Re: Linux Weaknesses - Ubuntu

This is a discussion on Re: Linux Weaknesses - Ubuntu ; On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote: > If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux viruses > and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable and dangerous > ...

+ Reply to Thread
Page 1 of 4 1 2 3 ... LastLast
Results 1 to 20 of 74

Thread: Re: Linux Weaknesses

  1. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:

    > If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux viruses
    > and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable and dangerous
    > to use.
    >
    > It probably wouldn't even take that many: a couple of hundred over six
    > months or so.
    >
    > The image of linux as safe from viruses would be shattered, and any
    > company that was thinking of switching to linux would think again.
    >
    > It would set back linux by 10 years.


    Linux has been around for 15+ years and still sits at 0.6 percent of the
    desktop market.

    How can you set something back that never got moving in the first place?

    My idea is to include a free Linux LiveCD with every shrinkwrap of Vista as
    a gesture of "good will".

    People will try Linux, destroy their systems, see how bad Linux is and
    never want to use it again.
    Nothing kills a product faster than bad press and people remember when they
    get a terrible product and will not venture that path again.
    They also tend to tell their friends.

    I sent this idea to Microsoft a while back.
    We shall see what happens but I think it's brilliant!

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  2. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:
    >
    >> If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux viruses
    >> and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable and dangerous
    >> to use.
    >>
    >> It probably wouldn't even take that many: a couple of hundred over six
    >> months or so.
    >>
    >> The image of linux as safe from viruses would be shattered, and any
    >> company that was thinking of switching to linux would think again.
    >>
    >> It would set back linux by 10 years.

    >
    > Linux has been around for 15+ years and still sits at 0.6 percent of the
    > desktop market.
    >
    > How can you set something back that never got moving in the first place?
    >
    > My idea is to include a free Linux LiveCD with every shrinkwrap of Vista as
    > a gesture of "good will".
    >
    > People will try Linux, destroy their systems, see how bad Linux is and
    > never want to use it again.
    > Nothing kills a product faster than bad press and people remember when they
    > get a terrible product and will not venture that path again.
    > They also tend to tell their friends.
    >
    > I sent this idea to Microsoft a while back.
    > We shall see what happens but I think it's brilliant!
    >

    never work

  3. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:57:43 +1000, Vote out Brendan Nelson wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:
    >>
    >>> If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux viruses
    >>> and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable and dangerous
    >>> to use.
    >>>
    >>> It probably wouldn't even take that many: a couple of hundred over six
    >>> months or so.
    >>>
    >>> The image of linux as safe from viruses would be shattered, and any
    >>> company that was thinking of switching to linux would think again.
    >>>
    >>> It would set back linux by 10 years.

    >>
    >> Linux has been around for 15+ years and still sits at 0.6 percent of the
    >> desktop market.
    >>
    >> How can you set something back that never got moving in the first place?
    >>
    >> My idea is to include a free Linux LiveCD with every shrinkwrap of Vista as
    >> a gesture of "good will".
    >>
    >> People will try Linux, destroy their systems, see how bad Linux is and
    >> never want to use it again.
    >> Nothing kills a product faster than bad press and people remember when they
    >> get a terrible product and will not venture that path again.
    >> They also tend to tell their friends.
    >>
    >> I sent this idea to Microsoft a while back.
    >> We shall see what happens but I think it's brilliant!
    >>

    > never work


    I dunno.....
    I think it will.

    For example I got a free Quickbooks CD when I bought some hardware a few
    years ago.
    I gave it a try and found out, later of course, that it was trial ware.
    I had an awful time removing it from my system.

    Guess what financial program I will *never* use?
    Yep.
    Quickbooks.

    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  4. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:57:43 +1000, Vote out Brendan Nelson wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:
    >>
    >>> If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux
    >>> viruses and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable and
    >>> dangerous to use.



    Wasn't Larry Ellison booted, or something? Anyhow, what would he have
    against Linux given that his company has its very own Linux distro?


    -Thufir

  5. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    > On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:57:43 +1000, Vote out Brendan Nelson wrote:
    >
    >> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:
    >>>
    >>>> If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux viruses
    >>>> and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable and dangerous
    >>>> to use.
    >>>>
    >>>> It probably wouldn't even take that many: a couple of hundred over six
    >>>> months or so.
    >>>>
    >>>> The image of linux as safe from viruses would be shattered, and any
    >>>> company that was thinking of switching to linux would think again.
    >>>>
    >>>> It would set back linux by 10 years.
    >>> Linux has been around for 15+ years and still sits at 0.6 percent of the
    >>> desktop market.
    >>>
    >>> How can you set something back that never got moving in the first place?
    >>>
    >>> My idea is to include a free Linux LiveCD with every shrinkwrap of Vista as
    >>> a gesture of "good will".
    >>>
    >>> People will try Linux, destroy their systems, see how bad Linux is and
    >>> never want to use it again.
    >>> Nothing kills a product faster than bad press and people remember when they
    >>> get a terrible product and will not venture that path again.
    >>> They also tend to tell their friends.
    >>>
    >>> I sent this idea to Microsoft a while back.
    >>> We shall see what happens but I think it's brilliant!
    >>>

    >> never work

    >
    > I dunno.....
    > I think it will.
    >
    > For example I got a free Quickbooks CD when I bought some hardware a few
    > years ago.
    > I gave it a try and found out, later of course, that it was trial ware.
    > I had an awful time removing it from my system.



    You found uninstalling a program difficult? That says something about
    your expertise then eh?

  6. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:47:21 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:57:43 +1000, Vote out Brendan Nelson wrote:


    >> For example I got a free Quickbooks CD when I bought some hardware a
    >> few years ago.
    >> I gave it a try and found out, later of course, that it was trial ware.
    >> I had an awful time removing it from my system.

    >
    >
    > You found uninstalling a program difficult? That says something about
    > your expertise then eh?


    And something for the OS.

    --
    Andy Jacobs

  7. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:47:21 -0500, Charlie Tame wrote:

    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Sun, 20 Jul 2008 01:57:43 +1000, Vote out Brendan Nelson wrote:
    >>
    >>> Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:
    >>>>
    >>>>> If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux viruses
    >>>>> and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable and dangerous
    >>>>> to use.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It probably wouldn't even take that many: a couple of hundred over six
    >>>>> months or so.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> The image of linux as safe from viruses would be shattered, and any
    >>>>> company that was thinking of switching to linux would think again.
    >>>>>
    >>>>> It would set back linux by 10 years.
    >>>> Linux has been around for 15+ years and still sits at 0.6 percent of the
    >>>> desktop market.
    >>>>
    >>>> How can you set something back that never got moving in the first place?
    >>>>
    >>>> My idea is to include a free Linux LiveCD with every shrinkwrap of Vista as
    >>>> a gesture of "good will".
    >>>>
    >>>> People will try Linux, destroy their systems, see how bad Linux is and
    >>>> never want to use it again.
    >>>> Nothing kills a product faster than bad press and people remember when they
    >>>> get a terrible product and will not venture that path again.
    >>>> They also tend to tell their friends.
    >>>>
    >>>> I sent this idea to Microsoft a while back.
    >>>> We shall see what happens but I think it's brilliant!
    >>>>
    >>> never work

    >>
    >> I dunno.....
    >> I think it will.
    >>
    >> For example I got a free Quickbooks CD when I bought some hardware a few
    >> years ago.
    >> I gave it a try and found out, later of course, that it was trial ware.
    >> I had an awful time removing it from my system.

    >
    >
    > You found uninstalling a program difficult? That says something about
    > your expertise then eh?


    Idiot.
    FULLY removing all the crap the defective un-installer program left around,
    probably on purpose.

    Think Symantec and you'll get the idea, maybe.

    You don't seem to be the sharpest knife in the drawer.
    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  8. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    Vote out Brendan Nelson wrote:
    > Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >> On Tue, 15 Jul 2008 01:50:04 +0200 (CEST), Nomen Nescio wrote:
    >>
    >>> If I were Steve Jobs or Larry Ellison, I would manufacture linux
    >>> viruses and pump them into the wild to make linux look vulnerable
    >>> and dangerous to use.
    >>>
    >>> It probably wouldn't even take that many: a couple of hundred over
    >>> six months or so.
    >>>
    >>> The image of linux as safe from viruses would be shattered, and any
    >>> company that was thinking of switching to linux would think again.
    >>>
    >>> It would set back linux by 10 years.

    >>
    >> Linux has been around for 15+ years and still sits at 0.6 percent of the
    >> desktop market.
    >>
    >> How can you set something back that never got moving in the first place?
    >>
    >> My idea is to include a free Linux LiveCD with every shrinkwrap of
    >> Vista as
    >> a gesture of "good will".
    >>
    >> People will try Linux, destroy their systems, see how bad Linux is and
    >> never want to use it again.
    >> Nothing kills a product faster than bad press and people remember
    >> when they
    >> get a terrible product and will not venture that path again.
    >> They also tend to tell their friends.
    >>
    >> I sent this idea to Microsoft a while back.
    >> We shall see what happens but I think it's brilliant!
    >>

    > never work

    You sound uninformed, childish, and maybe around 18 or 19 years old.
    For you to hate Linux so bad tells me that you test drove it and didn't
    have the competence to master the terminal or just sat there wondering
    what to do now - but you wanted it bad enough to try it didn't you?
    Ubuntu Linux is on the market to date and shipped out on Dell PC's.
    while Microsoft just pulled Vista off the market because of a profit
    plunged.

    http://www.dell.com/content/topics/s...125&lid=519235

    If it wasn't for Unix, you wouldn't be online AT ALL. Microsoft can't
    even run on the net without Unix/Linux. Nothing digital runs without it
    - cell phone servers, dns servers, electric meter, gas meter, water
    meter, our Satellite and much more than meets the eye. If it wasn't for
    Unix/Linux, you couldn't have made such a stupid post.

    WorthyOfUrAttn

  9. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    If it wasn't for Unix, you wouldn't be online AT ALL. Microsoft can't
    > even run on the net without Unix/Linux. Nothing digital runs without it
    > - cell phone servers, dns servers, electric meter, gas meter, water
    > meter, our Satellite and much more than meets the eye. If it wasn't for
    > Unix/Linux, you couldn't have made such a stupid post.
    >
    > WorthyOfUrAttn



    I totally agree. Ive used windows since win 3.xx. Started using computers
    in 1982 (the bbc micro, speccy). Windows is OK if you want it to just run,
    and your not interested in keeping the brain cells working by learning, as
    windows makes you lazy.

    Linux on the other hand, makes you learn. Im dual booting with win xp and
    ubuntu 7.10. I find Ubuntu probably one of the easiest, but was hard work
    learning. But it was well worth the work. Microsoft only made it, because
    bill gates saw a chance and took it. fair play to the bloke, thats how
    good business people make it, they have the right product at the right
    time. And it cant be that crap else another OS would have been no. 1.

    The reason all the hackers get into windows is because its used by 90% of
    the pc users. Hacker, script kiddies and scammers want a fast buck, get in
    get out, its that simple, so they learn how to hack what ever os is out
    there, which will reap the biggest profit in the shortest time. Hence why
    they find flaws in windows. Im sure its not just about "Writing a bad OS",
    its also finding the cracks. I think that no OS is 100% safe. Linux is
    just safer, at the moment.

  10. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:54:44 +0100, Confused Donkey wrote:


    >
    > I totally agree. Ive used windows since win 3.xx. Started using computers
    > in 1982 (the bbc micro, speccy). Windows is OK if you want it to just run,
    > and your not interested in keeping the brain cells working by learning, as
    > windows makes you lazy.


    Windows allows you to use the common software that you need to do your
    work.
    It's most likely what you use during your day job.
    It's most likely what is used at your college.
    Etc...

    It has nothing to do with being lazy, it's all about using the
    APPLICATIONS.

    > Linux on the other hand, makes you learn.


    Great if you are into that kind of stuff.
    My Doctor, accountant,cleaning lady,etc want to run their business and they
    don't care how a computer works.

    > Im dual booting with win xp and
    > ubuntu 7.10. I find Ubuntu probably one of the easiest, but was hard work
    > learning. But it was well worth the work.


    Good for you.
    Knowledge is always a good thing but see above for how most people feel
    about computers.
    Computers have become more of an appliance, like a microwave for example.
    Do you think people care how a microwave works?
    Of course not, they just want to cook with it.
    Same thing for most people and the computer.


    > Microsoft only made it, because
    > bill gates saw a chance and took it. fair play to the bloke, thats how
    > good business people make it, they have the right product at the right
    > time. And it cant be that crap else another OS would have been no. 1.


    It was timing.

    > The reason all the hackers get into windows is because its used by 90% of
    > the pc users. Hacker, script kiddies and scammers want a fast buck, get in
    > get out, its that simple, so they learn how to hack what ever os is out
    > there, which will reap the biggest profit in the shortest time. Hence why
    > they find flaws in windows. Im sure its not just about "Writing a bad OS",
    > its also finding the cracks. I think that no OS is 100% safe. Linux is
    > just safer, at the moment.


    It's mostly due to the stupidity of the users.
    If Linux ever becomes more popular on the desktop, the fun will begin.


    --
    Moshe Goldfarb
    Collector of soaps from around the globe.
    Please visit The Hall of Linux Idiots:
    http://linuxidiots.blogspot.com/

  11. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On 2008-08-04, Confused Donkey wrote:
    > If it wasn't for Unix, you wouldn't be online AT ALL. Microsoft can't
    >> even run on the net without Unix/Linux. Nothing digital runs without it
    >> - cell phone servers, dns servers, electric meter, gas meter, water
    >> meter, our Satellite and much more than meets the eye. If it wasn't for
    >> Unix/Linux, you couldn't have made such a stupid post.
    >>
    >> WorthyOfUrAttn

    >
    >
    > I totally agree. Ive used windows since win 3.xx. Started using computers
    > in 1982 (the bbc micro, speccy). Windows is OK if you want it to just run,
    > and your not interested in keeping the brain cells working by learning, as
    > windows makes you lazy.
    >
    > Linux on the other hand, makes you learn. Im dual booting with win xp and
    > ubuntu 7.10. I find Ubuntu probably one of the easiest, but was hard work
    > learning. But it was well worth the work. Microsoft only made it, because
    > bill gates saw a chance and took it. fair play to the bloke, thats how
    > good business people make it, they have the right product at the right
    > time. And it cant be that crap else another OS would have been no. 1.
    >
    > The reason all the hackers get into windows is because its used by 90% of
    > the pc users. Hacker, script kiddies and scammers want a fast buck, get in


    ....and it's CRAP.

    There have been platforms in the past that WISH they had as many users
    as Linux does now (even under the worst Lemming troll estimates) and
    they have been plagued by malware of ALL KINDS.

    If you build it, they will come and break into it.

    It doesn't how matter how ubiquitious you are.

    > get out, its that simple, so they learn how to hack what ever os is out
    > there, which will reap the biggest profit in the shortest time. Hence why
    > they find flaws in windows. Im sure its not just about "Writing a bad OS",
    > its also finding the cracks. I think that no OS is 100% safe. Linux is
    > just safer, at the moment.


    Linux is remarkably safer. It's built based off of a better template.
    It's design is not intentionally sabotaged by poorly thought out ideas
    and notions of convenience.

    Microsoft goes out of it's way above and beyond anyone else to be stupid.

    That's why Windows is the leader in malware. They work at it.

    --
    Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
    better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
    want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
    rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  12. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:54:44 +0100, Confused Donkey wrote:

    > If it wasn't for Unix, you wouldn't be online AT ALL. Microsoft can't
    >> even run on the net without Unix/Linux. Nothing digital runs without
    >> it - cell phone servers, dns servers, electric meter, gas meter, water
    >> meter, our Satellite and much more than meets the eye. If it wasn't
    >> for Unix/Linux, you couldn't have made such a stupid post.
    >>
    >> WorthyOfUrAttn

    >
    >
    > I totally agree. Ive used windows since win 3.xx. Started using
    > computers in 1982 (the bbc micro, speccy). Windows is OK if you want it
    > to just run, and your not interested in keeping the brain cells working
    > by learning, as windows makes you lazy.


    Well computers COULD make live an awful lot easier!
    I think that is the purpose of computers in the first place,
    keeping your brain cells working isn't a very good argument
    for Linux here.
    Linux could do a whole lot better if those programmers would listen for
    once to people which simply want to use a computer instead of learning to
    program!
    Starting to listen to well motivated critism would help a lot too.
    So IMHO !! linux could have been a 100 times better by now with
    less then 1% of the effort which is spent on all linux flavors.

    Edmund




  13. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:31:56 +0000, Edmund wrote:

    > On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:54:44 +0100, Confused Donkey wrote:
    >
    >> If it wasn't for Unix, you wouldn't be online AT ALL. Microsoft can't
    >>> even run on the net without Unix/Linux. Nothing digital runs without
    >>> it - cell phone servers, dns servers, electric meter, gas meter, water
    >>> meter, our Satellite and much more than meets the eye. If it wasn't
    >>> for Unix/Linux, you couldn't have made such a stupid post.
    >>>
    >>> WorthyOfUrAttn

    >>
    >>
    >> I totally agree. Ive used windows since win 3.xx. Started using
    >> computers in 1982 (the bbc micro, speccy). Windows is OK if you want it
    >> to just run, and your not interested in keeping the brain cells working
    >> by learning, as windows makes you lazy.

    >
    > Well computers COULD make live an awful lot easier! I think that is the
    > purpose of computers in the first place, keeping your brain cells
    > working isn't a very good argument for Linux here.
    > Linux could do a whole lot better if those programmers would listen for
    > once to people which simply want to use a computer instead of learning
    > to program!
    > Starting to listen to well motivated critism would help a lot too. So
    > IMHO !! linux could have been a 100 times better by now with less then
    > 1% of the effort which is spent on all linux flavors.
    >
    > Edmund


    By percentage, very little effort goes into distro packaging, as opposed
    to the effort that goes into the app/utility development.



    --
    Rick

  14. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On 2008-08-04, Edmund wrote:
    > On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:54:44 +0100, Confused Donkey wrote:
    >
    >> If it wasn't for Unix, you wouldn't be online AT ALL. Microsoft can't
    >>> even run on the net without Unix/Linux. Nothing digital runs without
    >>> it - cell phone servers, dns servers, electric meter, gas meter, water
    >>> meter, our Satellite and much more than meets the eye. If it wasn't
    >>> for Unix/Linux, you couldn't have made such a stupid post.
    >>>
    >>> WorthyOfUrAttn

    >>
    >>
    >> I totally agree. Ive used windows since win 3.xx. Started using
    >> computers in 1982 (the bbc micro, speccy). Windows is OK if you want it
    >> to just run, and your not interested in keeping the brain cells working
    >> by learning, as windows makes you lazy.

    >
    > Well computers COULD make live an awful lot easier!
    > I think that is the purpose of computers in the first place,
    > keeping your brain cells working isn't a very good argument
    > for Linux here.
    > Linux could do a whole lot better if those programmers would listen for
    > once to people which simply want to use a computer instead of learning to
    > program!


    Programming is nothing more than telling the computer EXACTLY what
    you want done. It can be done at a very highly technical level very
    close to the hardware or it can be done at a higher level layer in
    a more abstract manner.

    > Starting to listen to well motivated critism would help a lot too.
    > So IMHO !! linux could have been a 100 times better by now with
    > less then 1% of the effort which is spent on all linux flavors.
    >
    > Edmund
    >
    >
    >



    --
    Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
    better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
    want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
    rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  15. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On 2008-08-04, Rick wrote:
    > On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 16:31:56 +0000, Edmund wrote:
    >
    >> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:54:44 +0100, Confused Donkey wrote:
    >>
    >>> If it wasn't for Unix, you wouldn't be online AT ALL. Microsoft can't
    >>>> even run on the net without Unix/Linux. Nothing digital runs without
    >>>> it - cell phone servers, dns servers, electric meter, gas meter, water
    >>>> meter, our Satellite and much more than meets the eye. If it wasn't
    >>>> for Unix/Linux, you couldn't have made such a stupid post.
    >>>>
    >>>> WorthyOfUrAttn
    >>>
    >>>
    >>> I totally agree. Ive used windows since win 3.xx. Started using
    >>> computers in 1982 (the bbc micro, speccy). Windows is OK if you want it
    >>> to just run, and your not interested in keeping the brain cells working
    >>> by learning, as windows makes you lazy.

    >>
    >> Well computers COULD make live an awful lot easier! I think that is the
    >> purpose of computers in the first place, keeping your brain cells
    >> working isn't a very good argument for Linux here.
    >> Linux could do a whole lot better if those programmers would listen for
    >> once to people which simply want to use a computer instead of learning
    >> to program!
    >> Starting to listen to well motivated critism would help a lot too. So
    >> IMHO !! linux could have been a 100 times better by now with less then
    >> 1% of the effort which is spent on all linux flavors.
    >>
    >> Edmund

    >
    > By percentage, very little effort goes into distro packaging, as opposed
    > to the effort that goes into the app/utility development.


    One of the trolls just complained about this very thing:

    How some distros are nothing more than a package list.

    OTOH, if Mark hired some graphic artists that could be very handy.
    A few well done bits of art in the right places could go a long way.

    --
    Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
    better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
    want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
    rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  16. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    Ezekiel wrote:

    > "Confused Donkey" wrote in message
    > newsan.2008.08.04.15.47.06.698526@wartydog.invalid...
    >>>
    >>> Windows allows you to use the common software that you need to do your
    >>> work.
    >>> It's most likely what you use during your day job.
    >>> It's most likely what is used at your college.
    >>> Etc...

    >>
    >> So what if windows is used most. Linux also has common software, that
    >> allows you to do the same work but under linux, otherwise there is wine
    >> or crossover

    >
    > Wine and crossover are a pain to configure and use. If people need to go
    > through all of these hassles then why just not run Windows natively.
    >


    You have obviously never done so yourself, otherwise you would not talk that
    gibberish balderdash. Both are fairly easy to setup, even a moron like you
    would come along quite well

    < snip more pure, unadultered bull**** >
    --
    Microsoft? Is that some kind of a toilet paper?


  17. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    >
    > I was agreeing, you moron.
    >
    > I've wasted enough time with your babble....
    >
    > Go back to vi and your compiler...


    Oh you masterful hunk of ****e, I bet that made you feel good. Got a
    stiffie now have you ? The dog might get lucky as well tonight, or do you
    have a cat ?


  18. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On 2008-08-04, Ezekiel wrote:
    > "Confused Donkey" wrote in message
    > newsan.2008.08.04.15.47.06.698526@wartydog.invalid...
    >>>
    >>> Windows allows you to use the common software that you need to do your
    >>> work.
    >>> It's most likely what you use during your day job.
    >>> It's most likely what is used at your college.
    >>> Etc...

    >>
    >> So what if windows is used most. Linux also has common software, that
    >> allows you to do the same work but under linux, otherwise there is wine or
    >> crossover

    >
    > Wine and crossover are a pain to configure and use. If people need to go
    > through all of these hassles then why just not run Windows natively.


    Lets see...

    Installing crossover is a simple matter of running something along the
    lines of "setup-crosover". Installing a new app is a little more complicated.
    You go into the Applications menu and select Crossover and then "install
    windows software". Then follow the dialog boxes.

    >
    >
    >>> It has nothing to do with being lazy, it's all about using the
    >>> APPLICATIONS.

    >>
    >> It is being lazy. People want it to just work and dont give a rats arse
    >> about the workings.

    >
    > Correct conclusion but for the wrong reason. It's not about "being lazy" -
    > it's about priorities and efficiency. It would be ridiculously inefficient
    > to have your "widget salesmen" spend his or her time learning about the
    > "inner workings" of their linux OS when they should be spending their time


    ....which is of course a total bull**** argument.

    [deletia]

    --
    Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
    better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
    want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
    rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

  19. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    In comp.os.linux.advocacy, someone claiming to be chrisv

    wrote
    on Mon, 4 Aug 2008 11:30:12 -0700
    <48974b47$0$1844$c3e8da3@news.astraweb.com>:
    > Confused Donkey wrote:
    >> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:26:34 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2008-08-04, John J wrote:
    >>>> "Confused Donkey" wrote in message
    >>>> newsan.2008.08.04.15.47.06.698526@wartydog.invalid...


    [crunch]

    >>>> Very funny, Confused Donkey, your name says it all. MG has it
    >>>> exactly correct, most people use Windows because it works out of
    >>>> the box. Users
    >>>
    >>> ...it's funny you should mention that.
    >>>
    >>> I had to install a USB camera for a Doctor so she could use it on
    >>> her Windows box.
    >>>

    >> I have a digital camera (USB) just plugged it in, switched it on, and
    >> screw me it worked, out of the box, aint that sweet !!!
    >>

    >
    > If linux supported it, it must be a very, very, old camera.
    >


    I used to have a Brownie[*] running around. Is that old enough? :-P

    http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Brownie_%28camera%29

    I'll admit to some curiosity, but a Google on "Linux USB camera support"
    coughed up the interesting submission

    http://www.saillard.org/linux/pwc/

    and

    http://qce-ga.sourceforge.net/

    The Winvocates will of course be horrified at the picture
    of the bearded pipesmoking individual documented in

    http://www.theinquirer.net/en/inquir...35-usb-webcams

    who apparently has been able to dope out in sufficient
    technical detail an entire family of about 235 webcams,
    with details at http://mxhaard.free.fr/spca5xx.html ,
    to implement a fair amount of functionality therein.
    [*] the one I have (had?) matches most closely the Hawkeye
    Brownie, though I don't have the flash attachment.

    --
    #191, ewill3@earthlink.net
    Windows Vista. Because a BSOD is just so 20th century; why not
    try our new color changing variant?
    ** Posted from http://www.teranews.com **

  20. Re: Linux Weaknesses

    On 2008-08-04, chrisv wrote:
    > Confused Donkey wrote:
    >> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 12:26:34 -0500, JEDIDIAH wrote:
    >>
    >>> On 2008-08-04, John J wrote:
    >>>> "Confused Donkey" wrote in message
    >>>> newsan.2008.08.04.15.47.06.698526@wartydog.invalid...
    >>>>> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 11:28:48 -0400, Moshe Goldfarb. wrote:
    >>>>>
    >>>>>> On Mon, 04 Aug 2008 15:54:44 +0100, Confused Donkey wrote:

    [deletia]
    >>>> Very funny, Confused Donkey, your name says it all. MG has it
    >>>> exactly correct, most people use Windows because it works out of
    >>>> the box. Users
    >>>
    >>> ...it's funny you should mention that.
    >>>
    >>> I had to install a USB camera for a Doctor so she could use it on
    >>> her Windows box.
    >>>

    >> I have a digital camera (USB) just plugged it in, switched it on, and
    >> screw me it worked, out of the box, aint that sweet !!!
    >>

    >
    > If linux supported it, it must be a very, very, old camera.


    USB? USB cameras are mundane these days. It's been a LONG time
    since digital cameras were problematic under Linux. Most days, cameras
    don't engage in a lot of proprietary stupidity. USB has been helpful
    in that regard.

    With my last camera I was so busy worried about the features I
    wanted that I forgot to double check for "compatability". It turned
    out to be no problem at all. Works like a charm.

    --
    Sure, I could use iTunes even under Linux. However, I have |||
    better things to do with my time than deal with how iTunes doesn't / | \
    want to play nicely with everyone else's data (namely mine). I'd
    rather create a DVD using those Linux apps we're told don't exist.

    Posted Via Usenet.com Premium Usenet Newsgroup Services
    ----------------------------------------------------------
    http://www.usenet.com

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