On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 15:30:28 GMT
Fish wrote:

> On Fri, 31 Aug 2007 08:24:07 +0100, Trevor Best wrote:
>
>
> > Of course there was no reason that anyone named that "plug and Pray"
> > then, because it *always* works doesn't it?
> >
>
> Get with the program, numb-nuts, we are well beyond the days of Win95, like
> 12 years beyond.

Oh, of course, I forgot, perfect now isn't it?

--
People say I'm violent.
Tell 'em it aint true or I'll kick yer teeth in!

Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
> Moog writes:
>
>> Fish illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
>>>
>>> The fact is though most people don't want to edit files
>>> or generate a modeline to make a monitor work correctly.
>>
>> Quite right. And in a short time they won't have to.
>>
>> When Xorg 7.3 is released in a week or so and the distros
>> start including it in their repositories, for instance.
>>
>> What will you whine about then?
>
> I don't think it's whining. If it wasn't for such whining we'd still be
> stuck with a default xorg.conf designed for some cathode ray tube device
> from 1972....

I *do* think it's whining. We all know (or should know) what xorg 7.3
is about to deliver. It's been addressed already. With the current
distro lifecycle (especially in Ubuntu - one every six months), we
have an OS that is going to progress, get better (and perhaps even
worse) during these regular new distro releases. Progression isn't
static and it is good. We should embrace it instead of moaning.

> There is a certain element who deny that people have ever had to edit
> config files, those that say that now you never have to edit config
> files. They are what I call the "works for me" brigade. Well, it doesn't
> work for everyone and listening to those people for whom it doesn't work
> is how progress is made.

Who is blocking progress in Ubuntu? The distro has a great release
schedule (second to none in the world of any OS), it is constantly
being developed.

As are the things it relies on. I've already mentioned Xorg, which is
constantly being developed (two major overhauls this year alone).
Samba is also being worked on in the same way. Jeremy Allison and his
team are looking to work on a friendlier way for networking and
file/printer sharing to be set up. No-one is standing still.

Yet, I still hear people moaning and whinging. I'd rather have them
spend time on bug fixing and developing than making miserable, "know
it all" posts in newsgroups.

I often wonder if they are 'bots rather than real folk. But that would
just be down to my paranioa. Are you looking at me? ;-)

--
Moog

"Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the
leather straps."

Moog writes:

> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
>> Moog writes:
>>
>>> Fish illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
>>>>
>>>> The fact is though most people don't want to edit files
>>>> or generate a modeline to make a monitor work correctly.
>>>
>>> Quite right. And in a short time they won't have to.
>>>
>>> When Xorg 7.3 is released in a week or so and the distros
>>> start including it in their repositories, for instance.
>>>
>>> What will you whine about then?
>>
>> I don't think it's whining. If it wasn't for such whining we'd still be
>> stuck with a default xorg.conf designed for some cathode ray tube device
>> from 1972....
>
> I *do* think it's whining. We all know (or should know) what xorg 7.3
> is about to deliver. It's been addressed already. With the current

I didn't. And I "live" in Linux these days.

> distro lifecycle (especially in Ubuntu - one every six months), we
> have an OS that is going to progress, get better (and perhaps even
> worse) during these regular new distro releases. Progression isn't
> static and it is good. We should embrace it instead of moaning.

Err, I did. I said that progressing is down to listening to legitimate
complaints - even whiners have a point :-;

>> There is a certain element who deny that people have ever had to edit
>> config files, those that say that now you never have to edit config
>> files. They are what I call the "works for me" brigade. Well, it doesn't
>> work for everyone and listening to those people for whom it doesn't work
>> is how progress is made.
>
> Who is blocking progress in Ubuntu? The distro has a great release
> schedule (second to none in the world of any OS), it is constantly
> being developed.

As I said, listening to peoples legitimate complaints, like the Ubuntu
crowd do, leads to progress. NOT listening like the "works for me"
brigade halts progress. I think we are in agreement.

>
> As are the things it relies on. I've already mentioned Xorg, which is
> constantly being developed (two major overhauls this year alone).
> Samba is also being worked on in the same way. Jeremy Allison and his
> team are looking to work on a friendlier way for networking and
> file/printer sharing to be set up. No-one is standing still.
>
> Yet, I still hear people moaning and whinging. I'd rather have them
> spend time on bug fixing and developing than making miserable, "know
> it all" posts in newsgroups.

I think you are talking about different people. Someone complaining that
they have to edit a file is, in many ways, constructive to the
improvement of Linux in general.

>
> I often wonder if they are 'bots rather than real folk. But that would
> just be down to my paranioa. Are you looking at me? ;-)

Spending too long on usenet can do that ...

--
I surely do hope that's a syntax error.
-- Larry Wall in <199710011752.KAA21624@wall.org>

Fish wrote:

> On Thu, 30 Aug 2007 22:23:29 -0400, Michael Trausch wrote:
>
>
>
>> All that having been said, Windows does have a target niche---as does
>> any other operating system. I'm fine with what people choose to use so
>> long as they are either (a) educated about it or (b) aware that they're
>> not and prefer inertia over anything else; my choices aren't going to be
>> influenced by others, particularly when it comes to what software I use
>> on my PC and network. To me, Windows is just plain unusable---over
>> nearly any other system---for a number of reasons mostly centering
>> around how inflexible it is.
>>
>> -- Mike
>>
> I have 4 PC's with 5 OS's installed right now so it's not like I am a one
> OS man. Lately I've been using Ubuntu the most but that could change
> tomorrow too. The fact is though most people don't want to edit files
> or generate a modeline to make a monitor work correctly. I installed
> Vista last night and the only thing I had to do was install a Vista
> driver for my HP laser printer. All other hardware was recognized
> and setup correctly. Windows update installed the sound driver for
> me. Piece of cake.

Yeh, but the end result of this great venture is that you're running ****ing
Vista! Now, that can't be considered any sort of accomplishment.

Cheers.

--

Proprietary Software: a 20th Century software business model.
Intelligent and helpful Windoze error messages: http://tinyurl.com/2ks5dz

N.
>
> Yeh, but the end result of this great venture is that you're running ****ing
> Vista! Now, that can't be considered any sort of accomplishment.
>

I LOVE Vista! It's the best thing that could have happened to Linux in a
million years!

People are ringing my phone off the hook to get that off their HD's. I
do it too, for $200 and 2 hours of my time.

Mountain Mike^^ writes:

> N.
>>
>> Yeh, but the end result of this great venture is that you're running ****ing
>> Vista! Now, that can't be considered any sort of accomplishment.
>>
>
> I LOVE Vista! It's the best thing that could have happened to Linux in
> a million years!
>
> People are ringing my phone off the hook to get that off their HD's. I
> do it too, for $200 and 2 hours of my time.

Sure.

Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:

>>>
>>> I don't think it's whining. If it wasn't for such whining we'd still be
>>> stuck with a default xorg.conf designed for some cathode ray tube device
>>> from 1972....
>>
>> I *do* think it's whining. We all know (or should know) what xorg 7.3
>> is about to deliver. It's been addressed already. With the current
>
> I didn't. And I "live" in Linux these days.

Interesting. It's been flagged as the killer xorg function since 7.2
(before feisty's release).

>> distro lifecycle (especially in Ubuntu - one every six months), we
>> have an OS that is going to progress, get better (and perhaps even
>> worse) during these regular new distro releases. Progression isn't
>> static and it is good. We should embrace it instead of moaning.
>
> Err, I did. I said that progressing is down to listening to legitimate
> complaints - even whiners have a point :-;

No. Whiners are simply whiners. If you have a "point" you raise it
with the relevant parties. You get "involved" and you take your head out of
your arse and offer to contribute.

>>> There is a certain element who deny that people have ever had to edit
>>> config files, those that say that now you never have to edit config
>>> files. They are what I call the "works for me" brigade. Well, it doesn't
>>> work for everyone and listening to those people for whom it doesn't work
>>> is how progress is made.
>>
>> Who is blocking progress in Ubuntu? The distro has a great release
>> schedule (second to none in the world of any OS), it is constantly
>> being developed.
>
> As I said, listening to peoples legitimate complaints, like the Ubuntu
> crowd do, leads to progress. NOT listening like the "works for me"
> brigade halts progress. I think we are in agreement.

It's not a legitimate complaint when it has already been addressed.

>> As are the things it relies on. I've already mentioned Xorg, which is
>> constantly being developed (two major overhauls this year alone).
>> Samba is also being worked on in the same way. Jeremy Allison and his
>> team are looking to work on a friendlier way for networking and
>> file/printer sharing to be set up. No-one is standing still.
>>
>> Yet, I still hear people moaning and whinging. I'd rather have them
>> spend time on bug fixing and developing than making miserable, "know
>> it all" posts in newsgroups.
>
> I think you are talking about different people. Someone complaining that
> they have to edit a file is, in many ways, constructive to the
> improvement of Linux in general.

No. Someone whining about editing a conf file and saying "I don't have
to do this in Windows" is either worthless or stupid or both.
Especially when the thing they are whining about will not be there in
future distros.

>> I often wonder if they are 'bots rather than real folk. But that would
>> just be down to my paranioa. Are you looking at me? ;-)
>
> Spending too long on usenet can do that ...

Stop staring at me will you? ;-)

--
Moog

"Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the
leather straps."

Moog writes:

> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
>
>>>>
>>>> I don't think it's whining. If it wasn't for such whining we'd still be
>>>> stuck with a default xorg.conf designed for some cathode ray tube device
>>>> from 1972....
>>>
>>> I *do* think it's whining. We all know (or should know) what xorg 7.3
>>> is about to deliver. It's been addressed already. With the current
>>
>> I didn't. And I "live" in Linux these days.
>
> Interesting. It's been flagged as the killer xorg function since 7.2
> (before feisty's release).

I must admit to not keeping up with xorg dev news - it all works for me
now :-;

>
>>> distro lifecycle (especially in Ubuntu - one every six months), we
>>> have an OS that is going to progress, get better (and perhaps even
>>> worse) during these regular new distro releases. Progression isn't
>>> static and it is good. We should embrace it instead of moaning.
>>
>> Err, I did. I said that progressing is down to listening to legitimate
>> complaints - even whiners have a point :-;
>
> No. Whiners are simply whiners. If you have a "point" you raise it
> with the relevant parties. You get "involved" and you take your head out of
> your arse and offer to contribute.

No. Most people dont. They just want it to work. It's not
unreasonable. And if Linux want to increase its market share then people
need to listen. Whiners have legitimate issues to. IMO this is the best
thing Ubuntu has done. As a result a lof of "hard core geeks" scoff at
Ubuntu - but they're just pissed off that a lot of their hard earned
knowledge has now been packaged and installing Linux is generally a
breeze these days.

>
>>>> There is a certain element who deny that people have ever had to edit
>>>> config files, those that say that now you never have to edit config
>>>> files. They are what I call the "works for me" brigade. Well, it doesn't
>>>> work for everyone and listening to those people for whom it doesn't work
>>>> is how progress is made.
>>>
>>> Who is blocking progress in Ubuntu? The distro has a great release
>>> schedule (second to none in the world of any OS), it is constantly
>>> being developed.
>>
>> As I said, listening to peoples legitimate complaints, like the Ubuntu
>> crowd do, leads to progress. NOT listening like the "works for me"
>> brigade halts progress. I think we are in agreement.
>
> It's not a legitimate complaint when it has already been addressed.

Maybe I have lost the thread here. There are issues. Hence the new xorg
you mentioned (not released yet).

>
>>> As are the things it relies on. I've already mentioned Xorg, which is
>>> constantly being developed (two major overhauls this year alone).
>>> Samba is also being worked on in the same way. Jeremy Allison and his
>>> team are looking to work on a friendlier way for networking and
>>> file/printer sharing to be set up. No-one is standing still.
>>>
>>> Yet, I still hear people moaning and whinging. I'd rather have them
>>> spend time on bug fixing and developing than making miserable, "know
>>> it all" posts in newsgroups.
>>
>> I think you are talking about different people. Someone complaining that
>> they have to edit a file is, in many ways, constructive to the
>> improvement of Linux in general.
>
> No. Someone whining about editing a conf file and saying "I don't have
> to do this in Windows" is either worthless or stupid or both.

We have to beg to disagree. People should NOT have to edit these
things. And as root it can kill a system.

> Especially when the thing they are whining about will not be there in
> future distros.

future is in the future. Most people want it to work now :-;

>
>>> I often wonder if they are 'bots rather than real folk. But that would
>>> just be down to my paranioa. Are you looking at me? ;-)
>>
>> Spending too long on usenet can do that ...
>
> Stop staring at me will you? ;-)

You do a great job of helping. But don't forget not everyone has the
philosophy and desire to dig deep. They just want an OS to "work" - and
this is what they mean by "windows works" - it does for most people (e.g
sound/vide etc). Yes, Linux is getting better. And is certainly more
flexible.


--
The world really isn't any worse. It's just that the news coverage
is so much better.

It was on, or about, Sat, 01 Sep 2007 16:46:05 +0000, that as I was
halfway through a large jam doughnut, Moog wrote:

> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
>> Moog writes:
>>
>>> Fish illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
>>>>
>>>> The fact is though most people don't want to edit files or generate a
>>>> modeline to make a monitor work correctly.
>>>
>>> Quite right. And in a short time they won't have to.
>>>
>>> When Xorg 7.3 is released in a week or so and the distros start
>>> including it in their repositories, for instance.
>>>
>>> What will you whine about then?
>>
>> I don't think it's whining. If it wasn't for such whining we'd still be
>> stuck with a default xorg.conf designed for some cathode ray tube
>> device from 1972....
>
> I *do* think it's whining. We all know (or should know) what xorg 7.3 is
> about to deliver. It's been addressed already. With the current distro
> lifecycle (especially in Ubuntu - one every six months), we have an OS
> that is going to progress, get better (and perhaps even worse) during
> these regular new distro releases. Progression isn't static and it is
> good. We should embrace it instead of moaning.
>
>> There is a certain element who deny that people have ever had to edit
>> config files, those that say that now you never have to edit config
>> files. They are what I call the "works for me" brigade. Well, it
>> doesn't work for everyone and listening to those people for whom it
>> doesn't work is how progress is made.
>
> Who is blocking progress in Ubuntu? The distro has a great release
> schedule (second to none in the world of any OS), it is constantly being
> developed.

Perhaps ask Quack just *who* has said that people have never had to edit
config files, Message-ID etc. I think you'll find that what they actually
said was, that *they* hadn't any need to edit config files, etc. You do
know that Quack has reading & comprehension problems? He sees something
that someone posted & misquotes it, & the original actually turns out to
be something quite different. An example is that is when he says that
people in cola think linux is perfect, where what was *actually* said was
that linux is more perfect than windows...which is *entirely* different.
So IMO anything he says should be treated very carefully. He also trolls,
which is no surprise.

Oh, yeah, & according to him, GNU/Linux didn't exist in 1997.


--
Surely you are not comparing the non-existent Linux (at that time) with
98? - Hadron aka Hadron Quark, Hans Schneider, & Damian O'Leary
comp.os.linux.advocacy - Thu, 16 Aug 2007
Message-ID:

Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
> Moog writes:
>
>> Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
>>
>>>>>
>>>>> I don't think it's whining. If it wasn't for such whining we'd still be
>>>>> stuck with a default xorg.conf designed for some cathode ray tube device
>>>>> from 1972....
>>>>
>>>> I *do* think it's whining. We all know (or should know) what xorg 7.3
>>>> is about to deliver. It's been addressed already. With the current
>>>
>>> I didn't. And I "live" in Linux these days.
>>
>> Interesting. It's been flagged as the killer xorg function since 7.2
>> (before feisty's release).
>
> I must admit to not keeping up with xorg dev news - it all works for me
> now :-;

It works for the vast majority of people. As I understand it, the
problem we're discussing relates to changing a CRT to an LCD with
differing resolutions. I'll say it again, the xorg dev team have known
about this issue for at least a year and the "on the fly"
rwconfiguring is going to be available in xorg 7.3

>>>> distro lifecycle (especially in Ubuntu - one every six months), we
>>>> have an OS that is going to progress, get better (and perhaps even
>>>> worse) during these regular new distro releases. Progression isn't
>>>> static and it is good. We should embrace it instead of moaning.
>>>
>>> Err, I did. I said that progressing is down to listening to legitimate
>>> complaints - even whiners have a point :-;
>>
>> No. Whiners are simply whiners. If you have a "point" you raise it
>> with the relevant parties. You get "involved" and you take your head out of
>> your arse and offer to contribute.
>
> No. Most people dont. They just want it to work. It's not
> unreasonable. And if Linux want to increase its market share then people
> need to listen. Whiners have legitimate issues to. IMO this is the best
> thing Ubuntu has done. As a result a lof of "hard core geeks" scoff at
> Ubuntu - but they're just pissed off that a lot of their hard earned
> knowledge has now been packaged and installing Linux is generally a
> breeze these days.

I don't mind people asking questions. What gets on my tits is the "It
doesn't work in Ubuntu, Ubuntu is ****" mentality that we are
increasingly seeing. Yes. We need to help everyone. Yes, the dev teams
need to get as much hardware as possible working from the off.
However, the point made in this thread was simply whining. Nothing
more, nothing less.

>>>>> There is a certain element who deny that people have ever had to edit
>>>>> config files, those that say that now you never have to edit config
>>>>> files. They are what I call the "works for me" brigade. Well, it doesn't
>>>>> work for everyone and listening to those people for whom it doesn't work
>>>>> is how progress is made.
>>>>
>>>> Who is blocking progress in Ubuntu? The distro has a great release
>>>> schedule (second to none in the world of any OS), it is constantly
>>>> being developed.
>>>
>>> As I said, listening to peoples legitimate complaints, like the Ubuntu
>>> crowd do, leads to progress. NOT listening like the "works for me"
>>> brigade halts progress. I think we are in agreement.
>>
>> It's not a legitimate complaint when it has already been addressed.
>
> Maybe I have lost the thread here. There are issues. Hence the new xorg
> you mentioned (not released yet).

Errmmm. We're talking about a guy replacing a CRT with an LCD. He
would potentially have trouble doing that in any other OS. It's not an
Xorg thing. However, the xorg team have adressed the issue. This is
something that will happen far quicker here than in most other OS'es
with less of a development cycle.

>>>> As are the things it relies on. I've already mentioned Xorg, which is
>>>> constantly being developed (two major overhauls this year alone).
>>>> Samba is also being worked on in the same way. Jeremy Allison and his
>>>> team are looking to work on a friendlier way for networking and
>>>> file/printer sharing to be set up. No-one is standing still.
>>>>
>>>> Yet, I still hear people moaning and whinging. I'd rather have them
>>>> spend time on bug fixing and developing than making miserable, "know
>>>> it all" posts in newsgroups.
>>>
>>> I think you are talking about different people. Someone complaining that
>>> they have to edit a file is, in many ways, constructive to the
>>> improvement of Linux in general.
>>
>> No. Someone whining about editing a conf file and saying "I don't have
>> to do this in Windows" is either worthless or stupid or both.
>
> We have to beg to disagree. People should NOT have to edit these
> things. And as root it can kill a system.

Good lord. People should not have to put up with voltage surges, ISP
downtime and spyware, but they have to. The issue here is how quickly
fixes are developed and what you should do to ensure that.
Whining is not the way, especially when the solution is already in
progress.

>> Especially when the thing they are whining about will not be there in
>> future distros.
>
> future is in the future. Most people want it to work now :-;

I prefer to see a future with a solution than a it> approach. How do you think the solution is reached in the open
source world anyway?

>>>> I often wonder if they are 'bots rather than real folk. But that would
>>>> just be down to my paranioa. Are you looking at me? ;-)
>>>
>>> Spending too long on usenet can do that ...
>>
>> Stop staring at me will you? ;-)
>
> You do a great job of helping. But don't forget not everyone has the
> philosophy and desire to dig deep. They just want an OS to "work" - and
> this is what they mean by "windows works" - it does for most people (e.g
> sound/vide etc). Yes, Linux is getting better. And is certainly more
> flexible.

I know that as well, possibly better than most. I don't need you to
preach. I do actively try and improve our OS though. For instance, I
spend a lot of time working through Gutsy looking for bugs. This isn't
a..."well this doesn't work...this OS is ****....lets moan about it
way" this is in an active "I want to improve things" way.

Let us not forget that there isn't the kind of development budget with
Ubuntu as there is in others. The fact that Ubuntu and numerous other
distros are seen as viable alternatives is a minor miracle, considering
the above. Never, *ever* forget that.

--
Moog

"Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the
leather straps."

Moog writes:

> Let us not forget that there isn't the kind of development budget with
> Ubuntu as there is in others. The fact that Ubuntu and numerous other
> distros are seen as viable alternatives is a minor miracle, considering
> the above. Never, *ever* forget that.

I don't. And I'm surprised you think I do.

Also never, ever forget that people having issues is a good resource for
prioritizing fixes and product line.

--
Not that I'm against sneaking some notions into people's heads upon
occasion. (Or blasting them in outright.)
-- Larry Wall in <199710211624.JAA17833@wall.org>

Fish, on 09/01/2007 11:56 AM said:
> I have 4 PC's with 5 OS's installed right now so it's not like I am a
> one OS man. Lately I've been using Ubuntu the most but that could
> change tomorrow too. The fact is though most people don't want to
> edit files or generate a modeline to make a monitor work correctly. I
> installed Vista last night and the only thing I had to do was install
> a Vista driver for my HP laser printer. All other hardware was
> recognized and setup correctly. Windows update installed the sound
> driver for me. Piece of cake.

Yet, there are several issues with Vista pertaining to backwards
compatibility with older releases of Windows, including drivers and the
like (what works in today's Windows doesn't typically work in tomorrow's
Windows, save for a little overlap and some really popular classic
hardware, for example). Also, Vista is too slow for me to generally
recommend to any Windows user; my personal recommendation is to not move
to that release unless it is considered absolutely essential by someone.

While I do tend to try many different distributions, I also tend to stay
with one that I generally use and support. For the past year, and for
the next several forseeable ones, that will be Ubuntu for me. For the
several years before that, it was Slackware; the only reason that I
really sought change was that Slackware dropped GNOME and until the most
recent release was a bit behind the times.

-- Mike

--
Michael B. Trausch http://www.trausch.us/
Pidgin 2.1.1 and plugins for Ubuntu Feisty!
(And Thunderbird 2.0.0.6, too!) http://www.trausch.us/pidgin

Hadron, on 09/01/2007 12:14 PM said:
>
> I don't think it's whining. If it wasn't for such whining we'd still
> be stuck with a default xorg.conf designed for some cathode ray tube
> device from 1972....
>
> There is a certain element who deny that people have ever had to edit
> config files, those that say that now you never have to edit config
> files. They are what I call the "works for me" brigade. Well, it
> doesn't work for everyone and listening to those people for whom it
> doesn't work is how progress is made.
>

Absolutely. While editing configuration files is something that is not
as frequent as in other distributions (Slackware comes to mind), it is
still---and will likely always be, in the most esoteric of cases---a
required activity for some reason or another. It is getting to be
something that is required less and less in nearly every application of
computers regardless of operating system, and I think that is a good
thing. The other good thing is that the configuration files are still
*there* so that if someone wants to do something that the GUI isn't
programmed to give them (think very non-standard setups), those are
still possible.

The great part about Ubuntu---at least to me---is that it aims to be as
user-friendly as possible, moving more and more in that direction with
every release. However, it is also "expert" friendly, in that those who
really want to have very specifically tweaked environments can do so
without worrying about being stepped all over.

-- Mike

--
Michael B. Trausch http://www.trausch.us/
Pidgin 2.1.1 and plugins for Ubuntu Feisty!
(And Thunderbird 2.0.0.6, too!) http://www.trausch.us/pidgin

Mountain Mike^^, on 09/01/2007 02:16 PM said:
> N.
>>
>> Yeh, but the end result of this great venture is that you're running
>> ****ing
>> Vista! Now, that can't be considered any sort of accomplishment.
>>
>
> I LOVE Vista! It's the best thing that could have happened to Linux in a
> million years!
>
> People are ringing my phone off the hook to get that off their HD's. I
> do it too, for $200 and 2 hours of my time.

Sounds a bit on the expensive side to me.

Two hours, sure, but $100 for each of those? That's more than I can see
anyone fishing out for a little bit of operating system shuffling work,
particuarly when Ubuntu is considerably easier to install than Windows
XP is these days. I haven't seen the Windows Vista installation
process, so I can't comment on that---but I know that it's far easier to
install Ubuntu than XP.

-- Mike

--
Michael B. Trausch http://www.trausch.us/
Pidgin 2.1.1 and plugins for Ubuntu Feisty!
(And Thunderbird 2.0.0.6, too!) http://www.trausch.us/pidgin

Mountain Mike^^ wrote:
> N.
>
>> Yeh, but the end result of this great venture is that you're
>> running ****ing Vista! Now, that can't be considered any sort
>> of accomplishment.
>
> I LOVE Vista! It's the best thing that could have happened to
> Linux in a million years!
>
> People are ringing my phone off the hook to get that off their
> HD's. I do it too, for $200 and 2 hours of my time.

Finally, a legitimate reason for encouraging people to try Vista
:-) The unfortunate thing is that the trial also feeds the
Microsofties.

--
"Vista is finally secure from hacking. No one is going to 'hack'
the product activation and try and steal the o/s. Anyone smart
enough to do so is also smart enough not to want to bother."



--
Posted via a free Usenet account from http://www.teranews.com

On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 22:27:16 -0400, Michael Trausch wrote:

> my personal recommendation is to not move to that release unless
> it is considered absolutely essential by someone.

Thanks for sharing, Michael! But why, particularly, should we worry
about what you recommend?

--
Chris Game

"Hopefully the net-dwelling paranoid delusional conspiracy theorists
won't descend upon me " -- Chris Pratley, MSFT.

Chris Game wrote:

> On Sat, 01 Sep 2007 22:27:16 -0400, Michael Trausch wrote:
>
>> my personal recommendation is to not move to that release unless
>> it is considered absolutely essential by someone.
>
> Thanks for sharing, Michael! But why, particularly, should we worry
> about what you recommend?
>

Because he has a point or two?

--
Microsoft's Product Strategy: "It compiles, let's ship it!"

Hadron illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
> Moog writes:
>
>> Let us not forget that there isn't the kind of development budget with
>> Ubuntu as there is in others. The fact that Ubuntu and numerous other
>> distros are seen as viable alternatives is a minor miracle, considering
>> the above. Never, *ever* forget that.
>
> I don't. And I'm surprised you think I do.

Yet you seem to side with the whiners.

> Also never, ever forget that people having issues is a good resource for
> prioritizing fixes and product line.

Of course I don't. I help as much as my knpowledge allows. I will not
listen to BS from whiners though.

--
Moog

"Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the
leather straps."

Michael Trausch illuminated alt.os.linux.ubuntu by typing:
> Mountain Mike^^, on 09/01/2007 02:16 PM said:
>> N.
>>>
>>> Yeh, but the end result of this great venture is that you're running
>>> ****ing
>>> Vista! Now, that can't be considered any sort of accomplishment.
>>>
>>
>> I LOVE Vista! It's the best thing that could have happened to Linux in a
>> million years!
>>
>> People are ringing my phone off the hook to get that off their HD's. I
>> do it too, for $200 and 2 hours of my time.
>
> Sounds a bit on the expensive side to me.
>
> Two hours, sure, but $100 for each of those? That's more than I can see
> anyone fishing out for a little bit of operating system shuffling work,
> particuarly when Ubuntu is considerably easier to install than Windows
> XP is these days. I haven't seen the Windows Vista installation
> process, so I can't comment on that---but I know that it's far easier to
> install Ubuntu than XP.

The Vista Install is better than XP's. You can install in around an
hour for just a vanilla version. As it happens, Vista has *more*
hardware issues than Ubuntu does in my experience. Obviously, this will
change once drivers hit the win update site, but it is a good comparison
to make when people complain about Ubuntu's hardware compatibility.

--
Moog

"Some mornings it just doesn't seem worth it to gnaw through the
leather straps."