Linux is NOT for Everyone!

[Tom Scott]

Well with Windows Vista Ultimate, I can also:

Brower Websites Safely
Receive and send email
chat on loats of different chat clients
Use thunderbird for newsgroups
Burn CD and DVDs
Watch movies
Listen to music in 5.1 surround sound
Play every game i own
run every program i own... unlike linux

etc etc

You have just told me below what i can do with Windows Vista!

STOP TROLLING... if people want to use Linux then there are most likly
going to know that it is there... in which case a quick google will
bring lots of guides on how to!

 

[Justin]

What distro and what version were you trying to install? It looks like you
tried to install a 64bit version.

As Stephan probably already understands, we discussed Ubuntu 7.04.

What's confusing about:
Standard personal computer (x86 architecture, PentiumTM, CeleronTM,
AthlonTM, SempronTM)

See the "x86" in there?

 

[Peter Foldes]

Justin

What's confusing about:
Standard personal computer (x86 architecture, PentiumTM, CeleronTM,
AthlonTM, SempronTM)

See the "x86" in there?

I also by reading the posts in this thread understood the same as did Doris. His answer was correctly put and there is no need to try and continue a personal flame in these posts. Adults do not tend to do that. Let us put an end to this un-needed game Please

 

[Justin]

"I also by reading the posts in this thread understood the same as did
Doris. His answer was correctly put and there is no need to try and continue
a personal flame in these posts. Adults do not tend to do that. Let us put
an end to this un-needed game Please"

1. I don't care what you understood. I'm waiting for Stephan's reply.
He'll give REAL insight to the issue and not the dribble that came from
Doris' keyboard. Doris is a worthless troll and was responded to as such.
If you have a problem with that then I can direct you to a brick wall to
address the issue.

2. My comment still stands. I made it VERY CLEAR that I downloaded the x86
ISO (TWICE) so please explain to us all how that equals a 64bit OS? Please
explain to us again how Doris was right.

 

[Alias]

"I also by reading the posts in this thread understood the same as did
Doris. His answer was correctly put and there is no need to try and
continue a personal flame in these posts. Adults do not tend to do that.
Let us put an end to this un-needed game Please"

1. I don't care what you understood. I'm waiting for Stephan's reply.
He'll give REAL insight to the issue and not the dribble that came from
Doris' keyboard. Doris is a worthless troll and was responded to as
such. If you have a problem with that then I can direct you to a brick
wall to address the issue.

2. My comment still stands. I made it VERY CLEAR that I downloaded the
x86 ISO (TWICE) so please explain to us all how that equals a 64bit OS?
Please explain to us again how Doris was right.

What's risible is that you can't install Ubuntu when an eight year old
has no problem doing it. I suspect you're either in denial about 64bit
or you have some dorked hardware. Or you're stupid. Take your choice.

Alias

 

[Stephan Rose]

It doesn't run. How about that one? ;p

I downloaded this twice:

Standard personal computer (x86 architecture, PentiumTM, CeleronTM,
AthlonTM, SempronTM)

It wont install on an older P4 I have. When you boot from the CD and
select install it tells me to get the 32bit version as my CPU doesn't
support "long".

Honestly, I really wish I could help you there but...I can't. Never
encountered that error so far so I have no experience dealing with it. You
might wanna give it another shot now that Feisty is out of beta to see if
anything has changed. But beyond that, you'd have to ask for help in the
ubuntu NG or forums as that particular problem is beyond my knowledge.

You mean the second largest computer industry? I guess that's a good
reason
why Windows will remain #1. At least linux supports the #1 industry

Maybe, maybe not. MS has dug quite a nice hole for themselves with DX10
opening up a wide door for OpenGL. All it takes is one major developer to
release a significant title with OpenGL on par with what DX10 can do and
plenty more will follow. It's not a question if OpenGL can do it or not,
it's a question if someone will use it to do it. MS literally handed the
edge to OpenGL on a silver platter with DX10.

If that does happen, which I kind of hope it will, it automatically opens up
the gaming market to Linux as OpenGL is 100% compatible with linux.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Alias]

Well with Windows Vista Ultimate, I can:

Brower Websites Safely

Now, that's funny! I bet you use IE7 to do it!

Alias

 

[Justin]

What's risible is that you can't install Ubuntu when an eight year old has
no problem doing it. I suspect you're either in denial about 64bit or you
have some dorked hardware. Or you're stupid. Take your choice.

Alias

Hum...so many choices!!! Since you're the self proclaimed expert how about
you pick one.

 

[Justin]

Honestly, I really wish I could help you there but...I can't. Never
encountered that error so far so I have no experience dealing with it. You
might wanna give it another shot now that Feisty is out of beta to see if
anything has changed. But beyond that, you'd have to ask for help in the
ubuntu NG or forums as that particular problem is beyond my knowledge.

Well, I downloaded it on the day it was released. Maybe the files/links got
crossed or something.

Maybe, maybe not. MS has dug quite a nice hole for themselves with DX10
opening up a wide door for OpenGL. All it takes is one major developer to
release a significant title with OpenGL on par with what DX10 can do and
plenty more will follow. It's not a question if OpenGL can do it or not,
it's a question if someone will use it to do it. MS literally handed the
edge to OpenGL on a silver platter with DX10.

If that does happen, which I kind of hope it will, it automatically opens
up
the gaming market to Linux as OpenGL is 100% compatible with linux.

Well, we've all heard the promises. Wasn't OpenGL supposed to open the Mac
to the gaming arena? That hasn't happened yet. I've got nothing against
OpenGL. Hell I used to use it frequently with 3DStudioMax. I want whatever
looks best.

Knowing MS they'll figure out ways to tightly integrate DX in other areas to
make sure that game studios need to keep DX on their docket regardless of
using OpenGL thus making the issue moot. They're sneaky like that

 

[Stephan Rose]

Well, I downloaded it on the day it was released. Maybe the files/links
got crossed or something.



Well, we've all heard the promises. Wasn't OpenGL supposed to open the
Mac
to the gaming arena? That hasn't happened yet. I've got nothing against
OpenGL. Hell I used to use it frequently with 3DStudioMax. I want
whatever looks best.

It hasn't happened yet because the gaming market is DirectX and therefore
Windows. Mac is in the same boat as linux gaming-wise.

The second Mac has games linux has them and vice versa.

Knowing MS they'll figure out ways to tightly integrate DX in other areas
to make sure that game studios need to keep DX on their docket regardless
of
using OpenGL thus making the issue moot. They're sneaky like that

They might be sneaky like that but one can only be so sneaky. They can
integrate DX10 as tightly as they want, a few facts remain:

- Vista is needed to use it
- DX10 Hardware is needed to use it
- Requiring either Vista or DX10 currently annihilates the majority of the
potential userbase.

Currently only the 8800 line of cards from nVidia has any DX 10 support, and
I suppose whatever equivalent from nVidia.

The average desktop does not have a 8800 series video card and XP is still
the majority OS. Nor is the average desktop being sold with a 8800 series
video card. Usually only high end desktops are sold with that kind of
hardware.

I doubt that any developer is going to be willing to annihilate their XP
customers for a least a year if not more. Not until Vista is so widespread
that the XP usage is an insignificant minority.

At this point in time, this only solves the OS problem. Even if a user has
Vista, it still does not mean they have DX10 hardware. There are countless
cards that support DX9. DX9 has been supported for I don't know how many
years now! Even Win98 friggin supports it. So there is many many years
worth of hardware capable of using DX9.

There are less than a handful of cards capable of using DX10 and most of
them are rather expensive.

The way I see it, both in terms of OS spread and hardware spread, I think it
will easily take 1-2 years before DX10 is a feasible API for anyone to use.

No single version of DX that I can think of in the past has been as grossly
incompatible with existing hardware and operating systems as DX10 has.

Another factor that isn't helping is that many people have no compelling
reason for DX10 level hardware. In the 90's people upgraded their video
hardware like water because they had compelling reason to do so,
performance! For the average person though, there is no difference between
a couple year old 6XXX series card or a brand new 8800 GTX. Most people
wouldn't even be able to push a 6XXX series card to its limits with their
usage.

High end gamers and people who use 3D Modeling or visualization software
need hardware like the 8800 GTX. The average user usually does not. That
only slows the spread of DX10 capable hardware because the average person
just does not need it and the casual gamer with a bone stock off the shelf
system is not likely to have it. No gaming company can afford to target
only the high-end gamers unless they want to charge over 100 bucks a copy
for their game.

--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Justin]

It hasn't happened yet because the gaming market is DirectX and therefore
Windows. Mac is in the same boat as linux gaming-wise.

OpenGL's been around for a LONG time. They should have been somewhere by
now.

They might be sneaky like that but one can only be so sneaky. They can
integrate DX10 as tightly as they want, a few facts remain:

- Vista is needed to use it
- DX10 Hardware is needed to use it
- Requiring either Vista or DX10 currently annihilates the majority of the
potential userbase.

Currently only the 8800 line of cards from nVidia has any DX 10 support,
and
I suppose whatever equivalent from nVidia.

Not 8800. Series 8. More series 8 cards are coming out or ARE out that
support DX10 8500, 8600. Cheaper as well. DX10 is now completely
affordable for those that can afford new games to being with.

I doubt that any developer is going to be willing to annihilate their XP
customers for a least a year if not more.

Annihilate? Not required. Take Crysis for example. When released it will
support both DX10 and DX9. The DX10 flavor will be a full blown
implementation. IOW, the DX10 version will not be lacking because they
needed to also spend time on a DX9 version.

There are less than a handful of cards capable of using DX10 and most of
them are rather expensive.

Not any more.

The way I see it, both in terms of OS spread and hardware spread, I think
it
will easily take 1-2 years before DX10 is a feasible API for anyone to
use.

Nope. It already is. As I already said there is no reason to ditch DX9
just because you also want to dev DX10.

No single version of DX that I can think of in the past has been as
grossly
incompatible with existing hardware and operating systems as DX10 has.

???

Every version of DX didn’t work with old hardware. In order to use DX9 when
it was released you needed a DX9 card. Otherwise DX9 just gave you DX8
features.

Another factor that isn't helping is that many people have no compelling
reason for DX10 level hardware.

Have you seen DX10 versus DX9 screen shots? If you're a gamer then DX10
alone is reason enough. It looks AMAZING in comparison.

In the 90's people upgraded their video
hardware like water because they had compelling reason to do so,
performance!

You'll change your tune when you see Crysis playing in full spec on an 8800
SLI rig. Unless of course this stuff isn't your cup of tea. Even 2/3's
spec with a 8500 or 8600 will look incredible.

For the average person though, there is no difference between
a couple year old 6XXX series card or a brand new 8800 GTX.

The average person doesn't play bleeding edge games. The average person is
not in question in this thread. The average person doesn't need DX10 or DX9
or DX8 or DX7..... 7? 8? Did we skip a couple numbers or go through them
quickly? I seem to remember 6 then 9.

High end gamers and people who use 3D Modeling or visualization software
need hardware like the 8800 GTX.

The extra memory alone made a MAJOR difference. Plus the speed change in
memory. The upgrade from a 7800 512MB to 8800 was money well spent in my
eyes! The 7800 however was not. That hurt my wallet!

No gaming company can afford to target
only the high-end gamers unless they want to charge over 100 bucks a copy
for their game.

It wont be high end for long. It's already getting cheaper. Plus remember,
a game can be DX9 and DX10.

 

[Bill]

Well with Windows Vista Ultimate, I can also:

Brower Websites Safely
Receive and send email
chat on loats of different chat clients Use thunderbird for newsgroups
Burn CD and DVDs
Watch movies
Listen to music in 5.1 surround sound Play every game i own
run every program i own... unlike linux

etc etc

You have just told me below what i can do with Windows Vista!

STOP TROLLING... if people want to use Linux then there are most likly
going to know that it is there... in which case a quick google will
bring lots of guides on how to!

The main difference is:
Vista Ultimate.....$189 to $378 at NewEgg
Linux..............Free (with a donation of $20 to help them out)
I doubt that you can browse websites safely..there are now over 70,000
websites that have been identified as deliverers of viruses, spyware, and
malware that are Windows specific. www.stopbadware.org
This list is constantly growing and Microsoft is slow in patching.
As I stated currently Windows is better for playing games and running
various professional programs. But for the average user, Linux might
provide ample programming and the programs are mostly free.

 

[Doris Day - MFB]

As Stephan probably already understands, we discussed Ubuntu 7.04.

What's confusing about:
Standard personal computer (x86 architecture, PentiumTM, CeleronTM,
AthlonTM, SempronTM)

Justin,

Sorry, but I was just trying to help. What is confusing to me is the error
you reported ... "it tells me to get the 32bit version as my CPU doesn't
support "long"." It would indicate to me that somehow the install is
confused about the CPU that you have in that box. Why, I don't know?

As to asking what installation version did you download, I asked because you
didn't state the version. Typically Ubuntu is available in the following
versions:

Desktop CD
Server install CD
Alternate install CD

Within each of these versions there are 3 different images available:

PC (Intel x86)
Mac (PowerPC)
64-bit PC (AMD64)
SPARC server install - only in the Server install CD

See the "x86" in there?

Yes, I did see that, but that is available in a number of different
installation CDs, hence my question.

But really Justin, I have to wonder if you really are that interested in
installing it anyways. I've seen you slam Linux so much, it could well be
that your claim to have tried to install Ubuntu, was just another attempt
to slam it and that the "error" you reported, you just found somewhere on
the Net and have quoted, not realizing it doesn't really make sense.

Love and Kisses,
Doris

 

[Justin]

Justin,

Sorry, but I was just trying to help.

That's funny. You'll help a wounded linux bunny but instead of helping a
wounded windows bunny you just blow it away with a shotgun. Gee, thanks.

But really Justin, I have to wonder if you really are that interested in
installing it anyways. I've seen you slam Linux so much, it could well be
that your claim to have tried to install Ubuntu, was just another attempt
to slam it and that the "error" you reported, you just found somewhere on
the Net and have quoted, not realizing it doesn't really make sense.

Oh really? What "about" linux have you seen me slam? I use and like linux
very much. Figure that one out.

 

[Stephan Rose]

OpenGL's been around for a LONG time. They should have been somewhere by
now.

Open is somewhere just not in gaming. But the problem is there are only a
handful of game developers left. The diversity of developers and content
that existed in the early to mid 90's is gone. All you have now are a few
monolithic studios who all target Windows only.

Not 8800. Series 8. More series 8 cards are coming out or ARE out that
support DX10 8500, 8600. Cheaper as well. DX10 is now completely
affordable for those that can afford new games to being with.

Series 8 is what I meant. Good to hear some cheaper alternatives coming out.

Annihilate? Not required. Take Crysis for example. When released it
will
support both DX10 and DX9. The DX10 flavor will be a full blown
implementation. IOW, the DX10 version will not be lacking because they
needed to also spend time on a DX9 version.

Of course not "required". But implementing both DX9 and DX10 is
significantly more work VS using simply one API that can do it both. It
means implementing, debugging and testing 2 seperate render pipelines
instead of one.

Not any more.

Fair enough.

Nope. It already is. As I already said there is no reason to ditch DX9
just because you also want to dev DX10.

Go try to write an engine that supports both APIs and then get back to me if
there is a reason.

???

As far back as I can remember most previous versions of DX would still work
with older hardware. Such as DX9 still working with a DX8 card. Some
features would be missing, of course...but the game would still at least
RUN!

I distinctly remember this because whenever MS released a new version of DX
I would try it the new sample apps and see what would work on my hardware
and what not.

Every version of DX didn’t work with old hardware. In order to use DX9
when
it was released you needed a DX9 card. Otherwise DX9 just gave you DX8
features.



Have you seen DX10 versus DX9 screen shots? If you're a gamer then DX10
alone is reason enough. It looks AMAZING in comparison.

Of course the latest hardware is amazing. I like my 8800 GTX =)

You'll change your tune when you see Crysis playing in full spec on an
8800
SLI rig. Unless of course this stuff isn't your cup of tea. Even 2/3's
spec with a 8500 or 8600 will look incredible.


The average person doesn't play bleeding edge games. The average person
is
not in question in this thread. The average person doesn't need DX10 or
DX9
or DX8 or DX7..... 7? 8? Did we skip a couple numbers or go through
them
quickly? I seem to remember 6 then 9.

Funny then how I know plenty of average people with average hardware that
play bleeding edge games just not with all the bleeding edge eye candy
enabled.

The extra memory alone made a MAJOR difference. Plus the speed change in
memory. The upgrade from a 7800 512MB to 8800 was money well spent in my
eyes! The 7800 however was not. That hurt my wallet!


It wont be high end for long. It's already getting cheaper. Plus
remember, a game can be DX9 and DX10.

Like I said, sure it can be. I am very well aware of that having written
software using DirectX. I am also very well aware therefore of how much of
a pain it would be to implement both. =)


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Justin]

Open is somewhere just not in gaming. But the problem is there are only a
handful of game developers left. The diversity of developers and content
that existed in the early to mid 90's is gone. All you have now are a few
monolithic studios who all target Windows only.

Few?

There is also console. Maybe had OpenGL entered the console market?

Series 8 is what I meant. Good to hear some cheaper alternatives coming
out.

The 256MB GeForce 8600 GTS is set to be around $229, 8600 GT will be $149 to
$159 and the 128MB GeForce 8500 GT will sell as low as $89.


GeForce 8600 GTS — 256 MB GDDR3, 675 MHz core clock, 1000 MHz memory clock
GeForce 8600 GT — 256 MB GDDR3, 540 MHz core clock, 700 MHz memory clock
GeForce 8500 GT — 128 to 256 MB DDR2 or GDDR3, 450 MHz core clock, 700 MHz
memory clock

$90 for DX10, expect most new machines to be DX10 ready very soon.

Of course not "required". But implementing both DX9 and DX10 is
significantly more work VS using simply one API that can do it both. It
means implementing, debugging and testing 2 seperate render pipelines
instead of one.

Perfectly normal. Cross platform is more intensive then this. This should
be just be another days work for them. Figure of speech ;p

Go try to write an engine that supports both APIs and then get back to me
if
there is a reason.

Devs are already doing it. As with anything new it will take time but as
far as they are concerned the API is "feasible".

As far back as I can remember most previous versions of DX would still
work
with older hardware. Such as DX9 still working with a DX8 card. Some
features would be missing, of course...but the game would still at least
RUN!

Wait, are you saying if I have a DX9 card and a DX10 (only) game in Vista
the game wont run? I've not heard any such thing. Google gives me nothing
on the subject. Where have you seen that info? That would certainly be a
major issue.


Well seeing as how there is no full featured software product out yet,
that's a given. As I mentioned about the screenshots, THOSE are compelling
reasons and they'll plastered everywhere once marketing has a reason to
start spending money.


As I already said, the average person does not play games. We're not
talking about the average person. If you mean the average gamer then I
disagree.

Funny then how I know plenty of average people with average hardware that
play bleeding edge games just not with all the bleeding edge eye candy
enabled.

How many people do you know? It would have to be at least 100,000 to put a
very small ding in the gaming industry alone

So, if you asked these people you know if they would spend $90 to make their
games leaps and bounds better they would, on average, say no? What did that
last game cost? $50?

Like I said, sure it can be. I am very well aware of that having written
software using DirectX. I am also very well aware therefore of how much of
a pain it would be to implement both. =)

I go back to my cross platform comment ;p

 

[Stephan Rose]

Few?

There is also console. Maybe had OpenGL entered the console market?

OpenGL *is* in the console market. Both Wii and the PS3 use it.

Perfectly normal. Cross platform is more intensive then this. This
should
be just be another days work for them. Figure of speech ;p

Actually no Cross platform is LESS intensive than this. Cross platfrom
simply requires someone to use OpenGL. =) One API, one rendering pipeline.
And it can do anything both DX9 and DX10 can.

Remember, I write cross platform code =)

Devs are already doing it. As with anything new it will take time but as
far as they are concerned the API is "feasible".

Well I also know Devs in the actual gaming industry who don't exactly share
your views. They think more along my lines. =)

Wait, are you saying if I have a DX9 card and a DX10 (only) game in Vista
the game wont run? I've not heard any such thing. Google gives me
nothing
on the subject. Where have you seen that info? That would certainly be a
major issue.

Come to think of it, that one particular bit I mighta been wrong one. Even I
make mistakes sometimes. You got me on that one. =)

Well seeing as how there is no full featured software product out yet,
that's a given. As I mentioned about the screenshots, THOSE are
compelling reasons and they'll plastered everywhere once marketing has a
reason to start spending money.



As I already said, the average person does not play games. We're not
talking about the average person. If you mean the average gamer then I
disagree.

I'd personally say there are more casual gamers than hard core gamers with
high-end hardware. The casual gamers STILL buy games, just don't play them
as much. =)

How many people do you know? It would have to be at least 100,000 to put
a very small ding in the gaming industry alone

Doesn't matter how many I know in total. What matters is out of the very
varied pool of people I know across multiple totally different games what
percentages are running what type of hardware.

So, if you asked these people you know if they would spend $90 to make
their
games leaps and bounds better they would, on average, say no? What did
that
last game cost? $50?

It's not done with $90 though.
They need to spend $200+ more on Vista to use DX10.
Then is the PC sufficient to run that sloth of an OS? Likely not at any
reasonable speed...so then the other PC upgrades start...

I go back to my cross platform comment ;p

I'll go back to my OpenGL comment and experience implementing cross platform
code.


--
Stephan
2003 Yamaha R6

å›ã®ã“ã¨æ€ã„出ã™æ—¥ãªã‚“ã¦ãªã„ã®ã¯
å›ã®ã“ã¨å¿˜ã‚ŒãŸã¨ããŒãªã„ã‹ã‚‰

 

[Justin]

OpenGL *is* in the console market. Both Wii and the PS3 use it.

Ah, I did not know that. So what you are saying is a game made for the PS3
and the PC by the same game studio is DX for the PC and OpenGL for the PS3?
Hum...Since they can't choose on the PS3 then why not just keep OpenGL only?
Unless DX offers clear advantages over OpenGL.

I'd have to say that making the same game from DX and OpenGL would be harder
then DX9 and DX10.

This doesn't add up.

Actually no Cross platform is LESS intensive than this. Cross platfrom
simply requires someone to use OpenGL. =) One API, one rendering pipeline.
And it can do anything both DX9 and DX10 can.

Remember, I write cross platform code =)

That's all great and fine but that's not the case. Why not? Why are my Wii
and PS3 games for the my PC rehashed in DX?

If it’s so easy to keep OpenGL then why don’t they? Especially when it
comes down to time=money.

Well I also know Devs in the actual gaming industry who don't exactly
share
your views. They think more along my lines. =)

My views on the subject are narrow. I only know of the handful of VERY
SUCCESSFUL game studios that are currently dev'ing DX10.....when it comes to
DX10.

Come to think of it, that one particular bit I mighta been wrong one. Even
I
make mistakes sometimes. You got me on that one. =)

You scared me! Knock it off!

Doesn't matter how many I know in total. What matters is out of the very
varied pool of people I know across multiple totally different games what
percentages are running what type of hardware.

Well, I as well know people that will get Vista alone just for DX10. In
fact that's what they're waiting for. Now that these new cards are out one
of them is even more excited as he didn’t know how he going to swing a DX10.
Another guy is going to get Vista and NO DX10 just to run Halo2. Unless
they hack it for XP.

It's not done with $90 though.

Oh yes it will! Not full spec but like I said, even 2/3 spec will look
great.

They need to spend $200+ more on Vista to use DX10.

Ok.

1. Some will already have Vista.
2. Some will get Vista via a new PC purchase.
3. Some will crack Vista
4. Some will flat out buy Vista.

However, seeing as how Vista will do more then run a single game then that
purchase needs to be spread out ;p

Then is the PC sufficient to run that sloth of an OS? Likely not at any
reasonable speed...so then the other PC upgrades start...

What PC? Now we're getting into speculation. ;p

I'll go back to my OpenGL comment and experience implementing cross
platform
code.

Well, now I again go back on, why don't people actually do that? All these
top game devs can’t possibly be stupid.

 

[Alias]

Hum...so many choices!!! Since you're the self proclaimed expert how
about you pick one.

I have never claimed to be a computer expert. I am a computer user,
albeit with many years experience. It's inconceivable to me that you
can't install Ubuntu when it's so easy to do.

Alias

 

[Justin]

I have never claimed to be a computer expert. I am a computer user, albeit
with many years experience. It's inconceivable to me that you can't
install Ubuntu when it's so easy to do.

Alias

Not really. It's a realistic fault on their part. The fact you can't
conceive that thought only proves how much of a troll you are.