Another "downgrade" to XP - Linux

This is a discussion on Another "downgrade" to XP - Linux ; As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine." He responded, "It came with Vista but ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 3 1 2 3 LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 60

Thread: Another "downgrade" to XP

  1. Another "downgrade" to XP

    As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help
    Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I
    mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine."

    He responded, "It came with Vista but I loaded XP on it."

    "Didn't like Vista?"

    "It had some serious issues."

    Has *any* OS been uninstalled more times than Vista?

    --
    RonB
    "There's a story there...somewhere"

  2. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    On Nov 5, 8:28 pm, RonB wrote:
    > As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help
    > Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I
    > mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine."


    > He responded, "It came with Vista but I loaded XP on it."


    > "Didn't like Vista?"


    > "It had some serious issues."


    > Has *any* OS been uninstalled more times than Vista?


    Not in terms of gross unit volumes. In terms of percentage of units
    deployed, I think the winner would still be NT 3.1 and the "Upgrade
    version" NT 3.51.

    Those were so bad that Merril Lynch after spending what they estimated
    to be roughly $10,000 per user to do the upgrade, decided to downgrade
    back to Windows 3.1.

    Microsoft was saved from economic disaster in 1993 by the vaporware
    announcement of "Chicago" - and when CIOs and OEMs started seriously
    looking at alternatives like OS/2, Unixware, SCO Unix, and Linux in
    late 1994, Bill started referring to Chicago as Windows 95 -
    attempting to convince these key decision makers that the new version
    of Windows would be out in early 1995. Several delays later,
    Microsoft released Windows 95 on the last weekend of their fiscal
    year. The initial version was still unstable and most corporate
    customers didn't start deployment of Windows until Windows 95B - which
    came out in April of 1996.

    I was really surprised that Microsoft didn't come out with some sort
    of Vista upgrade, but I suppose that after all the wierdness around
    the Home BASIC, Home Premium, Business, and Ultimate - about the last
    thing anyone wanted to hear from Microsoft was that they would have to
    purchase upgrades to their upgrades.

    Microsoft has burned as much credibility as Sarah Palin. And Steve
    Ballmer doesn't seem to be near as good at the bald-face lie as Bill
    Gates was. Ballmer has tried to claim that "Windows 7 will fix
    Vista", but the level of skepticism is probably the highest it has
    ever been. The only to remaining US manufacturers - HP and Dell, are
    already putting out Linux powered sub-notebooks. Acer, ASUS, and
    Lenovo have been aggressively marketing "No OS" machines almost
    everywhere BUT the United States, and it's likely that, with the
    change in administration, they are likely to be MUCH more aggressive
    about this strategy in the United States as well.



  3. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    RonB wrote:
    > As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help
    > Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I
    > mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine."
    >
    > He responded, "It came with Vista but I loaded XP on it."
    >
    > "Didn't like Vista?"
    >
    > "It had some serious issues."
    >
    > Has *any* OS been uninstalled more times than Vista?
    >


    Only Windows ME, but hey, that's Windows too.

  4. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP


    "RonB" wrote in message
    news:WNrQk.57$mA1.19@newsfe01.iad...
    > As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help
    > Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I
    > mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine."
    >
    > He responded, "It came with Vista but I loaded XP on it."
    >


    So why didn't he load Linux on it?




  5. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

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

    > "RonB" wrote in message
    > news:WNrQk.57$mA1.19@newsfe01.iad...
    >> As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help
    >> Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I
    >> mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine."
    >>
    >> He responded, "It came with Vista but I loaded XP on it."

    >
    > So why didn't he load Linux on it?


    You must be pretty dense. Been hanging out here a long time, and you still
    don't know?

    --
    I'm an artist.
    But it's not what I really want to do.
    What I really want to do is be a shoe salesman.
    I know what you're going to say --
    "Dreamer! Get your head out of the clouds."
    All right! But it's what I want to do.
    Instead I have to go on painting all day long.
    The world should make a place for shoe salesmen.
    -- J. Feiffer

  6. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP


    "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    news:C8BQk.62251$rD2.40356@bignews4.bellsouth.net. ..
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> "RonB" wrote in message
    >> news:WNrQk.57$mA1.19@newsfe01.iad...
    >>> As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help
    >>> Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I
    >>> mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine."
    >>>
    >>> He responded, "It came with Vista but I loaded XP on it."

    >>
    >> So why didn't he load Linux on it?

    >
    > You must be pretty dense. Been hanging out here a long time, and you
    > still
    > don't know?


    What's often posted here is how millions and millions of people are moving
    to Linux in droves. According to the posts here, the reason he installed XP
    and now Linux on the laptop is:

    1) MS bribed him to run Windows
    2) MS threatened him if he didn't run Windows
    3) Ballmer threw a chair at him








  7. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

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

    > "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>
    >>> So why didn't he load Linux on it?

    >>
    >> You must be pretty dense. Been hanging out here a long time, and you
    >> still don't know?

    >
    > What's often posted here is how millions and millions of people are moving
    > to Linux in droves. According to the posts here, the reason he installed XP
    > and now Linux on the laptop is:
    >
    > 1) MS bribed him to run Windows
    > 2) MS threatened him if he didn't run Windows
    > 3) Ballmer threw a chair at him


    You must have missed my posts (and posts of others) where we note that some
    people just prefer Windows XP, for whatever reasons -- inertia, familiarity,
    games, access to Windows-only sites....

    I've never had a really exciting eXPerience (in fact, the product lets me
    down with surprising regularity), but others apparently have.

    --
    Solver_: add users who should be messing with sound to group
    audio.. Make sure the devices are all group audio (ls -l /dev/dsp will
    give you the fastest indication if it's probably set right) and build a
    kernel with sound support for your card
    OR optionally install alsa source and build modules for that
    with make-kpkg
    OR (not recommended) get and install evil OSS/Linux evil non-free
    evil binary only evil drivers---but those are evil. And did I mention
    that it's not recommended?

  8. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP


    "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    news:%BBQk.62268$rD2.51386@bignews4.bellsouth.net. ..
    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>>
    >>>> So why didn't he load Linux on it?
    >>>
    >>> You must be pretty dense. Been hanging out here a long time, and you
    >>> still don't know?

    >>
    >> What's often posted here is how millions and millions of people are
    >> moving
    >> to Linux in droves. According to the posts here, the reason he installed
    >> XP
    >> and now Linux on the laptop is:
    >>
    >> 1) MS bribed him to run Windows
    >> 2) MS threatened him if he didn't run Windows
    >> 3) Ballmer threw a chair at him

    >
    > You must have missed my posts (and posts of others) where we note that
    > some
    > people just prefer Windows XP, for whatever reasons -- inertia,
    > familiarity,
    > games, access to Windows-only sites....


    Whoah! You mean that some people actually make a choice to use Windows. In
    COLAville it sure seems like people only make a "choice" when they use Linux
    and they are somehow forced/locked-in to using Windows.


    > I've never had a really exciting eXPerience (in fact, the product lets me
    > down with surprising regularity), but others apparently have.


    Just curious... how exactly does XP let you down regularly? I use XP, Linux,
    Solaris, AIX, HP/UX and to a lesser degree some other OSs. From a
    development perspective Win32 is more of a pain simply because the API is
    different from the Unix's. Not necessarily better or worse but just
    different so the lower layers (mostly IO stuff) needs to be #ifdef's
    specifically for Win32. But from a user perspective (what most people will
    see) there really isn't all that much to complain about.





  9. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

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

    > "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >
    >> You must have missed my posts (and posts of others) where we note that
    >> some people just prefer Windows XP, for whatever reasons -- inertia,
    >> familiarity, games, access to Windows-only sites....

    >
    > Whoah! You mean that some people actually make a choice to use Windows. In
    > COLAville it sure seems like people only make a "choice" when they use Linux
    > and they are somehow forced/locked-in to using Windows.


    Well, that forced "choice" starts the ball rolling. In a normal market,
    you'd have a variety of computer systems (remember the days of Tandy,
    Atari, Commodore, Sinclair, along with the Macs and PCs) and more than one
    Windows implementation (there used to be at three implementations of DOS,
    for example -- Microsoft made sure that didn't happen with Windows).

    >> I've never had a really exciting eXPerience (in fact, the product lets me
    >> down with surprising regularity), but others apparently have.

    >
    > Just curious... how exactly does XP let you down regularly? I use XP, Linux,
    > Solaris, AIX, HP/UX and to a lesser degree some other OSs. From a
    > development perspective Win32 is more of a pain simply because the API is
    > different from the Unix's. Not necessarily better or worse but just
    > different so the lower layers (mostly IO stuff) needs to be #ifdef's
    > specifically for Win32. But from a user perspective (what most people will
    > see) there really isn't all that much to complain about.


    Are you kidding? First off, XP is /slow/. On every machine I've ever used
    it on. Second, Windows Explorer is an abomination on some machines, giving
    a minutes-long hourglass at the very same time I can go to a DOS or Cygwin
    xterm and complete the desired file operation. Then there's the quixotic
    and variable responses to plugging in a USB stick.

    We currently use only DELLs at work, and every laptop of the same model acts
    a little different, some working okay, some giving period troubles, such as
    not enabling networking automatically. On a slow laptop, the DOS console is
    fast -- but on fast desktop machine I used, the same DOS console is slow as
    hell at text-scrolling. Why?

    Then there's the malware issue. I haven't been bitten by that one lately,
    because I use Windows only on a sequestered network managed by NMCI, and now
    update religiously -- even though I've been bitten by Microsoft Windows
    updates that have altered (for example) my multiple-monitor support.

    No workable multiple desktops, slow networking, a paucity of window
    managers, krufty apps meant to try to replace functionality that Windows
    lacks, a proprietary remote GUI protocol....

    Then there's Visual Studio. A pretty fast, decent compiler with a good
    debugger, but slow as hell at dependency-checking, with a crappy text editor.

    And then our corporate guys think it is nice to give us access to corporate
    "virtual drives", so that I have to fire up VPN (or go through a web
    interface) to access a freakin' "G:" drive using CIFS over the internet. Ye
    gods, how slow can you get?

    And then there's our Win 2003-based systems! Oy!

    But, damn you, you've got me ranting far beyond XP at this point,
    so I'm shutting up.

    You're right that some people have a good eXPerience, but I haven't.

    --
    Variables don't; constants aren't.

  10. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    Chris Ahlstrom wrote:
    > Then there's the malware issue. I haven't been bitten by that one lately,
    > because I use Windows only on a sequestered network managed by NMCI, and now
    > update religiously -- even though I've been bitten by Microsoft Windows
    > updates that have altered (for example) my multiple-monitor support.



    My pet windows update hate atm is Spoutchuck Distress openbing a nice
    popup on windows start informing me it wants to compact its databases. I
    don't ****ing use it. At all. Who said what about crapware?

  11. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    > this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>
    >>> You must have missed my posts (and posts of others) where we note that
    >>> some people just prefer Windows XP, for whatever reasons -- inertia,
    >>> familiarity, games, access to Windows-only sites....

    >>
    >> Whoah! You mean that some people actually make a choice to use Windows. In
    >> COLAville it sure seems like people only make a "choice" when they use Linux
    >> and they are somehow forced/locked-in to using Windows.

    >
    > Well, that forced "choice" starts the ball rolling. In a normal market,
    > you'd have a variety of computer systems (remember the days of Tandy,
    > Atari, Commodore, Sinclair, along with the Macs and PCs) and more than one
    > Windows implementation (there used to be at three implementations of DOS,
    > for example -- Microsoft made sure that didn't happen with Windows).
    >
    >>> I've never had a really exciting eXPerience (in fact, the product lets me
    >>> down with surprising regularity), but others apparently have.

    >>
    >> Just curious... how exactly does XP let you down regularly? I use XP, Linux,
    >> Solaris, AIX, HP/UX and to a lesser degree some other OSs. From a
    >> development perspective Win32 is more of a pain simply because the API is
    >> different from the Unix's. Not necessarily better or worse but just
    >> different so the lower layers (mostly IO stuff) needs to be #ifdef's
    >> specifically for Win32. But from a user perspective (what most people will
    >> see) there really isn't all that much to complain about.

    >
    > Are you kidding? First off, XP is /slow/. On every machine I've ever
    > used


    Please define "slow" for us.

    > it on. Second, Windows Explorer is an abomination on some machines, giving
    > a minutes-long hourglass at the very same time I can go to a DOS or Cygwin
    > xterm and complete the desired file operation. Then there's the quixotic
    > and variable responses to plugging in a USB stick.


    You really should get some help. If your knowledge of using XP is the
    same as your knowledge of DirectX v X then you really have no place
    using a computer. I use a mixture of XP, Ubuntu and Mac and XP works
    just fine.

    >
    > We currently use only DELLs at work, and every laptop of the same model acts
    > a little different, some working okay, some giving period troubles, such as
    > not enabling networking automatically. On a slow laptop, the DOS console is
    > fast -- but on fast desktop machine I used, the same DOS console is slow as
    > hell at text-scrolling. Why?


    Because you have an idiot administering them it would seem. Is it you?
    The reason I ask is that we have about 200 DELL laptops in our company
    and the work just fine. (We have stuck with XP by the way as Vista
    brings us nothing new). We run a few Ubuntu dowrkstations to check
    things in VMWare and Wine but most people don't like Ubuntu because of
    the poorer desktop applications.
    >
    > Then there's the malware issue. I haven't been bitten by that one lately,
    > because I use Windows only on a sequestered network managed by NMCI, and now
    > update religiously -- even though I've been bitten by Microsoft Windows
    > updates that have altered (for example) my multiple-monitor support.


    But this happens all the time in Linux too. And that is IF you get multi
    monitor support working. Thank god for third party applications which
    take some of the pain out of video set up in Linux.

    >
    > No workable multiple desktops, slow networking, a paucity of window
    > managers, krufty apps meant to try to replace functionality that Windows
    > lacks, a proprietary remote GUI protocol....


    You need to find someone to help you. You clearly have no clue about
    what is there.

    > Then there's Visual Studio. A pretty fast, decent compiler with a good
    > debugger, but slow as hell at dependency-checking, with a crappy text
    > editor.


    Compared to what wonderful Linux one? gdb? Dont make me laugh. Eclipse?
    java garbage.

    >
    > And then our corporate guys think it is nice to give us access to corporate
    > "virtual drives", so that I have to fire up VPN (or go through a web
    > interface) to access a freakin' "G:" drive using CIFS over the internet. Ye
    > gods, how slow can you get?


    You are clueless. Why blame Windows for your lack of knowledge or your
    corporate set up?

    >
    > And then there's our Win 2003-based systems! Oy!
    >
    > But, damn you, you've got me ranting far beyond XP at this point,
    > so I'm shutting up.


    You really should.

    >
    > You're right that some people have a good eXPerience, but I haven't.


    Because you have a rubbish system administer. Get one that knows what
    he's doing. The rest of the world manages.

  12. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    Steve Townsend wrote:

    > Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out
    >> this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    >>>
    >>>> You must have missed my posts (and posts of others) where we note that
    >>>> some people just prefer Windows XP, for whatever reasons -- inertia,
    >>>> familiarity, games, access to Windows-only sites....
    >>>
    >>> Whoah! You mean that some people actually make a choice to use Windows.
    >>> In COLAville it sure seems like people only make a "choice" when they
    >>> use Linux and they are somehow forced/locked-in to using Windows.

    >>
    >> Well, that forced "choice" starts the ball rolling. In a normal market,
    >> you'd have a variety of computer systems (remember the days of Tandy,
    >> Atari, Commodore, Sinclair, along with the Macs and PCs) and more than
    >> one Windows implementation (there used to be at three implementations of
    >> DOS, for example -- Microsoft made sure that didn't happen with Windows).
    >>
    >>>> I've never had a really exciting eXPerience (in fact, the product lets
    >>>> me down with surprising regularity), but others apparently have.
    >>>
    >>> Just curious... how exactly does XP let you down regularly? I use XP,
    >>> Linux, Solaris, AIX, HP/UX and to a lesser degree some other OSs. From a
    >>> development perspective Win32 is more of a pain simply because the API
    >>> is different from the Unix's. Not necessarily better or worse but just
    >>> different so the lower layers (mostly IO stuff) needs to be #ifdef's
    >>> specifically for Win32. But from a user perspective (what most people
    >>> will see) there really isn't all that much to complain about.

    >>
    >> Are you kidding? First off, XP is /slow/. On every machine I've ever
    >> used

    >
    > Please define "slow" for us.


    Slow. Like a slug on tranquilizer

    >> it on. Second, Windows Explorer is an abomination on some machines,
    >> giving a minutes-long hourglass at the very same time I can go to a DOS
    >> or Cygwin
    >> xterm and complete the desired file operation. Then there's the quixotic
    >> and variable responses to plugging in a USB stick.

    >
    > You really should get some help. If your knowledge of using XP is the
    > same as your knowledge of DirectX v X then you really have no place
    > using a computer. I use a mixture of XP, Ubuntu and Mac and XP works
    > just fine.


    How about commenting on his claim of USb quirks instead of trying to kill
    the messenger?
    Because he is right. WWindows USB handling is utterly idiotic. Plug in a
    device already installed on a different USB port, and often you are greeted
    with "new hardware found". Hardware which has its driver already installed.
    It is pathetic to see such incompetent fools like MS programmers.

    >>
    >> We currently use only DELLs at work, and every laptop of the same model
    >> acts a little different, some working okay, some giving period troubles,
    >> such as
    >> not enabling networking automatically. On a slow laptop, the DOS console
    >> is fast -- but on fast desktop machine I used, the same DOS console is
    >> slow as
    >> hell at text-scrolling. Why?

    >
    > Because you have an idiot administering them it would seem. Is it you?


    What happened to the "windows is easy, linux is difficult" mantra of you
    wintendo fanbois?
    Because always when it is reported what a nightmare windows really is, you
    widiots chime in with your pathetic "incompetent admin" mantra

    > The reason I ask is that we have about 200 DELL laptops in our company
    > and the work just fine.


    For suitable low values of "fine"

    > (We have stuck with XP by the way as Vista brings us nothing new).


    You forgot that the machines crawl to a stop with vista, too

    > We run a few Ubuntu dowrkstations to check
    > things in VMWare and Wine but most people don't like Ubuntu because of
    > the poorer desktop applications.


    Naturally. They have to be "poorer". Because otherwise it would be difficult
    to explain what that MS garbage is doing there

    >> Then there's the malware issue. I haven't been bitten by that one
    >> lately, because I use Windows only on a sequestered network managed by
    >> NMCI, and now update religiously -- even though I've been bitten by
    >> Microsoft Windows updates that have altered (for example) my
    >> multiple-monitor support.

    >
    > But this happens all the time in Linux too.


    Feel free to point us to the daily reports of yet another linux virus, will
    you?

    > And that is IF you get multi monitor support working.


    Well, you seem to be unable to check a few checkboxes and select which
    monitor is situated where. Because thats it what it takes here

    > Thank god for third party applications which
    > take some of the pain out of video set up in Linux.


    What pain? When I setup a new linux box, it comes up with the native
    resolution of the monitor. No setup required for the basic video setup at
    all

    >>
    >> No workable multiple desktops, slow networking, a paucity of window
    >> managers, krufty apps meant to try to replace functionality that Windows
    >> lacks, a proprietary remote GUI protocol....

    >
    > You need to find someone to help you. You clearly have no clue about
    > what is there.


    Remote Desktop is crap. Give me X every day, but never that MS garbage. They
    simply have no idea how to do things properly remote

    >> Then there's Visual Studio. A pretty fast, decent compiler with a good
    >> debugger, but slow as hell at dependency-checking, with a crappy text
    >> editor.

    >
    > Compared to what wonderful Linux one? gdb? Dont make me laugh. Eclipse?
    > java garbage.


    Well, you have not seen others, I see.
    And please explain why eclipse is "java garbage". It is working fine

    >>
    >> And then our corporate guys think it is nice to give us access to
    >> corporate "virtual drives", so that I have to fire up VPN (or go through
    >> a web
    >> interface) to access a freakin' "G:" drive using CIFS over the internet.
    >> Ye gods, how slow can you get?

    >
    > You are clueless. Why blame Windows for your lack of knowledge or your
    > corporate set up?


    Well, why do you insult him for decisions he did not make?

    >>
    >> And then there's our Win 2003-based systems! Oy!
    >>
    >> But, damn you, you've got me ranting far beyond XP at this point,
    >> so I'm shutting up.

    >
    > You really should.


    It could be said a lot more about the cruftiness of XP

    >>
    >> You're right that some people have a good eXPerience, but I haven't.

    >
    > Because you have a rubbish system administer. Get one that knows what
    > he's doing. The rest of the world manages.


    Err, no, the rest of the world suffers. Those who use it from its
    crappiness. And those who don't from the malware and spam overwhelming the
    email accounts, originating from the millions of infected windows systems
    --
    To mess up a Linux box, you need to work at it.
    To mess up your Windows box, you just need to work on it.


  13. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

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



    --
    Stop searching forever. Happiness is just next to you.

  14. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    Ezekiel wrote:
    > "RonB" wrote in message
    > news:WNrQk.57$mA1.19@newsfe01.iad...
    >> As I was leaving the building tonight I noticed that our late-night Help
    >> Desk tech had a new laptop. A Dell Inspiron, his personal machine. I
    >> mentioned it was a "pretty nice machine."
    >>
    >> He responded, "It came with Vista but I loaded XP on it."
    >>

    >
    > So why didn't he load Linux on it?
    >
    >
    >


    Could be ignorance to its existence or viability?

    It's usually one of those two.

  15. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

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

    > Steve Townsend wrote:
    >>
    >> Because you have a rubbish system administer. Get one that knows what
    >> he's doing. The rest of the world manages.

    >
    > Err, no, the rest of the world suffers. Those who use it from its
    > crappiness. And those who don't from the malware and spam overwhelming the
    > email accounts, originating from the millions of infected windows systems


    Steve Townsend, A.K.A. Hadron II, is simply another dazed follower of
    Microsoft who dismisses other peoples issues as unimportant, attributing
    their problems to their own incompetence, rather than the incompetence of
    Microsoft, the vendor, or even the Microsoft MCSEs who attempt to administer
    Microsoft networks with "GUIs".

    Perfectly impervious to facts, that one is.

    And shooting blanks, too. Why else does he resort to insult, instead of
    acknowledging what everyone else in the world knows: that Microsoft
    software is far from uniformly perfect.

    --
    Good day to let down old friends who need help.

  16. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron II belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >


    Oh I see. You get corrected on your mistakes and then have a hissy
    fit. You appear to be at home here. Enjoy your strutting.

  17. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message
    newsVBQk.62274$rD2.52867@bignews4.bellsouth.net...

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Ezekiel belched out


    > this bit o' wisdom:


    >


    >> "Chris Ahlstrom" wrote in message


    >>


    >>> You must have missed my posts (and posts of others) where we note that


    >>> some people just prefer Windows XP, for whatever reasons -- inertia,


    >>> familiarity, games, access to Windows-only sites....


    >>


    >> Whoah! You mean that some people actually make a choice to use Windows.
    >> In


    >> COLAville it sure seems like people only make a "choice" when they use
    >> Linux


    >> and they are somehow forced/locked-in to using Windows.


    >


    > Well, that forced "choice" starts the ball rolling. In a normal market,


    > you'd have a variety of computer systems (remember the days of Tandy,


    > Atari, Commodore, Sinclair, along with the Macs and PCs) and more than one


    > Windows implementation (there used to be at three implementations of DOS,


    > for example -- Microsoft made sure that didn't happen with Windows).


    I don't see this as being specific to computers. At one time there were
    dozens

    of US car manufacturers, aircraft companies, etc. It's natural for markets
    to

    coalesce towards a leader. It was bound to eventually happen with OS's to

    some extent and MS happened to be the beneficiary of this.

    "Standardizing" has been a double-edged sword however. There are the obvious

    issues with MS having too much power and influence but there have been some

    positive benefits as well. It's nice having standards for things and the
    growth

    of the computer industry since the inception of MS is a testimony to this.
    The

    price of computers, software, hardware and storage has benefited from the

    economies of scale.


    >>> I've never had a really exciting eXPerience (in fact, the product lets
    >>> me


    >>> down with surprising regularity), but others apparently have.


    >>


    >> Just curious... how exactly does XP let you down regularly? I use XP,
    >> Linux,


    >> Solaris, AIX, HP/UX and to a lesser degree some other OSs. From a


    >> development perspective Win32 is more of a pain simply because the API is


    >> different from the Unix's. Not necessarily better or worse but just


    >> different so the lower layers (mostly IO stuff) needs to be #ifdef's


    >> specifically for Win32. But from a user perspective (what most people
    >> will


    >> see) there really isn't all that much to complain about.


    >


    > Are you kidding? First off, XP is /slow/. On every machine I've ever used


    > it on.


    I don't experience this at all. First of all XP was designed for CPU's and

    memory configurations that existed some 8-years ago. Give XP a reasonably

    new system and it runs very quickly. I actually find that XP runs faster

    than most Linux installs. (Compared to something like Ubuntu - not DSL.)

    If I open a console or a web-browser on XP it's pretty much instantaneous.

    When I do the same thing on Linux there's a short but noticable delay.

    > Second, Windows Explorer is an abomination on some machines, giving


    > a minutes-long hourglass at the very same time I can go to a DOS or Cygwin


    > xterm and complete the desired file operation.


    I do most of my file ops from a console (Cygwin) but when I do use Explorer

    I don't notice any minutes-long hourglasses. Nothing even close.

    > Then there's the quixotic


    > and variable responses to plugging in a USB stick.


    I've always found that weird as well. I don't know if that's an artifact

    from the way it was implemented or a design goal. If it's the later then

    I'd be interested in what the rationale for this was.


    > We currently use only DELLs at work, and every laptop of the same model
    > acts


    > a little different, some working okay, some giving period troubles, such
    > as


    > not enabling networking automatically. On a slow laptop, the DOS console
    > is


    > fast -- but on fast desktop machine I used, the same DOS console is slow
    > as


    > hell at text-scrolling. Why?


    No idea why. At home and work all of the XP installs I've used run fine.
    It's

    usually different for neighbors and relatives because they tend to install
    way

    too much ****e on their system. The little 'tray' in the botton-right of the

    screen (by the clock) has about a dozen or so useless apps that they
    installed.

    Then there's all sorts of media-bars and other crap that they installed
    which

    bogs down the system.


    > Then there's the malware issue. I haven't been bitten by that one lately,


    > because I use Windows only on a sequestered network managed by NMCI, and
    > now


    > update religiously -- even though I've been bitten by Microsoft Windows


    > updates that have altered (for example) my multiple-monitor support.


    No malware here either. As far as "updates" altering configurations such as

    multi-monitor support... Linux isn't significantly different. There are just

    too many possible configurations out there and it's not going to be perfect

    every time regardless of what the OS is.


    > No workable multiple desktops, slow networking, a paucity of window


    > managers, krufty apps meant to try to replace functionality that Windows


    > lacks, a proprietary remote GUI protocol....


    The lack of multiple desktops isn't a valid argument IMO. You can nitpick

    the details if you want but it's there for Windows if you want it. The

    network tests that I've seen on the LAN at home and work don't show any

    differences in speed. If anything I find that networking on Windows takes

    less CPU resources than Linux most likely because the manufacturers do a

    better job of optimizing the Windows drivers for the card/chipset.


    > Then there's Visual Studio. A pretty fast, decent compiler with a good


    > debugger, but slow as hell at dependency-checking, with a crappy text
    > editor.


    The debugger in Visual Studio is better than just good. One thing that I
    like

    is the ability to configure it to display classes and structs the way you
    want

    when you "mouse-over" a variable or add it to a watch window. You can always

    expand the class/struct/union to view the whole thing but being able to
    customize

    how it's initially displayed is very nice.

    The ability to do things like debug an application and then be able to step
    into

    (and debug) a stored procedure in a database is unmatched by things like
    GDB.



    > And then our corporate guys think it is nice to give us access to
    > corporate


    > "virtual drives", so that I have to fire up VPN (or go through a web


    > interface) to access a freakin' "G:" drive using CIFS over the internet.
    > Ye


    > gods, how slow can you get?


    That's a configuration issue with your IT guys. You can't blame MS for that
    one.


    > And then there's our Win 2003-based systems! Oy!


    >


    > But, damn you, you've got me ranting far beyond XP at this point,


    > so I'm shutting up.


    Not for long I bet.


    > You're right that some people have a good eXPerience, but I haven't.


    The same can probably be said with Linux experiences. People who use Linux

    all of the time are bound to have a better experience by virtue of their

    familiarity with the OS and their ability to configure it as they want.

    People who use Windows often can't configure their Linux systems as well

    as you but they can likely configure their XP setup to suit them better.

    Horses for courses.




  18. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

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

    > Chris Ahlstrom writes:
    >
    >> After takin' a swig o' grog, Hadron II belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >>
    >>

    >
    > Oh I see. You get corrected on your mistakes and then have a hissy
    > fit. You appear to be at home here. Enjoy your strutting.


    Dude, I do not intend to perform "Hadron, the Sequel".

    Buh-bye.

    Idiot.

    --
    The only possible interpretation of any research whatever in the `social
    sciences' is: some do, some don't.
    -- Ernest Rutherford

  19. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    Rex Ballard wrote:

    > Ballmer has tried to claim that "Windows 7 will fix
    > Vista",


    Where did he say this?


    > Acer, ASUS, and
    > Lenovo have been aggressively marketing "No OS" machines


    Show us. I've never seen an Acer website that didn't recommend Windows
    Vista. And Lenovo recently signed a $1.2 billion deal with Microsoft.




  20. Re: Another "downgrade" to XP

    Chris Ahlstrom writes:

    > After takin' a swig o' grog, Peter Köhlmann belched out this bit o' wisdom:
    >
    >> Steve Townsend wrote:
    >>>
    >>> Because you have a rubbish system administer. Get one that knows what
    >>> he's doing. The rest of the world manages.

    >>
    >> Err, no, the rest of the world suffers. Those who use it from its
    >> crappiness. And those who don't from the malware and spam overwhelming the
    >> email accounts, originating from the millions of infected windows systems

    >
    > Steve Townsend, A.K.A. Hadron II, is simply another dazed follower of
    > Microsoft who dismisses other peoples issues as unimportant, attributing
    > their problems to their own incompetence, rather than the incompetence of
    > Microsoft, the vendor, or even the Microsoft MCSEs who attempt to administer
    > Microsoft networks with "GUIs".


    Are you stupid or merely sick?

    We were discussing the difference between X Windows and Direct X. You
    did not know they address different things.

    I have not "followed" Windows in any way. I have merely offered to help
    you with your poorly configured XP set up since you freely admit you are
    not capable of administering it.

    >
    > Perfectly impervious to facts, that one is.


    What facts? The fact I corrected you on? You haven#t given any facts -
    only made up things. You seem to have a hatred for MS and yet you are
    clearly incapable of forming such a decision based on facts. As each
    thread you are in makes clear to the reader. You seem to delight in
    knocking MS with no factual backup. The fact that you make your income
    from Linux related work is good but try to be more honest.

    >
    > And shooting blanks, too. Why else does he resort to insult, instead of
    > acknowledging what everyone else in the world knows: that Microsoft
    > software is far from uniformly perfect.


    I never said MS SW is uniformly perfect. You're a complete and utter
    dick head and liar. Grow up and address the issues and stop telling
    these outrageous lies and making things up. I do not think MS SW is
    perfect. I also know that your Xp experiences are down to crap
    administration or an idiot using it. After your reply there I can only
    assume the later.


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