The true definition of "linux"... - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on The true definition of "linux"... - Ubuntu ; On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:45:14 +0000, dennis@home wrote: > "Holz" wrote in message > news:20080217084610.385afa89@laptop... >> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:34:55 -0000 >> "dennis@home" wrote: >> >>> Yes you can unformat the windows drive but you won't recover ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast
Results 21 to 40 of 85

Thread: The true definition of "linux"...

  1. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:45:14 +0000, dennis@home wrote:

    > "Holz" wrote in message
    > news:20080217084610.385afa89@laptop...
    >> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:34:55 -0000
    >> "dennis@home" wrote:
    >>
    >>> Yes you can unformat the windows drive but you won't recover so easily
    >>> from what the RM command.

    >> You do not want to unformat Windows, you refuse to unformat Windows. M$
    >> please bring more of the same, it helps us in the long run.


    So... where exactly is this "unformat" command? Is there a manpage for it?

    ;-)


    > Its all very well saying that but there are some things you *can't* do
    > with linux of any variety unless you have a couple of years to waste
    > writing your own application.


    I think a lot of that is a response to the common Windows-user mistake
    of equating, say, inability to run MS Office with inability to handle
    office tasks, or inability to run Photoshop with inability to do
    professional graphics work. Usually combined with another commom
    Windows-user mistake of expecting that all operating systems are
    supposed to work exactly like Windows, run all Windows hardware, talk
    to all Windows peripherals, and run all Windows applications. People
    hear so much of that, that when someone voices a concern over a real
    applications problem it automatically gets lumped into the same
    category.

    > If you run one of those no number of linux zealots can actually
    > solve the problem as all they can do is make noise but not actually
    > contribute anything useful. There is a good collection of the
    > loonies in this group, being paid by Bill the way they act. It
    > doesn't take much to put newbies off and they are doing a good job
    > AFAICS.


    The kinds of user Ubuntu is aimed at don't even know Usenet
    exists. Their idea of a "newsgroup" is ubuntuforums.org. Most of the
    people here have been around Usenet awhile and aren't going to be put
    off by the usual run of trolls and nutcases.

  2. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:

    > Losers
    > In
    > Nostalgic
    > Unity &
    > Xenophobia
    >
    > Frank


    Aren't you funny. Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System
    kernel started by Linux Torvolds - but I would not expect you to be up to
    that understanding.

  3. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    dennis@home wrote:

    >
    >
    > "Holz" wrote in message
    > news:20080217084610.385afa89@laptop...
    > > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:34:55 -0000
    > > "dennis@home" wrote:
    > >
    > >> Yes you can unformat the windows drive but you won't recover so
    > >> easily from what the RM command.

    > > You do not want to unformat Windows, you refuse to unformat Windows. M$
    > > please bring more of the same, it helps us in the long run.

    >
    > Its all very well saying that but there are some things you *can't* do with
    > linux of any variety unless you have a couple of years to waste writing your


    There's a whole lot more you *can't* do with Windows, no matter how
    much time you waste writing whatever you like.

    Being a Wintard you're probably oblivious to that fact, but your
    ignorance doesn't change anything.

    Il mittente di questo messaggio|The sender address of this
    non corrisponde ad un utente |message is not related to a real
    reale ma all'indirizzo fittizio|person but to a fake address of an
    di un sistema anonimizzatore |anonymous system
    Per maggiori informazioni |For more info
    https://www.mixmaster.it


  4. Re: The true definition of "linux"...



    "lazy me" wrote in message
    news:13rh3uogjjidefc@news.supernews.com...
    > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:45:14 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >> "Holz" wrote in message
    >> news:20080217084610.385afa89@laptop...
    >>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:34:55 -0000
    >>> "dennis@home" wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> Yes you can unformat the windows drive but you won't recover so easily
    >>>> from what the RM command.
    >>> You do not want to unformat Windows, you refuse to unformat Windows. M$
    >>> please bring more of the same, it helps us in the long run.

    >
    > So... where exactly is this "unformat" command? Is there a manpage for it?
    >
    > ;-)


    Sure there are lots. ;-)
    http://www.diskinternals.com/ntfs-recovery/ for one.
    I wouldn't recommend getting into the position where you need to use it..
    these cached file systems can be a bugger to fix.
    Even with full journaling which most don't use. ;-)

    >
    >
    >> Its all very well saying that but there are some things you *can't* do
    >> with linux of any variety unless you have a couple of years to waste
    >> writing your own application.

    >
    > I think a lot of that is a response to the common Windows-user mistake
    > of equating, say, inability to run MS Office with inability to handle
    > office tasks, or inability to run Photoshop with inability to do
    > professional graphics work. Usually combined with another commom
    > Windows-user mistake of expecting that all operating systems are
    > supposed to work exactly like Windows, run all Windows hardware, talk
    > to all Windows peripherals, and run all Windows applications. People
    > hear so much of that, that when someone voices a concern over a real
    > applications problem it automatically gets lumped into the same
    > category.


    Yes I agree in the main, however in my case there doesn't appear to be a
    linux alternative to paperport (I have looked) or to Olympus Studio 2 so
    there is no way I could dump windows. I probably wouldn't anyway as I like
    to know how to use multiple systems and there is no reason why linux and
    windows can't co-exist. I use linux where its best and I use windows where
    its best and I use other stuff too. The zealots are too stupid to work that
    out.

    >
    >> If you run one of those no number of linux zealots can actually
    >> solve the problem as all they can do is make noise but not actually
    >> contribute anything useful. There is a good collection of the
    >> loonies in this group, being paid by Bill the way they act. It
    >> doesn't take much to put newbies off and they are doing a good job
    >> AFAICS.

    >
    > The kinds of user Ubuntu is aimed at don't even know Usenet
    > exists. Their idea of a "newsgroup" is ubuntuforums.org. Most of the
    > people here have been around Usenet awhile and aren't going to be put
    > off by the usual run of trolls and nutcases.


    A lot of them are the trolls and nutcases, just about everyone in the
    iPlayer thread after the first dozen or so posts. ;-)


  5. Re: [ OT ] The true definition of "linux"...

    In Bit Twister:

    [Snip...]

    > will soon drop a noisy newsgroup rather than wasting time


    I agree, but realistically IMO it's part of Usenet--actually life in any
    democratic culture. We adapt and join in, or drop out and move on.

    JMO; YMMV...

    --
    Regards, Weird (Harold Stevens) * IMPORTANT EMAIL INFO FOLLOWS *
    Pardon any bogus email addresses (wookie) in place for spambots.
    Really, it's (wyrd) at airmail, dotted with net. DO NOT SPAM IT.
    Kids jumping ship? Looking to hire an old-school type? Email me.

  6. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    ray wrote:
    > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Losers
    >>In
    >>Nostalgic
    >>Unity &
    >>Xenophobia
    >>
    >>Frank

    >
    >
    > Aren't you funny.


    Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.

    Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System
    > kernel started by Linux Torvolds


    Well duh...I've proly known that longer than you.

    - but I would not expect you to be up to
    > that understanding.


    Understanding? What's not to understand?
    Frank

  7. Re: The true definition of "linux"...


    "ray" wrote in message
    news:61ri5rF209tp1U1@mid.individual.net...
    > On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >
    >> Losers
    >> In
    >> Nostalgic
    >> Unity &
    >> Xenophobia
    >>
    >> Frank

    >
    > Aren't you funny. Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System
    > kernel started by Linux Torvolds - but I would not expect you to be up to
    > that understanding.


    Or maybe it was Linus Torvolds



  8. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:16:23 +0000, dennis@home wrote:

    > "lazy me" wrote in message
    > news:13rh3uogjjidefc@news.supernews.com...
    >> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:45:14 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >>
    >>> "Holz" wrote in message
    >>> news:20080217084610.385afa89@laptop...
    >>>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:34:55 -0000
    >>>> "dennis@home" wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> Yes you can unformat the windows drive but you won't recover so
    >>>>> easily from what the RM command.
    >>>> You do not want to unformat Windows, you refuse to unformat Windows.
    >>>> M$ please bring more of the same, it helps us in the long run.

    >>
    >> So... where exactly is this "unformat" command? Is there a manpage for
    >> it?
    >>
    >> ;-)

    >
    > Sure there are lots. ;-)
    > http://www.diskinternals.com/ntfs-recovery/ for one. I wouldn't
    > recommend getting into the position where you need to use it.. these
    > cached file systems can be a bugger to fix. Even with full journaling
    > which most don't use. ;-)


    Sounds like the Linux recovery tools... "It just might work, but don't
    count on it..."

    >>
    >>> Its all very well saying that but there are some things you *can't* do
    >>> with linux of any variety unless you have a couple of years to waste
    >>> writing your own application.

    >>
    >> I think a lot of that is a response to the common Windows-user mistake
    >> of equating, say, inability to run MS Office with inability to handle
    >> office tasks, or inability to run Photoshop with inability to do
    >> professional graphics work. Usually combined with another commom
    >> Windows-user mistake of expecting that all operating systems are
    >> supposed to work exactly like Windows, run all Windows hardware, talk
    >> to all Windows peripherals, and run all Windows applications. People
    >> hear so much of that, that when someone voices a concern over a real
    >> applications problem it automatically gets lumped into the same
    >> category.

    >
    > Yes I agree in the main, however in my case there doesn't appear to be a
    > linux alternative to paperport (I have looked)


    Here's something I stumbled across a while back:

    http://sourceforge.net/projects/maxview/

    I've never tried it and don't know anything about it except that it
    claims to be some kind of paperport workalike.

    > or to Olympus Studio 2


    There's just one single Windows program that I can't live without. It
    was a PITA having to boot to Windows to run it then back to Linux to
    do everything else. So, I set up a Virtual Machine in Linux and
    installed Windows 2000 on that. Now I can run both OS's at once.

    The reason I used Windows 2000 is that it doesn't use WPA. XP and
    Vista are a PITA in VM's because you tend to change the simulated
    hardware a lot, expand or shrink HD space, enable/disable networking
    "cards", etc. Eventually Windows XP/Vista accuses you of being a
    pirate and then essentially disables itself until MS decides to let
    you keep using the product you've already paid for. I hear MS has
    relented a little but they could also change it back again any time
    they want. This annoying phone-home-for-approval behavior is built
    into XP and Vista, but it's not built into Win2K.

    IMO virtualbox is the best bet for running a VM because, unlike the
    free version of VMware, it provides a simple dialog for allowing the
    OS running in the VM to access directories on the host OS. However,
    none of the open-source versions of virtualbox, including the ones in
    Synaptic, have USB support. The closed-source versions does and it's
    still free except to businesses. You can get it at
    http://www.virtualbox.org. Installation is child's play, especially if
    you RTFM (which, of course, I didn't do until everything was already
    working).

    Virtualbox does annoyingly insist on a name and email address the
    first time you run it and sends this off somewhere. I just entered
    fake info and it seems to work. Someone else said that if you keep
    canceling the dialog it will eventually go away for good.

    > so there is no way I could dump windows. I probably wouldn't anyway as I
    > like to know how to use multiple systems and there is no reason why
    > linux and windows can't co-exist. I use linux where its best and I use
    > windows where its best and I use other stuff too. The zealots are too
    > stupid to work that out.


    There's no reason OS/2 and Windows can't co-exist!

    There's no reason DR-DOS and Windows can't co-exist!

    There's no reason BeOS and Windows can't co-exist!

    There's no reason Linux and Windows can't co-exist?

    >>> If you run one of those no number of linux zealots can actually solve
    >>> the problem as all they can do is make noise but not actually
    >>> contribute anything useful. There is a good collection of the loonies
    >>> in this group, being paid by Bill the way they act. It doesn't take
    >>> much to put newbies off and they are doing a good job AFAICS.

    >>
    >> The kinds of user Ubuntu is aimed at don't even know Usenet exists.
    >> Their idea of a "newsgroup" is ubuntuforums.org. Most of the people
    >> here have been around Usenet awhile and aren't going to be put off by
    >> the usual run of trolls and nutcases.

    >
    > A lot of them are the trolls and nutcases, just about everyone in the
    > iPlayer thread after the first dozen or so posts. ;-)


    Funny, I don't see any iPlayer thread...


  9. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:18:36 +0000, Whoknew wrote:

    > "ray" wrote in message
    > news:61ri5rF209tp1U1@mid.individual.net...
    >> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>
    >>> Losers
    >>> In
    >>> Nostalgic
    >>> Unity &
    >>> Xenophobia
    >>>
    >>> Frank

    >>
    >> Aren't you funny. Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System
    >> kernel started by Linux Torvolds - but I would not expect you to be up
    >> to that understanding.

    >
    > Or maybe it was Linus Torvolds


    Look out, it's contagious!

    Things you desperately wanted to know: Change "Linus Torvalds" to
    "Linux Torvalds", and you get "Silvan Lord Tux" as an anagram.

  10. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    lazy me wrote:
    > On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:18:36 +0000, Whoknew wrote:
    >
    >
    >>"ray" wrote in message
    >>news:61ri5rF209tp1U1@mid.individual.net...
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Losers
    >>>>In
    >>>>Nostalgic
    >>>>Unity &
    >>>>Xenophobia
    >>>>
    >>>>Frank
    >>>
    >>>Aren't you funny. Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System
    >>>kernel started by Linux Torvolds - but I would not expect you to be up
    >>>to that understanding.

    >>
    >>Or maybe it was Linus Torvolds

    >
    >
    > Look out, it's contagious!
    >
    > Things you desperately wanted to know: Change "Linus Torvalds" to
    > "Linux Torvalds", and you get "Silvan Lord Tux" as an anagram.


    hehehe...bend over and see what you get...LOL!
    Frank

  11. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:19:48 -0800, Frank wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>Losers
    >>>In
    >>>Nostalgic
    >>>Unity &
    >>>Xenophobia
    >>>
    >>>Frank

    >>
    >>
    >> Aren't you funny.

    >
    > Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.


    I'm sure it didn't take you much more than 20 hours with the dictionary
    to come up with all those words!

    >
    > Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System


    Wrong. It is the name of the kernel. Come on frankie, you should know
    better than that.

    >> kernel started by Linux Torvolds

    >
    > Well duh...I've proly known that longer than you.


    That's entirely possible, however you have not demonstrated that.

    >
    > - but I would not expect you to be up to
    >> that understanding.

    >
    > Understanding? What's not to understand? Frank


    Exactly. What's not to understand? Frank!

  12. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Mon, 18 Feb 2008 02:18:36 +0000, Whoknew wrote:

    > "ray" wrote in message
    > news:61ri5rF209tp1U1@mid.individual.net...
    >> On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>
    >>> Losers
    >>> In
    >>> Nostalgic
    >>> Unity &
    >>> Xenophobia
    >>>
    >>> Frank

    >>
    >> Aren't you funny. Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System
    >> kernel started by Linux Torvolds - but I would not expect you to be up
    >> to that understanding.

    >
    > Or maybe it was Linus Torvolds


    Typo - I believe it is actually Torvalds.

  13. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    ray wrote:

    > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:19:48 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >
    >
    >>ray wrote:
    >>
    >>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>>Losers
    >>>>In
    >>>>Nostalgic
    >>>>Unity &
    >>>>Xenophobia
    >>>>
    >>>>Frank
    >>>
    >>>
    >>>Aren't you funny.

    >>
    >>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.

    >
    >
    > I'm sure it didn't take you much more than 20 hours with the dictionary
    > to come up with all those words!


    Try less than 30 seconds loser. I'm in a creative business.
    Obviously I have an extended lexicon but always talk down in the
    vernacular to losers like you. That way I'm sure you get the message.
    >
    >
    >> Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System

    >
    >
    > Wrong. It is the name of the kernel. Come on frankie, you should know
    > better than that.
    >
    >
    >>>kernel started by Linux Torvolds

    >>
    >>Well duh...I've proly known that longer than you.

    >
    >
    > That's entirely possible, however you have not demonstrated that.


    Who are You?
    Frank

  14. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    lazy me wrote:

    > I think a lot of that is a response to the common Windows-user mistake
    > of equating, say, inability to run MS Office with inability to handle
    > office tasks, or inability to run Photoshop with inability to do
    > professional graphics work. Usually combined with another commom
    > Windows-user mistake of expecting that all operating systems are
    > supposed to work exactly like Windows, run all Windows hardware, talk
    > to all Windows peripherals, and run all Windows applications.


    "Frank" discovered this the hard way when his Daddy beat him for screwing up
    his Windows Vista machine by failing to install Ubuntu correctly. Since
    then, he's vented his childish frustration by spewing abuse in this NG.

    This proves several things, including "Frank"'s inability for read and
    comprehend simple instructions, that he doesn't have his own computer and
    is forced to use Daddy's Vista rubbish, and the frustration he experiences
    when he sees all the grown-ups using /proper/ operating systems...

    C.

  15. Re: [ OT ] The true definition of "linux"...

    Bit Twister wrote:

    > Yes I know, but when everyone keeps flooding abuse@rr.com they may
    > decide it is more productive to cancel the account than continue to
    > clean the inbox of complaints.


    RoadRunner are getting hourly complaints from innumerable sources. They're
    still not showing any interest apart from firing back the standard email.

    > Only other option is everyone put the troll in the kill file.
    > I do not see that as a good option when other trolls continue to play
    > the original troll.


    It improves the S/N ratio, so is to be recommended!

    C.


  16. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Christopher Hunter wrote:
    > lazy me wrote:
    >
    >
    >>I think a lot of that is a response to the common Windows-user mistake
    >>of equating, say, inability to run MS Office with inability to handle
    >>office tasks, or inability to run Photoshop with inability to do
    >>professional graphics work. Usually combined with another commom
    >>Windows-user mistake of expecting that all operating systems are
    >>supposed to work exactly like Windows, run all Windows hardware, talk
    >>to all Windows peripherals, and run all Windows applications.

    >
    >
    > "Frank" discovered this the hard way when his Daddy beat him for screwing up
    > his Windows Vista machine by failing to install Ubuntu correctly. Since
    > then, he's vented his childish frustration by spewing abuse in this NG.


    You must be an anal retentive lying linux asshole...or else you're just
    as fukkin stupid as you seem.
    Which is it dickhead?
    >
    > This proves several things, including "Frank"'s inability for read and
    > comprehend simple instructions, that he doesn't have his own computer and
    > is forced to use Daddy's Vista rubbish, and the frustration he experiences
    > when he sees all the grown-ups using /proper/ operating systems...


    I venture to say that you couldn't find your own ass even if allowed to
    use both hands with all the lights turned on.
    You are the essence of a lying linux POS asshole loser...IOW's you're
    both broke and terminally ignorant...LOL!
    Frank

  17. Re: [ OT ] The true definition of "linux"...

    Christopher Hunter wrote:

    > Bit Twister wrote:
    >
    >
    >>Yes I know, but when everyone keeps flooding abuse@rr.com they may
    >>decide it is more productive to cancel the account than continue to
    >>clean the inbox of complaints.

    >
    >
    > RoadRunner are getting hourly complaints from innumerable sources. They're
    > still not showing any interest apart from firing back the standard email.


    They know you're just a stupid POS ignorant loser.
    >
    >
    >>Only other option is everyone put the troll in the kill file.
    >>I do not see that as a good option when other trolls continue to play
    >>the original troll.

    >
    >
    > It improves the S/N ratio, so is to be recommended!
    >

    Best for you to keep your pointy head shoved all the way up your stupid
    ass...it's the most intelligent move you've ever made in your miserable
    POS life.
    Frank

  18. Re: The true definition of "linux"...



    "lazy me" wrote in message
    news:13rhr6gmjsleb53@news.supernews.com...
    > On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 20:16:23 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >
    >> "lazy me" wrote in message
    >> news:13rh3uogjjidefc@news.supernews.com...
    >>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 17:45:14 +0000, dennis@home wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> "Holz" wrote in message
    >>>> news:20080217084610.385afa89@laptop...
    >>>>> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 16:34:55 -0000
    >>>>> "dennis@home" wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> Yes you can unformat the windows drive but you won't recover so
    >>>>>> easily from what the RM command.
    >>>>> You do not want to unformat Windows, you refuse to unformat Windows.
    >>>>> M$ please bring more of the same, it helps us in the long run.
    >>>
    >>> So... where exactly is this "unformat" command? Is there a manpage for
    >>> it?
    >>>
    >>> ;-)

    >>
    >> Sure there are lots. ;-)
    >> http://www.diskinternals.com/ntfs-recovery/ for one. I wouldn't
    >> recommend getting into the position where you need to use it.. these
    >> cached file systems can be a bugger to fix. Even with full journaling
    >> which most don't use. ;-)

    >
    > Sounds like the Linux recovery tools... "It just might work, but don't
    > count on it..."


    Well that's the trouble with caching stuff.. you never can be certain under
    "fault" conditions only those you have foreseen and taken care of. Some will
    never be taken care of as the three fold performance hit of doing it
    properly can be a problem.

    >>>> Its all very well saying that but there are some things you *can't* do
    >>>> with linux of any variety unless you have a couple of years to waste
    >>>> writing your own application.
    >>>
    >>> I think a lot of that is a response to the common Windows-user mistake
    >>> of equating, say, inability to run MS Office with inability to handle
    >>> office tasks, or inability to run Photoshop with inability to do
    >>> professional graphics work. Usually combined with another commom
    >>> Windows-user mistake of expecting that all operating systems are
    >>> supposed to work exactly like Windows, run all Windows hardware, talk
    >>> to all Windows peripherals, and run all Windows applications. People
    >>> hear so much of that, that when someone voices a concern over a real
    >>> applications problem it automatically gets lumped into the same
    >>> category.

    >>
    >> Yes I agree in the main, however in my case there doesn't appear to be a
    >> linux alternative to paperport (I have looked)

    >
    > Here's something I stumbled across a while back:
    >
    > http://sourceforge.net/projects/maxview/
    >
    > I've never tried it and don't know anything about it except that it
    > claims to be some kind of paperport workalike.


    I looked at that and its not very good ATM.
    My autofeed scanner doesn't autofeed with it and it is not easy like
    paperport.

    >
    >> or to Olympus Studio 2

    >
    > There's just one single Windows program that I can't live without. It
    > was a PITA having to boot to Windows to run it then back to Linux to
    > do everything else. So, I set up a Virtual Machine in Linux and
    > installed Windows 2000 on that. Now I can run both OS's at once.


    I just have more than one machine. The old ones run linux or win98se
    (another scanner linux doesn't support) the new one came with vista and so
    far there has been no reason to remove it and replace it with XP.
    >
    > The reason I used Windows 2000 is that it doesn't use WPA. XP and
    > Vista are a PITA in VM's because you tend to change the simulated
    > hardware a lot, expand or shrink HD space, enable/disable networking
    > "cards", etc. Eventually Windows XP/Vista accuses you of being a
    > pirate and then essentially disables itself until MS decides to let
    > you keep using the product you've already paid for. I hear MS has
    > relented a little but they could also change it back again any time
    > they want. This annoying phone-home-for-approval behavior is built
    > into XP and Vista, but it's not built into Win2K.


    I have heard of that but it hasn't happened to me despite changing the RAM
    and HDD in my machine. I guess I am lucky.

    >
    > IMO virtualbox is the best bet for running a VM because, unlike the
    > free version of VMware, it provides a simple dialog for allowing the
    > OS running in the VM to access directories on the host OS. However,
    > none of the open-source versions of virtualbox, including the ones in
    > Synaptic, have USB support. The closed-source versions does and it's
    > still free except to businesses. You can get it at
    > http://www.virtualbox.org. Installation is child's play, especially if
    > you RTFM (which, of course, I didn't do until everything was already
    > working).


    I have run ubuntu in M$ vpc quite well. Not brilliant graphics but this is a
    notebook anyway.
    Ubuntu doesn't like vpc out of the box and screws up but there are some
    detailed instructions on the M$ site that tells you what to add to the boot
    config so it works as it should. It appears to be a ubuntu problem as other
    linux distros don't need fixing but it doesn't matter as it only requires
    another reboot and a bit of file editing to fix.

    >
    > Virtualbox does annoyingly insist on a name and email address the
    > first time you run it and sends this off somewhere. I just entered
    > fake info and it seems to work. Someone else said that if you keep
    > canceling the dialog it will eventually go away for good.
    >
    >> so there is no way I could dump windows. I probably wouldn't anyway as I
    >> like to know how to use multiple systems and there is no reason why
    >> linux and windows can't co-exist. I use linux where its best and I use
    >> windows where its best and I use other stuff too. The zealots are too
    >> stupid to work that out.

    >
    > There's no reason OS/2 and Windows can't co-exist!
    >
    > There's no reason DR-DOS and Windows can't co-exist!
    >
    > There's no reason BeOS and Windows can't co-exist!
    >
    > There's no reason Linux and Windows can't co-exist?
    >
    >>>> If you run one of those no number of linux zealots can actually solve
    >>>> the problem as all they can do is make noise but not actually
    >>>> contribute anything useful. There is a good collection of the loonies
    >>>> in this group, being paid by Bill the way they act. It doesn't take
    >>>> much to put newbies off and they are doing a good job AFAICS.
    >>>
    >>> The kinds of user Ubuntu is aimed at don't even know Usenet exists.
    >>> Their idea of a "newsgroup" is ubuntuforums.org. Most of the people
    >>> here have been around Usenet awhile and aren't going to be put off by
    >>> the usual run of trolls and nutcases.

    >>
    >> A lot of them are the trolls and nutcases, just about everyone in the
    >> iPlayer thread after the first dozen or so posts. ;-)

    >
    > Funny, I don't see any iPlayer thread...


    It breaks the boredom yanking Peters chain, trouble is the trolls don't keep
    it to one thread. They really should bog off to the advocacy group and play
    with themselves.
    >


  19. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    Frank regurgitated:



    > I'm in a creative business.




    > Frank


    A remarkably correct self assessment Frank!
    Though it is a sick sort of fantasy that you are spouting here.

  20. Re: The true definition of "linux"...

    On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 19:30:50 -0800, Frank wrote:

    > ray wrote:
    >
    >> On Sun, 17 Feb 2008 15:19:48 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>
    >>
    >>>ray wrote:
    >>>
    >>>>On Sat, 16 Feb 2008 22:10:31 -0800, Frank wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>>Losers
    >>>>>In
    >>>>>Nostalgic
    >>>>>Unity &
    >>>>>Xenophobia
    >>>>>
    >>>>>Frank
    >>>>
    >>>>
    >>>>Aren't you funny.
    >>>
    >>>Yeah...funny, creative and truthful.

    >>
    >>
    >> I'm sure it didn't take you much more than 20 hours with the dictionary
    >> to come up with all those words!

    >
    > Try less than 30 seconds loser. I'm in a creative business. Obviously I
    > have an extended lexicon but always talk down in the vernacular to
    > losers like you. That way I'm sure you get the message.


    Strange - you can't count time either! I could have pulled it together
    without even consulting a dictionary, however it is a rather juvenile
    exercise to begin with.


    >>
    >>
    >>> Of course, Linux is the name of an Operating System

    >>
    >>
    >> Wrong. It is the name of the kernel. Come on frankie, you should know
    >> better than that.
    >>
    >>
    >>>>kernel started by Linux Torvolds
    >>>
    >>>Well duh...I've proly known that longer than you.

    >>
    >>
    >> That's entirely possible, however you have not demonstrated that.

    >
    > Who are You?
    > Frank



+ Reply to Thread
Page 2 of 5 FirstFirst 1 2 3 4 ... LastLast