J
John Locke
So you're implying that Linux users are very advanced comparedThe beings that run Linsux are not even carbon based life forms!
to Microsoft users ?
So you're implying that Linux users are very advanced comparedThe beings that run Linsux are not even carbon based life forms!
Some people, like me, like both worlds. I have a mix of Linux &My take, people endlessly evangelizing for Macs or Linux should be
treated as the TROLLS they are. This is a Microsoft support group for
Vista. Not some other browser, not some other operating system.
Robert said:You are assuming that a life form based on some other structure is more
advanced. How can you tell until you discover and study such beings?
Good Point !You are assuming that a life form based on some other structure is more
advanced. How can you tell until you discover and study such beings?
Bill said:When I first started playing with Linux in 2003 (Debian Woody and
So . . . tell me again why Linux is better than Vista?
Bill said:This is a public newsgroup on Usenet...You can wish all you want.
Because it is a public newsgroup, we are not limited to what you or
Microsoft would like to express here. Many of us are also Windows users,
disillusioned windows users. Why shouldnt we offer hope to someone who
has reinstalled Vista five or six times, and still cant get the damn
thing to work..I installed PCLINUXOS in less than 30 minutes on a dual
boot windows machine and everything is working perfectly...You can not
say the same for Vista.
Bill said:This is a public newsgroup on Usenet...You can wish all you want.
Because it is a public newsgroup, we are not limited to what you or
Microsoft would like to express here. Many of us are also Windows users,
disillusioned windows users. Why shouldnt we offer hope to someone who
has reinstalled Vista five or six times, and still cant get the damn
thing to work..I installed PCLINUXOS in less than 30 minutes on a dual
boot windows machine and everything is working perfectly...You can not
say the same for Vista.
I had everything onto one partition which is bad. Old windows habit
since it is virtually impossible there to keep the OS isolated.
So I reinstalled Ubuntu, setup the partitions the way I liked them (32 gigs
for the OS / Application partition) and the remainder 260 gigs for /home
which is where all user data goes. Perfect!
Install took about 10 minutes...
Of course, loads in 1024x768 VESA driver...incredibly slow...
Then, unlike you, I went to my manufacturers website (nvidia in my case)
downloaded the video driver...installed it...reboot...ohh..lookie here!
1600x1200 and running at full speed.
This now about 20 minutes later...and now...I'm done beyond adding little
add on's I like. Beryl took another few minutes to download and add to auto
start.
So yea, you *might* want to consider installing the appropriate graphics
card driver on your wife's laptop..that should improve performance
drastically.
Saws are too hard to use.--------------- ---- --- -- - - - -
You just confirmed what I experienced years ago with seven different
flavors of Linux. Basically Linux is a toy for wannabe geeks
Linux versions often aren't stable, they often have more issues then
Windows. There is little worthwhile support for any flavor. Finding
device drivers is at times next to impossible
Saws are too hard to use.--------------- ---- --- -- - - - -
cquirke (MVP Windows shell/user) said:I remember an article stating that only 10% of program code was
actually there to do the work; the rest was UI for the user.
The inference was that this was a "bloat" problem.
But what computers and software do, is to bridge between the user's
conceptualization of what they are trying to do, and what the machine
has to actually do to accomplish that end.
If you can conceptualize what you're trying to do in terms that are
closer to the machine - e.g. "I want to edit a text file" rather than
"I want to apply for a job" - then you need less software. You can
probably enter a command with parameters, rather than rely on a
desktop icon launching some sort of wizard.
As hardware gets more capable, we have less need for very lean code
that requires the user to interact almost at the raw code level, and
more need for software that abstracts the mechanics behind a GUI,
wizards, canned templates, auto-formatting logic, logic to
automatically deduce the appropriate file formats, etc.
Linux is "lean" in the sense that the GUI simply doesn't exist for
many tasks. Install Ubuntu and decide you want to stop it dialing up
after every boot, or that you want to edit the Grub boot manager's
defaults and timeouts... you're up to your elbows in command line
syntax (that looks like modem line noise) in no time at all.
Linux certainly is used for serious work, all the time - even if
retail s(oft)ware e.g. as Symantec etc. are conspicuously absent.
The chances are your ADSL router is running Linux, your MemTest RAM
diagnostic boots from Linux, and you may have Linux embedded in other
intelligent peripherals. It's generally a good choice when you want
to run a limited set of well-defined jobs on a "black box", including
servers, or when your computing needs are so intense that you need
every ounce of power devoted to "the work", without UI overhead.
Saws are too hard to use.
Be easier to use!
cquirke said:On Sun, 11 Mar 2007 13:52:45 +0100, Stephan Rose
You're joking! I've been building multi-volume Windows installations
from the DOS and Win3.yuk days right through to Vista RTM; it's been
my standard procedure for well over a decade now...
The tricky think is when you move from a platform you know really
well, to one you don't know at all.
I'd find it really easy to download device drivers from a good PC,
carry them over on a USB stick to the new one, and apply them - in
Windows. The same task in *NIX would have me stumped.
That says more about me than *NIX, of course... but it's a problem
that applies to anyone who knows one platform far better than another,
in one direction or the other.
On partitions; what bugs me about *some* Linux distros is that they
use 3 separate partitions, thus 3/4 of the partition table, without
the elegance of logical volumes within a single partition.
cquirke said:I remember an article stating that only 10% of program code was
actually there to do the work; the rest was UI for the user.
The inference was that this was a "bloat" problem.
But what computers and software do, is to bridge between the user's
conceptualization of what they are trying to do, and what the machine
has to actually do to accomplish that end.
If you can conceptualize what you're trying to do in terms that are
closer to the machine - e.g. "I want to edit a text file" rather than
"I want to apply for a job" - then you need less software. You can
probably enter a command with parameters, rather than rely on a
desktop icon launching some sort of wizard.
As hardware gets more capable, we have less need for very lean code
that requires the user to interact almost at the raw code level, and
more need for software that abstracts the mechanics behind a GUI,
wizards, canned templates, auto-formatting logic, logic to
automatically deduce the appropriate file formats, etc.
Mike said:That was the original concept of Linux.. a barebones, yet highly capable
OS that could be easily customized for 'the' task in hand..
The Linux trolls in here quote the original mandate for Linux, but for a
very different product to the original concept.. the most popular distros
for personal desktop use are as bogged down with GUI and programs as ever
Windows is.. now, Linux Distos have minimum memory and disk space
requirements approaching Windows minimums.. of course, the trolls wouldn't
know this, having only recently discovered Linux in its prettier forms..
The most important advantage of Linux vs. Vista is that users don't have
to pay a fat licensing fee, sign in, get their license validated, and
then subject their systems to a monitoring process by which Microsoft
attempts to detect violations of the license agreement and/or IP
copyrights.
I don't trust Microsoft any more than they trust me, and I will not put
up with Vista's surveillance.
Your problems reflect the biggest weakness in Linux -- hardware
incompatibility. When you stop to think about it, is it surprising that
Windows, with 95+ percent market share, has better driver support than
Linux, with 2 or 3 percent?
I'm having a great experience with Ubuntu on a couple of machines that
are 3-4 years old.
For your wife's old computer, I suggest you try DSL (Damn Small Linux).
The developers are aiming for a compact OS that fits on a bootable USB
pen drive, but DSL also installs on a hard drive. I have had good luck
installing it on a couple of machines with sub-ghz CPUs and obsolete
video cards.