C
Cynic
So the other poster said. So maybe it was a 386 & I was mistaken.
I'm certainly not playing any games, just telling it how I remember.
So the other poster said. So maybe it was a 386 & I was mistaken.
I'm certainly not playing any games, just telling it how I remember.
P
P. Johnson
flatfish+++ said:
Now that's not true. Only inexperienced users or users deliberately trying
to obfuscate things would pick the most difficult, obtuse and dangerous
method, just like on any other platform.
No. If that's what you think, you're missing the point of Linux entirely
and probably shouldn't worry about it.
G
Guest
Cynic said:
Give it up. Your game is over.
Do you actually think that anyone still believes you now?
You are a liar, plain and simple. Nothing more
This (linux and minimum processor) is just so basic knowledge, anyone
claiming to be so involved as you does *not* make such stupid errors
In other words: You are a poser. A liar. And you "know" probably only what
your little sister is telling you
H
Hadron Quark
John Anderton said:
Good man : I agree with you. Works with all Windows installation and one
Linux one. Good to see you contributing back to the Linux "sharing"
mentality.
"I'm alright Jack - it works for me".
The COLA mantra.
A
Andy
Web analytics company OneStat.com says that XP is responsible for
almost 87 percent of all Web usage, while all Windows versions
combined account for 97 percent of Web usage.
According to OneStat.com, the following are the most frequently used
OSs on the Web in the world:
1. Windows XP - 86.80 percent
2. Windows 2000 - 6.09 percent
3. Windows 98 - 2.68 percent
4. Macintosh/ Macintosh Power PC - 2.47 percent
5. Windows Me - 1.09 percent
6. Linux - 0.36 percent
7. Windows NT - 0.24 percent
almost 87 percent of all Web usage, while all Windows versions
combined account for 97 percent of Web usage.
According to OneStat.com, the following are the most frequently used
OSs on the Web in the world:
1. Windows XP - 86.80 percent
2. Windows 2000 - 6.09 percent
3. Windows 98 - 2.68 percent
4. Macintosh/ Macintosh Power PC - 2.47 percent
5. Windows Me - 1.09 percent
6. Linux - 0.36 percent
7. Windows NT - 0.24 percent
K
know code
Cynic said:
So, let me see if I have this right.... you are blaming linux because
the hardware manufacturer that you chose to buy from does not support
linux?
Shouldn't you be pointing your blame at the manufacturer or maybe
yourself because you never done any research to see if the manufacturer
supported linux?
K
know code
Cynic said:
Absolutely, assuming the hardware manufacturer has decided to support
linux. If they haven't then you can't really blame linux for that.
Also, if you buy said hardware without checking if the manufacturer
supports linux, then you only have yourself to blame!
H
Hadron Quark
know code said:
It doesn't look like he is apportioning blame to me : just saying that is
simply doesn't work with Linux.
Nothing new there : always check.
I was pleasantly surprised this morning to see a cheap 14 euro sound
card display on its box that it supports Linux. or Linux supports
it. I'm not sure.
It didn't support optical out though, so it was a no go
G
Guest
Andy said:
How come you trust statistics? Especially those bogus ones?
Did you fabricate it yourself? Because those are the only ones to "trust"
M
Madden
I see no one took up the challenge...
Speaks volumes.
G
Guest
Madden said:
What challenge?
I think "Cynic" is an outright liar.
There is nothing "challenging" about that.
J
Jamie Hart
Err, since when was XP all windows installations?Hadron said:
He says he knows it works with one windows installation and one linux
installation.
It's kind of the opposite to you having trouble in one distro and saying
it's a problem in all.
H
Hadron Quark
Jamie Hart said:
Fair point. But probably covered by the fact that drivers exist for all
HW for all windows versions as a rule.
Anyway, XP is the defacto standard these days after all.
I have never said that. I have said that the problem with the distros is
that it works in some, not in others. And the solutions are different -
if they exist.
--
#ifdef __SMP__
#error "Me no hablo Alpha SMP"
#else
#define irq_enter(cpu, irq) (++local_irq_count[cpu])
#define irq_exit(cpu, irq) (--local_irq_count[cpu])
#endif
-- from kernel 2.1.90, arch/alpha/kernel/irc.c
C
Cynic
That way of thinking does not unfortunately help the end user *at
all*. It's like buying a car that runs only on an unobtainable type
of fuel, and then saying, "It's not the car manufacturer's fault that
service stations don't stock that fuel - you simply need to search
around for somewhere that sells it - I think there's a shop in the
Outer Hebrides."
No, it's not the car manufacturer's *direct* fault. But it's not the
user's fault either, and at the end of the day it's the user who will
get something that they can use easily.
If Linux wants to get a bigger market share, it will need to actively
solicit the peripheral manufacturers to include Linux drivers in their
installs - and if necessary pay the manufacturers to do so.
Either that or, if it is technically possible, write an application
that is capable of automatically changing a Windoze driver to a Linux
driver & installing it.
C
Cynic
I'm not *blaming* anyone. I'm simply stating the *fact* that I cannot
get the hardware working with Linux.
Why should I be doing anything? I have a solution that is acceptable
without going to that hassle or crippling myself by using only a small
subsection of available hardware. I simply use Windoze. Yes, Linux
has some advantages that I wouldn't mind having, but the disadvantage
of not being able to use the hardware I want to use outweighs those
advantages for me.
So what I'll do is to have one removable HDD with Windoze, and another
with Linux. I'll get Linux working with as much as I can, and use
Windoze for things that Linux is unsuitable for and vice versa. I
don't use a computer as a means of promoting this or that OS, or to be
a status symbol, I use it as a tool to do the tasks that *I* want to
carry out. I don't fit flashing lights to my computer, any more that
I would want to fit them to my socket set.
I see no point in being faithful to one OS like supporting a football
team - I get no money from either Windoze or Linux. I'll simply use
whatever does the job the easiest.
C
Cynic
Exactly - I'm not having a contest at all.
It didn't support optical out though, so it was a no go
That's the reason I got the sound card I did as well - I wanted
optical in and out as well as all the inputs on the front of the PC.
The card I got card came with a hardware console that fits in a CD bay
and puts ten I/O connectors and two volume controls (headphone &
microphone) on the front of the 'puter. Also allows me to adjust
everything from an I/R remote keypad, which is great when using the
'puter to show HD movies.
?
=?iso-8859-1?q?hier_k=F6nnt_ihr?=
LOL! - these ****ing lusers never actually "read" the entire question;
usually just the first two or three lines. Then they start blabbering
some incomprehensible nonsense - - or even just repeat everything
that's already been done; demonstrating the incredible ****wittery
that is a Linux Mensa... BWAAAHAAAHAAAAAAHAAAA!!!!!!
S
Steve Firth
<Zzzzzzzz>
And why use a crummy, broken OS like Windoze when you can have a secure,
stable OS with a properly designed GUI? If one wishes to double click on an
icon (gosh, which company came up with that concept? Hint, it wasn't Xerox)
*and* to have something happen reliably afterwards there's a perfectly good
OS available and it's Unix based and wasn't created by Microsoft.
If one wants a stable OS with a number of GUIs available, any one of them
superior to the trash produced by Microsoft then there are many different
flavours of Linux.
If one is a complete ****wit, then there's Windows.
H
Hadron Quark
Cynic said:
You must be warned that saying anything remotely derogatory about Linux
here will cause you to be savaged by the COLA gang.
If you were to say
"Linux is the best thing ever, buu I dont understand why I still need to
manually edit xorg.conf as root to get a bog standard nvidia card to
work"
then you will be labelled a wintroll. Gregory Shearman will laugh and
tell you its so easy his wife could do it and then start talking in nntp
since its such an easy protocol - his granny reads the nntp protocol
before she puts her bed socks on apparently.
Interestingly enough, I am convinced that the loudest, rudest are
actually wintrolls themselves and are only here to make linux look bad
to the outside world. Peter Köhlmann, Mark Kent and William Poster
amongst others merely insult and killfile without any indication that
they actually use or support Linux - their entire modus operandii
appears to be to hunt down newbies and to insult them.
--
<Overfiend> "Oxford University has joined with IBM and the UK
Government to build a sophisticated computing Grid based
on the open standards of Linux that will enable early
screening and diagnosis of breast cancer...." Press
release within.
<Overfiend> In gratitude, the women of the world should all let Linux
developers fondle their breasts, and the lactating ones
should permit developers to drink.
R
Rick
On Sat, 14 Oct 2006 15:34:18 +0200, Hadron Quark wrote:
(snip)
Why do you enjoy looking dishonest and stupid?
(snip)
Why do you enjoy looking dishonest and stupid?