of installation trouble victims.

    >>
    >> Windows users are choked by DLL hell after installing their
    >> programs. Poor Windows users.

    >
    > Actually most Windows user never come across this. So do try to be

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    ?????

    > honest. You appear, like this Chris guy, to make things up in order to
    > pursue some sort of anti MS vendetta.
    >


    And your evidence for this amazing statement is?

    .... well, clearly, you haven't got any.

    I can report, however, having had all kinds of interesting issues on
    this, and can equally report that at my $employer, there have been teams
    of people working on trying to get combinations of packages which will
    work on the PCs people have in the company so that they can do their
    day-jobs. It's intensely complex, because there is no proper package
    management in Windows.

    Linux, on the other hand, has had package management for well over a
    decade now, and it works *exceedingly* well.

    So, perhaps you'd take your anti-Linux vendetta out of the pro-Linux
    group, please?

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  13. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

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

    > Steve Townsend espoused:
    >> Ben writes:

    >
    >> honest. You appear, like this Chris guy, to make things up in order to
    >> pursue some sort of anti MS vendetta.

    >
    > And your evidence for this amazing statement is?
    >
    >
    >
    > So, perhaps you'd take your anti-Linux vendetta out of the pro-Linux
    > group, please?


    Hadron II

    "This Chris guy".

    --
    Then we're about to lose ftp.debian.org and dpkg
    * netgod will miss dpkg -- it was occasionally useful
    We still have rpm....
    -- Seen on #Debian

  14. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Chris Ahlstrom espoused:
    >
    >
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Mark Kent belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Steve Townsend espoused:
    >>> Ben writes:

    >>
    >>> honest. You appear, like this Chris guy, to make things up in order to
    >>> pursue some sort of anti MS vendetta.

    >>
    >> And your evidence for this amazing statement is?
    >>
    >>
    >>
    >> So, perhaps you'd take your anti-Linux vendetta out of the pro-Linux
    >> group, please?

    >
    > Hadron II
    >
    > "This Chris guy".
    >


    hehe - yeah... presumably things are becoming tougher at astroturfing
    central, since Microsoft's growth projections have been slashed by over
    50%, and Linux on netbooks is rising rapidly.

    I doubt Microsoft will have so much funding available for paying for
    astroturfers as time goes on. I wonder what they'll do instead?

    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  15. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

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

    > Chris Ahlstrom espoused:
    >>
    >> Hadron II
    >>
    >> "This Chris guy".

    >
    > hehe - yeah... presumably things are becoming tougher at astroturfing
    > central, since Microsoft's growth projections have been slashed by over
    > 50%, and Linux on netbooks is rising rapidly.
    >
    > I doubt Microsoft will have so much funding available for paying for
    > astroturfers as time goes on. I wonder what they'll do instead?


    Crowdsourcing.

    --
    Your good nature will bring unbounded happiness.

  16. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Mark Kent writes:

    > Steve Townsend espoused:
    >> Ben writes:
    >>
    >>> DFS wrote:
    >>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>>>> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>>>>>>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>>>>>>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?
    >>>>>>> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >>>>>>> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >>>>>>> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >>>>>>> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >>>>>>> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH
    >>>>>>> more receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >>>>>>> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Notice a pattern here?
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary
    >>>>>> stuff by day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by
    >>>>>> night. As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total
    >>>>>> bull****, but even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,
    >>>>> Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...
    >>>>
    >>>> No. A *lot* of people run Windows. Some people download Linux/OSS
    >>>> crapware. Don't be so naive as to believe a single word or number
    >>>> posted by Rex Kingmaker Ballard.
    >>>
    >>> I was focusing more on software like Firefox and Open Office, since
    >>> your wording was Linux *slash* OSS. They are undeniably popular, and
    >>> yes, a *lot* of people download them.
    >>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>> 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet
    >>>>> Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty
    >>>>> easy to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT
    >>>>> or RPM package managers, making it even easier.
    >>>>
    >>>> The Linux forums are chock full of installation trouble victims.
    >>>
    >>> Windows users are choked by DLL hell after installing their
    >>> programs. Poor Windows users.

    >>
    >> Actually most Windows user never come across this. So do try to be

    > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    > ?????
    >
    >> honest. You appear, like this Chris guy, to make things up in order to
    >> pursue some sort of anti MS vendetta.
    >>

    >
    > And your evidence for this amazing statement is?
    >
    > ... well, clearly, you haven't got any.


    Go read the thread where he was talking nonsense about DirectX and the
    other one where he dismisses Visual Studio while not giving any Linux
    equivalents. It seems to me that about 10% of what he says has any
    semblance to the truth or comes from hard earned real experiences.

  17. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Steve Townsend espoused:
    >
    >
    > Mark Kent writes:
    >
    >> Steve Townsend espoused:
    >>> Ben writes:
    >>>
    >>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>>>>> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>>>>>>>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>>>>>>>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?
    >>>>>>>> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >>>>>>>> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >>>>>>>> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >>>>>>>> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >>>>>>>> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH
    >>>>>>>> more receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >>>>>>>> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Notice a pattern here?
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary
    >>>>>>> stuff by day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by
    >>>>>>> night. As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total
    >>>>>>> bull****, but even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >>>>>>>
    >>>>>>> 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,
    >>>>>> Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...
    >>>>>
    >>>>> No. A *lot* of people run Windows. Some people download Linux/OSS
    >>>>> crapware. Don't be so naive as to believe a single word or number
    >>>>> posted by Rex Kingmaker Ballard.
    >>>>
    >>>> I was focusing more on software like Firefox and Open Office, since
    >>>> your wording was Linux *slash* OSS. They are undeniably popular, and
    >>>> yes, a *lot* of people download them.
    >>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>> 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet
    >>>>>> Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty
    >>>>>> easy to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT
    >>>>>> or RPM package managers, making it even easier.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The Linux forums are chock full of installation trouble victims.
    >>>>
    >>>> Windows users are choked by DLL hell after installing their
    >>>> programs. Poor Windows users.
    >>>
    >>> Actually most Windows user never come across this. So do try to be

    >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    >> ?????
    >>
    >>> honest. You appear, like this Chris guy, to make things up in order to
    >>> pursue some sort of anti MS vendetta.
    >>>

    >>
    >> And your evidence for this amazing statement is?
    >>
    >> ... well, clearly, you haven't got any.

    >
    > Go read the thread where he was talking nonsense about DirectX and the
    > other one where he dismisses Visual Studio while not giving any Linux
    > equivalents. It seems to me that about 10% of what he says has any

    ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    > semblance to the truth or comes from hard earned real experiences.



    Another wild stab in the dark, I see.

    Please go to a suitable forum, as this is not it. You are not welcome
    here.


    --
    | mark at ellandroad dot demon dot co dot uk |
    | Cola faq: http://www.faqs.org/faqs/linux/advocacy/faq-and-primer/ |
    | Cola trolls: http://colatrolls.blogspot.com/ |
    | Open platforms prevent vendor lock-in. Own your Own services! |


  18. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

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

    > Steve Townsend espoused:
    >>
    >> Go read the thread where he was talking nonsense about DirectX and the
    >> other one where he dismisses Visual Studio while not giving any Linux
    >> equivalents. It seems to me that about 10% of what he says has any

    > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    >> semblance to the truth or comes from hard earned real experiences.

    >
    > Another wild stab in the dark, I see.
    >
    > Please go to a suitable forum, as this is not it. You are not welcome
    > here.


    Isn't it /amazing/ how much like Hadron he sounds?

    --
    Wedding is destiny, and hanging likewise.
    -- John Heywood

  19. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Chris Ahlstrom wrote:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Mark Kent belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Steve Townsend espoused:
    >>>
    >>> Go read the thread where he was talking nonsense about DirectX and the
    >>> other one where he dismisses Visual Studio while not giving any Linux
    >>> equivalents. It seems to me that about 10% of what he says has any

    >> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    >>> semblance to the truth or comes from hard earned real experiences.

    >>
    >> Another wild stab in the dark, I see.
    >>
    >> Please go to a suitable forum, as this is not it. You are not welcome
    >> here.

    >
    > Isn't it /amazing/ how much like Hadron he sounds?
    >


    Because he quite probably *is* Hadron.

    At least he is every bit as stupid, claims similarly his superior (not
    existing) "knowledge" and tries to be an insulting POS
    --
    Perl - the only language that looks the same before and after RSA
    encryption.
    -- Keith Bostic


  20. Re: Windows 7: The 'Dog Food' Tastes Bad

    Mark Kent writes:

    > Steve Townsend espoused:
    >>
    >>
    >> Mark Kent writes:
    >>
    >>> Steve Townsend espoused:
    >>>> Ben writes:
    >>>>
    >>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>>> Rex Ballard wrote:
    >>>>>>>>> On Nov 3, 11:22 am, "DFS" wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>> DFS wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>>>> Ben wrote:
    >>>>>>>>>> With Linux "advocates*", everyone is always "planning" to switch to
    >>>>>>>>>> Linux or "evaluating" Linux for their company, etc. Yet the Linux
    >>>>>>>>>> flatline market share stays flat year after year after year?
    >>>>>>>>> You like to cite the most unreliable surveys as evidence, and assume
    >>>>>>>>> that because a machine was sold with Windows or Vista preinstalled,
    >>>>>>>>> that this is the only possible way the PC could be functional.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> How many of those PCs have been "Enhanced" with some form of Linux
    >>>>>>>>> (cygwin, vmware, xen, OSS software such as Firefox, Open Office, and
    >>>>>>>>> Gaim or Pidgin? I think that you'd find that the public is MUCH
    >>>>>>>>> more receptive to OSS, including Linux, than you might think.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> 1/2 billion firefox downloads - 40% of the browser market even in
    >>>>>>>>> defective IP address only surveys.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> 1/2 billion OpenOffice downloads
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> 1/4 billion VMware player downloads
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> 1 billion Linux downloads.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> 80 million Linux sub-notebooks in 11 months.
    >>>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>>> Notice a pattern here?
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> Yes I do. Same pattern you've always displayed: hawk proprietary
    >>>>>>>> stuff by day for IBM, pretend to advocate Linux and open source by
    >>>>>>>> night. As for the numbers... every single one of them is total, total
    >>>>>>>> bull****, but even divided by 10 they do reveal a pattern:
    >>>>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 1) some people download Linux/OSS crapware,
    >>>>>>> Rephrase: A *lot* of people download...
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> No. A *lot* of people run Windows. Some people download Linux/OSS
    >>>>>> crapware. Don't be so naive as to believe a single word or number
    >>>>>> posted by Rex Kingmaker Ballard.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> I was focusing more on software like Firefox and Open Office, since
    >>>>> your wording was Linux *slash* OSS. They are undeniably popular, and
    >>>>> yes, a *lot* of people download them.
    >>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>>>> 2) some try to install it - not at all a safe bet
    >>>>>>> Most software on Sourceforge and other F/OSS sites makes it pretty
    >>>>>>> easy to install. Most mainstream Linux distributions use either APT
    >>>>>>> or RPM package managers, making it even easier.
    >>>>>>
    >>>>>> The Linux forums are chock full of installation trouble victims.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> Windows users are choked by DLL hell after installing their
    >>>>> programs. Poor Windows users.
    >>>>
    >>>> Actually most Windows user never come across this. So do try to be
    >>> ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    >>> ?????
    >>>
    >>>> honest. You appear, like this Chris guy, to make things up in order to
    >>>> pursue some sort of anti MS vendetta.
    >>>>
    >>>
    >>> And your evidence for this amazing statement is?
    >>>
    >>> ... well, clearly, you haven't got any.

    >>
    >> Go read the thread where he was talking nonsense about DirectX and the
    >> other one where he dismisses Visual Studio while not giving any Linux
    >> equivalents. It seems to me that about 10% of what he says has any

    > ^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
    >> semblance to the truth or comes from hard earned real experiences.

    >
    >
    > Another wild stab in the dark, I see.


    I can only tell it as I see it. He was wrong about X and Direct X. He
    was wrong about games and consoles. He was wrong about Visual Studio. It
    seems to me that he is more interested in ingratiating himself with
    Linux heads than in telling the truth or talking honestly about
    things. I guess I can bottle you with a few of the others.

    >
    > Please go to a suitable forum, as this is not it. You are not welcome
    > here.


    Who are you? Are you Terry Potter? He seems to think he is in charge
    here too.


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