?
=?ISO-8859-1?Q?Erik_Wikstr=F6m?=
Tried to re-start the installation from scratch?
Tried to re-start the installation from scratch?
H
Homer J. Simpson
Wrong answer.
Actually, for a lot of people, it's the right answer. They'll give it a go
and then decide to put up with MS anyway...
Actually, for a lot of people, it's the right answer. They'll give it a go
and then decide to put up with MS anyway...
H
Homer J. Simpson
By all means try Linux, but its not user friendly at all. Be prepared to
....and get ready to get called a n00b, RTFM, M$ is the suxx0rz!!!!11
The Linux community needs to drop the attitude if it hopes to make any
headway.
....and get ready to get called a n00b, RTFM, M$ is the suxx0rz!!!!11
The Linux community needs to drop the attitude if it hopes to make any
headway.
H
Homer J. Simpson
Doesn't really matter, it's still a beta, RC1, RC2, still beta.
Don't try to hide problems behind nomenclature. If code is busted in an RC
and MS doesn't see it as enough of a problem to do anything about it, that
code won't magically fix itself because it gets rolled into something MS
decides to call the RTM.
If an RC won't even install on a machine, it's cause for concern, especially
if it turns out to be more widespread than initially believed.
Don't try to hide problems behind nomenclature. If code is busted in an RC
and MS doesn't see it as enough of a problem to do anything about it, that
code won't magically fix itself because it gets rolled into something MS
decides to call the RTM.
If an RC won't even install on a machine, it's cause for concern, especially
if it turns out to be more widespread than initially believed.
D
D. Rogers
Linux is great for a small footprint dedicated application like running a
print server or a firewall, but it just doesn't have the same appeal to me
as Windows when I think of where I want to store all my family photos, or
run my financial software, or work on a proposal for a Customer. It would
be too frustrating to use Linux for general everyday purposes. I actually
had Mandrake Linux as a desktop for a while a few years ago and it wasn't
bad, but always in a dual boot environment where you could come back to
Windows for real work.
I did an experiment a few years ago where I gave my wife a new Mac notebook
since she had never used a computer before and she gave me the computer
back! Needless to say she has a new HP laptop now with XP Home and loves
it. She won't even let me do updates on it LOL.
I wish MS had a stripped down, low resource, bare bones OS based on XP. I
saw where they sort of came out with this, but only for volume license
Customers and not for Joe Sixpack like myself. Guess I'll keep using win98
for the older machine.
print server or a firewall, but it just doesn't have the same appeal to me
as Windows when I think of where I want to store all my family photos, or
run my financial software, or work on a proposal for a Customer. It would
be too frustrating to use Linux for general everyday purposes. I actually
had Mandrake Linux as a desktop for a while a few years ago and it wasn't
bad, but always in a dual boot environment where you could come back to
Windows for real work.
I did an experiment a few years ago where I gave my wife a new Mac notebook
since she had never used a computer before and she gave me the computer
back! Needless to say she has a new HP laptop now with XP Home and loves
it. She won't even let me do updates on it LOL.
I wish MS had a stripped down, low resource, bare bones OS based on XP. I
saw where they sort of came out with this, but only for volume license
Customers and not for Joe Sixpack like myself. Guess I'll keep using win98
for the older machine.
L
Local Account
I am already testing the latest Novell Desktop Linux 10, in a vmware wks
5.0.2 with all the performance options of the vmware machine turned on (mem
file disabled, mem trim disabled, 1GB mem, vmtools installed, etc).
I am doing the same with the latest build of Vista PreRc1.
For the first time since years, Microsoft modified that interface so much to
a point when Linux actually looks good now !!!!! :-(
I am not concern about the bugs because the RC1 is beta, I am concerned
about performance, it is slower than linux or Xp or 2003, way slower; ah
yes, it boots faster, thank you, and the notepad opens instantly, but what
about the business applications out there?
Did you try to install VS.NET 2005 on the PreRc1 vista, well, give it a try
install things, see how slow it is.
Another thing, go to windowsforms.net, download some of their latest
samples, and run them on vista, and have a look the great looking samples,
like the outlook clone, is now looking as ... no comments on vista, run the
sample then on xp and notice the difference.
For the first time since ever, and I mean the word ever, Microsoft
downgraded windows to a point where it can compete with Linux, it was way
ahead of Linux all the time, and now in some cases is even worse.
I use Windows xp because my programs look good.
I love the way windows xp looks now, I just want the new features added to
it, the start button can be modified, the colors increased, but that's about
it, I don't want a full rewrite.
Google Desktop on Xp does the entire search today, no different if not
better than Vista
Again, when it is time to upgrade, Novell Linux or Sun Unix are on the
table, if everything will be rewritten, maybe will give Linux a try, at
least the UI is stable there, and as slow as the new Vista.
5.0.2 with all the performance options of the vmware machine turned on (mem
file disabled, mem trim disabled, 1GB mem, vmtools installed, etc).
I am doing the same with the latest build of Vista PreRc1.
For the first time since years, Microsoft modified that interface so much to
a point when Linux actually looks good now !!!!! :-(
I am not concern about the bugs because the RC1 is beta, I am concerned
about performance, it is slower than linux or Xp or 2003, way slower; ah
yes, it boots faster, thank you, and the notepad opens instantly, but what
about the business applications out there?
Did you try to install VS.NET 2005 on the PreRc1 vista, well, give it a try
install things, see how slow it is.Another thing, go to windowsforms.net, download some of their latest
samples, and run them on vista, and have a look the great looking samples,
like the outlook clone, is now looking as ... no comments on vista, run the
sample then on xp and notice the difference.
For the first time since ever, and I mean the word ever, Microsoft
downgraded windows to a point where it can compete with Linux, it was way
ahead of Linux all the time, and now in some cases is even worse.
I use Windows xp because my programs look good.
I love the way windows xp looks now, I just want the new features added to
it, the start button can be modified, the colors increased, but that's about
it, I don't want a full rewrite.
Google Desktop on Xp does the entire search today, no different if not
better than Vista
Again, when it is time to upgrade, Novell Linux or Sun Unix are on the
table, if everything will be rewritten, maybe will give Linux a try, at
least the UI is stable there, and as slow as the new Vista.
H
Homer J. Simpson
I use Windows xp because my programs look good.
Some of us have different priorities. FWIW, I use Windows Classic.
Having the entire Windows code base reviewed for security holes does nothing
for you?
Some of us have different priorities. FWIW, I use Windows Classic.
Having the entire Windows code base reviewed for security holes does nothing
for you?
L
Little Brother
It so easily could just be the mobo's onboard virus detection needs to be
switched off or somesuch. Let's wait before saying it's a wide spread
disaster please. Oh wait, you're probably a COLA troll here to bash Windows
and make it look bad. Oh my, could it be?
switched off or somesuch. Let's wait before saying it's a wide spread
disaster please. Oh wait, you're probably a COLA troll here to bash Windows
and make it look bad. Oh my, could it be?
L
Little Brother
I like Classic and variations on Classic. I have a whole slew I created
with the help of the Windows registry. Green this, Blue that, a nice red
Canada theme and so on .. all based on Classic.
with the help of the Windows registry. Green this, Blue that, a nice red
Canada theme and so on .. all based on Classic.
L
Little Brother
Oh it does something for me, right here, oh yeah .. oh yeah ..
L
Local
A security review is good, but patching will continue, security issues will
never go away, and that applies for all OS's including Linux.
But again, I can give you a car so secure that it cannot be stolen, with a
small issue, you cant drive it either
There are maybe tons of internal improvements in Vista, but most of them are
affecting what we have today, my priorities are simple, high performing OS,
with a good interface.
You can't just go and tell everyone hey, it is now better by making is
slower, and uglier, because I can simply say, hey, your competition is
actually doing a better job.
My expectation for Vista (if it stays as it is today), business will
download it from MSDN (I did that today), will run their existing internal
software (I did that today) (and the software is written in the latest .net
2.0), and will realize that it is less productive because it is slower, less
attractive, and with a depressing UI, and will simply not upgrade.
What should I tell my manager?, we need to upgrade to Vista?, why? ,
well ... our applications will render a bit slower, and some of the code
must be updated to get the application to look better, and the overall
performance of the OS is less than XP, you must train the user for Vista, or
you know what, keep Xp, just install and AV program, and MSN or Google
Desktop.
I upgraded to Vista 2 days ago, discovered most of the things that can be
discovered, and now going back to XP, and looking at Linux; this will happen
with many others days after the official release of the product.
The Vista explorer by the way is almost a Linux explorer (the left tree
panel), that is one of the reasons why I don't use Linux it does not
give you a full picture of the file system, or a super complex picture of
the file system if you are using the command line now vista is no
different, of course, the vista explorer is a bit better, although I miss
the + signs at the left of the tree.
never go away, and that applies for all OS's including Linux.
But again, I can give you a car so secure that it cannot be stolen, with a
small issue, you cant drive it either
There are maybe tons of internal improvements in Vista, but most of them are
affecting what we have today, my priorities are simple, high performing OS,
with a good interface.
You can't just go and tell everyone hey, it is now better by making is
slower, and uglier, because I can simply say, hey, your competition is
actually doing a better job.
My expectation for Vista (if it stays as it is today), business will
download it from MSDN (I did that today), will run their existing internal
software (I did that today) (and the software is written in the latest .net
2.0), and will realize that it is less productive because it is slower, less
attractive, and with a depressing UI, and will simply not upgrade.
What should I tell my manager?, we need to upgrade to Vista?, why? ,
well ... our applications will render a bit slower, and some of the code
must be updated to get the application to look better, and the overall
performance of the OS is less than XP, you must train the user for Vista, or
you know what, keep Xp, just install and AV program, and MSN or Google
Desktop.
I upgraded to Vista 2 days ago, discovered most of the things that can be
discovered, and now going back to XP, and looking at Linux; this will happen
with many others days after the official release of the product.
The Vista explorer by the way is almost a Linux explorer (the left tree
panel), that is one of the reasons why I don't use Linux
it does notgive you a full picture of the file system, or a super complex picture of
the file system if you are using the command line
now vista is nodifferent, of course, the vista explorer is a bit better, although I miss
the + signs at the left of the tree.
D
David Sherman
Thanks for all the ideas.
I have given up of the beta of Vista.
I still can't see why a "new installation" would hang up on the
initial boot since the previous beta worked.
I have taken that machine apart and will use what is left for a Linux
machine. I haven't decided if I will use that machine as a firewall or
not.
I have given up of the beta of Vista.
I still can't see why a "new installation" would hang up on the
initial boot since the previous beta worked.
I have taken that machine apart and will use what is left for a Linux
machine. I haven't decided if I will use that machine as a firewall or
not.
L
Lang Murphy
David,
Have you tried a bare metal install? Format the partition and install Vista
on a clean drive?
I've installed Vista on 3 different PC's here at home. No problem. I have
one PC that 5536 won't install to... blue screens right after I provide the
SATA controller driver. Tried that 3 times and got the same result each
time. I'm just going to continue to run 5472 on that box until the I get the
next drop and hope that problem gets fixed. I've seen numerous improvments
in 5536 over 5472, driver wise, and it's been pretty solid on the 3 PC's on
which it's installed.
As far as moving to Linux is concerned... my personal experience with Linux,
most recently with SuSE 10.1, is that it's not easy to transistion to Linux
from Windows. Sure, there have been improvements in the UI's (I selected KDE
for SuSE...) but it's still Linux underneath. If something goes wrong, boy,
and you're not Real Familiar with Linux, you're going to be spending an
awful lot of time in the Linux NG's. I would recommend doing a google search
on setting up Samba in SuSE Linux for an example of the complexity involved
with setting up a SuSE box to talk to your Windows PC's, assuming you have
more than one PC in your house. Even if you don't have multiple PC's, it
might do you good to look at the Samba stuff to get an idea of the kind of
stuff you might end up doing on your Linux box. It's not the kind of stuff
one can fumble one's way through... no, no, no.
Lang
Have you tried a bare metal install? Format the partition and install Vista
on a clean drive?
I've installed Vista on 3 different PC's here at home. No problem. I have
one PC that 5536 won't install to... blue screens right after I provide the
SATA controller driver. Tried that 3 times and got the same result each
time. I'm just going to continue to run 5472 on that box until the I get the
next drop and hope that problem gets fixed. I've seen numerous improvments
in 5536 over 5472, driver wise, and it's been pretty solid on the 3 PC's on
which it's installed.
As far as moving to Linux is concerned... my personal experience with Linux,
most recently with SuSE 10.1, is that it's not easy to transistion to Linux
from Windows. Sure, there have been improvements in the UI's (I selected KDE
for SuSE...) but it's still Linux underneath. If something goes wrong, boy,
and you're not Real Familiar with Linux, you're going to be spending an
awful lot of time in the Linux NG's. I would recommend doing a google search
on setting up Samba in SuSE Linux for an example of the complexity involved
with setting up a SuSE box to talk to your Windows PC's, assuming you have
more than one PC in your house. Even if you don't have multiple PC's, it
might do you good to look at the Samba stuff to get an idea of the kind of
stuff you might end up doing on your Linux box. It's not the kind of stuff
one can fumble one's way through... no, no, no.
Lang
L
Luke Fitzwater
Linux, like any other operating system is complicated. Have you ever
dove under the hood of Windows and took a peak at what really happens
when you launch a program or make a simple configuration change?
As far as licensing goes, you can make a profit off of open source
software. Here's just a snippet from the GNU GPL:
"You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."
Linux has already been harden. SELinux kernels are available from major
distros (RedHat, SuSe, Debian, Gentoo, ect...). I am not saying that it
is as hard as OpenBSD, but neither is Windows nor Mac.
For those who do not follow geeky topics... SELinux is Security Enhanced
Linux. OpenBSD is the most secure OS on the planet; only one security
hole in eight years.
-Luke
dove under the hood of Windows and took a peak at what really happens
when you launch a program or make a simple configuration change?
As far as licensing goes, you can make a profit off of open source
software. Here's just a snippet from the GNU GPL:
"You may charge a fee for the physical act of transferring a copy, and
you may at your option offer warranty protection in exchange for a fee."
Linux has already been harden. SELinux kernels are available from major
distros (RedHat, SuSe, Debian, Gentoo, ect...). I am not saying that it
is as hard as OpenBSD, but neither is Windows nor Mac.
For those who do not follow geeky topics... SELinux is Security Enhanced
Linux. OpenBSD is the most secure OS on the planet; only one security
hole in eight years.
-Luke
D
David Sherman
Yes, I did a bare betal install. I let Vista format the drive.
Suse 10.1- i gave up on it. It would never do an update.
I look on the bright for Microsoft. I won't be find any more bugs in
Vista.
Suse 10.1- i gave up on it. It would never do an update.
I look on the bright for Microsoft. I won't be find any more bugs in
Vista.
L
Little Brother
Yes, "technically" one can make a profit off the software. However, because
of the GPL licence, everyone else can make a profit off the software you or
your compnay writes. If the software actually starts to make serious money
you can bet your bottom dollar some person or group will offer a version of
your software that undercuts your price [and so on] until it shortly becomes
just another a free give-away with some distro. While technically one can
profit, de facto-wise one cannot. The licencing that comes with those
libraries essentially force a communism of any software written with it and
preclude profit making. I think it is disingenuous to suggest there's
substantial "profit" with writing software under the GNU GPL. Heck, didn't
even one of the major Linux distros have to declare bankruptcy a few years
back? Mandrake? And wasn't that the year Linux was going to take the desktop
too? While the same year Microsoft's profits were at their highest to date?
Linux and related software is, essentially, is a non-profit give-away.
of the GPL licence, everyone else can make a profit off the software you or
your compnay writes. If the software actually starts to make serious money
you can bet your bottom dollar some person or group will offer a version of
your software that undercuts your price [and so on] until it shortly becomes
just another a free give-away with some distro. While technically one can
profit, de facto-wise one cannot. The licencing that comes with those
libraries essentially force a communism of any software written with it and
preclude profit making. I think it is disingenuous to suggest there's
substantial "profit" with writing software under the GNU GPL. Heck, didn't
even one of the major Linux distros have to declare bankruptcy a few years
back? Mandrake? And wasn't that the year Linux was going to take the desktop
too? While the same year Microsoft's profits were at their highest to date?
Linux and related software is, essentially, is a non-profit give-away.
H
Homer J. Simpson
It so easily could just be the mobo's onboard virus detection needs to be
No, absolutely not, and if you were familiar with my posts, you wouldn't be
making such accusations.
I've been developing Windows software since the 3.1 days and DOS and OS/2
before that, and I'm familar enough with the development process to know
that you can't expect problems in a beta to just disappear on their own when
the software in question reaches RTM status. I realize the OP's problem
could very well turn out to be something silly, but all I'm saying is that
you shouldn't be so dismissive about problems in an RC, and to just "wait"
and hope for the best, as you suggest, is being rather optimistic. An
outright installation failure is NOT irrelevant and deserve investigation,
especially at this stage.
Believe me, I *want* Vista to be a rock-solid OS. It sucks to try to get
your software to work when the underlying OS itself isn't reliable.
No, absolutely not, and if you were familiar with my posts, you wouldn't be
making such accusations.
I've been developing Windows software since the 3.1 days and DOS and OS/2
before that, and I'm familar enough with the development process to know
that you can't expect problems in a beta to just disappear on their own when
the software in question reaches RTM status. I realize the OP's problem
could very well turn out to be something silly, but all I'm saying is that
you shouldn't be so dismissive about problems in an RC, and to just "wait"
and hope for the best, as you suggest, is being rather optimistic. An
outright installation failure is NOT irrelevant and deserve investigation,
especially at this stage.
Believe me, I *want* Vista to be a rock-solid OS. It sucks to try to get
your software to work when the underlying OS itself isn't reliable.
L
Little Brother
Apologies, sorry, my bad.
L
Luke Fitzwater
If I interpret your verbal spewing correctly, you are concerned about
selling a product and maintain a steady stream of income off that product.
In your scenario of someone else cutting your profits by releasing some
thing cheaper, also doesn't make any sense either. This happens to
closed sourced programs all the time. Ever heard of a program called
WordPerfect? Same thing happened to Novell when they owned the rights,
it was a great program. Almost every business and school used it. Along
came Microsoft with Word and the rest of the Office suite cheaper than
what Novell was offering. Novell was smart about it, instead of becoming
second fiddle to Microsoft's new Office programs; they sold it to Corel
and let them take the fall. Corel not only took the fall, but fumbled
and botched WordPerfect on the way down from the top.
Heres the software model you should be looking at: give the software
away at no cost or very little cost, then charge for tech support or
other services. This general service contract is the way that majority
of antivirus software is done. Pay a yearly subscription; free updates
and a working program for a year.
-Luke
selling a product and maintain a steady stream of income off that product.
In your scenario of someone else cutting your profits by releasing some
thing cheaper, also doesn't make any sense either. This happens to
closed sourced programs all the time. Ever heard of a program called
WordPerfect? Same thing happened to Novell when they owned the rights,
it was a great program. Almost every business and school used it. Along
came Microsoft with Word and the rest of the Office suite cheaper than
what Novell was offering. Novell was smart about it, instead of becoming
second fiddle to Microsoft's new Office programs; they sold it to Corel
and let them take the fall. Corel not only took the fall, but fumbled
and botched WordPerfect on the way down from the top.
Heres the software model you should be looking at: give the software
away at no cost or very little cost, then charge for tech support or
other services. This general service contract is the way that majority
of antivirus software is done. Pay a yearly subscription; free updates
and a working program for a year.
-Luke
L
Little Brother
WordPerfect? It was doing "OK" under Corel at first when competing with
Office 95 .. but against Office 97 it didn't do so well.
THAT was for a number of reasons. While WP itself was better than Word, the
Microsoft suite was altogether a better integrated than the new WP8 Suite.
When WordPerfect 8 was released, people thought it had a real clobbered
together feel in some aspects ..
... Netscape Navigator was crammed into it and forced to fit (when it was
obvious it didn't) and CorelCENTRAL was just a botch because of it. People
didn't like it. CorelCENTRAL got a real bad rep. MS Outlook, on the
otherhand only got better with the release of Outlook 98. There was a lot of
crashing of the Corel stuff too - only partly due to piss poor programming
on Corel's and Netscapes's part and partly, I suspect, because Microsoft
knowingly released patches to various programs and Windows components that
crashed Corel software. Those days had a real "Wild West" aspect to them.
Netscape was sinking faster than a lead ball in a lake and the WP 8 suite
was chained to it. Too bad , so sad.
Fastforward.
But nevertheless, unless someone pays for a piece of software then it is
unlikely that the authors will realize any profit. I just bought an art
program. It's really well done. It is the sort of thing that just isn't
going to be built in the non-profit zone of GPL'd software. It's worth more
than what I payed for it too, as it is a well done piece of work. I guess
the author didn't want to be reduced to a tech support slave and instead
wrote something that works, doesn't need to be supported much because it
done so well .. and, of course, can make him profit being sold in the market
place. The user doesn't need so much support per se as knowledge skill in
the use of the program. That could only really come from partitipation in a
community, practice, and the user's talent.
Sorry, but most program authors don't envision themselves as being reduced
to a tech support telephone guy to make their money. Nor should they have
to.
Not that I do not see merit in OSS. But clearly more in the non-profit world
e.g. in communist countries and in universities. Those people don't want to
live off the profits they make, rather, the profit someone else makes, so
GPL'd model is OK for them.
Profit without unrighteousnes is a good thing. And honest gain from works
should be expected. The labourer is due his wages and do not muzzle the
oxen.
Office 95 .. but against Office 97 it didn't do so well.
THAT was for a number of reasons. While WP itself was better than Word, the
Microsoft suite was altogether a better integrated than the new WP8 Suite.
When WordPerfect 8 was released, people thought it had a real clobbered
together feel in some aspects ..
... Netscape Navigator was crammed into it and forced to fit (when it was
obvious it didn't) and CorelCENTRAL was just a botch because of it. People
didn't like it. CorelCENTRAL got a real bad rep. MS Outlook, on the
otherhand only got better with the release of Outlook 98. There was a lot of
crashing of the Corel stuff too - only partly due to piss poor programming
on Corel's and Netscapes's part and partly, I suspect, because Microsoft
knowingly released patches to various programs and Windows components that
crashed Corel software. Those days had a real "Wild West" aspect to them.
Netscape was sinking faster than a lead ball in a lake and the WP 8 suite
was chained to it. Too bad , so sad.
Fastforward.
But nevertheless, unless someone pays for a piece of software then it is
unlikely that the authors will realize any profit. I just bought an art
program. It's really well done. It is the sort of thing that just isn't
going to be built in the non-profit zone of GPL'd software. It's worth more
than what I payed for it too, as it is a well done piece of work. I guess
the author didn't want to be reduced to a tech support slave and instead
wrote something that works, doesn't need to be supported much because it
done so well .. and, of course, can make him profit being sold in the market
place. The user doesn't need so much support per se as knowledge skill in
the use of the program. That could only really come from partitipation in a
community, practice, and the user's talent.
Sorry, but most program authors don't envision themselves as being reduced
to a tech support telephone guy to make their money. Nor should they have
to.
Not that I do not see merit in OSS. But clearly more in the non-profit world
e.g. in communist countries and in universities. Those people don't want to
live off the profits they make, rather, the profit someone else makes, so
GPL'd model is OK for them.
Profit without unrighteousnes is a good thing. And honest gain from works
should be expected. The labourer is due his wages and do not muzzle the
oxen.