Funny
|
| Author | Content |
|---|---|
| r_a_trip Nov 18, 2008 5:08 AM EDT |
All I hear is "Waaah, waaah, waaah, I can't live and think without the prison anymore I helped create!" The patience is wearing thin within me. The longer I read this kind of idiocy, the more I think, let them rot in that software ghetto with the great "Vista's". So Linux isn't it, because Mr. Beer can't comfortably lock himself in with MS' strangling formats and programs. Well, then Windows is exactly what he needs and deserves. My biggest fear is the possibility that the majority of potential Windows refugees are like Stan Beer. Whine, whine, whine that GNU/Linux isn't like Windows and when they finally get it perverted to be exactly like Windows.... Whine, whine, whine that it is a shoddy prison that locks them in and doesn't do what they want. I wouldn't mind if GNU/Linux stayed niche if it meant its users were able to use their grey cells and see the bigger picture and keep perverting influences out. The amount of freedom we enjoy within GNU/Linux right now wasn't brought about with licensing alone. It's also a result of people actively resisting proprietary technology. If binary kernel blobs were ok and no one ever made a fuss about the original QT license, etcetera, GNU/Linux would be a proprietary system with some FOSS bits stuck in to it. Disclaimer: This is the pessimist in me speaking, the optimist still hopes people will see the light some day... One last nugget: On the subject of support, what do you do when your Windows computer system breaks and you're a complete tech luddite? Chances are you take it to your local corner computer shop, where someone there will know what to do for a relatively reasonable fee. This nearly made me tear my hair out. Every computer shop I've been in I've almost always overhead the following "repair offer" made to some poor hapless sap. "Give us EUR 60.00 and we wipe your drive and personal files and reinstall a bare Windows system from your original disk." (Of course stated a little less direct.) Yep, very reasonable. |
| tracyanne Nov 18, 2008 6:10 AM EDT |
Quoting:My biggest fear is the possibility that the majority of potential Windows refugees are like Stan Beer. In my experience, the only people who complain about Linux like that are people who stand to make money off of the ordinary people who use windows. All of the people I've converted to Linux love Linux, the most unfortunate aspect of the exercise is that I don't get to support them very much, they simply don't have enough problems. |
| r_a_trip Nov 18, 2008 7:52 AM EDT |
All of the people I've converted to Linux love Linux [snip] Well, the small group of people I've introduced to GNU/Linux love it too. They are people though, who wholeheartedly embraced it warts and all. I've also had folks who were just looking for Windows sans the virusses and sans the pricetag. Needless to say, introducing them to the penguin was a complete disaster. That last group is also the most condemning about GNU/Linux after they fled back to their Windows. If you keep hearing NO year after year, it is hard to keep believing YES. So it probably isn't as bad as my deepest, darkest fears. |
| bigg Nov 18, 2008 10:29 AM EDT |
The guy is confused. He thinks that because he can't use Linux it won't become "mainstream". In spite of what he thinks, the world can support more than one OS. The nature of variety is that some prefer one version, others prefer the other version. He also said that he started out with Linux because it doesn't cost anything. Stop reading the article there. "I want Windows without paying for it." Linux is not free Windows. Windows is a bad imitation of an OS. If you want to do things in a backward fashion, you'll have to use Windows. Case closed. Frankly, I don't care if he doesn't like Linux. Linux works pretty darn good for me. |
| ColonelPanik Nov 18, 2008 11:48 AM EDT |
Why is this article even posted here? No more anti-Linux. No more Linux bashing. Lets talk about Linux and what is does/where its going! |
| jdixon Nov 18, 2008 1:50 PM EDT |
> Why is this article even posted here? Because we, or at least I, don't want LXer to become an echo chamber. It's almost always a good idea to examine what your opposition is saying. In a case like this, they'll be wrong 90% of the time, but that other 10% or so of the time they'll be pointing out problems you should be trying to fix. A good example would be the Mindcraft test from years ago. |
| ColonelPanik Nov 18, 2008 2:43 PM EDT |
It is all chaff thrown up to distract us. Lets not provide Troll kibbles to the FUD mongers. |
| number6x Nov 18, 2008 3:26 PM EDT |
How did Windows 3.1 succeed? It had no multimedia capabilities (Apple IIgs and Amiga users will tell you how advanced their systems were in the same time period) Win 3.1 had laughable graphics capabilities. Games didn't use Win 3.1, but ran right on top of DOS bypassing the useless Windows code. Windows 3.1 was non-intuitive, you had to be able to edit .bat and .ini files to make the system usable. Windows 3.1 was superior to Windows 2.8, but was inferior to most of its competition. Yet it became the market leader. Windows 3.1 was adequate and cheaper. Linux is more than adequate, and cheaper. Linux use will grow. |
| tuxchick Nov 18, 2008 3:45 PM EDT |
LOL, troll kibbles. Reminds me of comedy shows where kitty crunchies are kept in fancy bowls, and guests think they are people treats. Always good for a nice lowbrow laugh :) |
| jezuch Nov 18, 2008 4:22 PM EDT |
Quoting:what do you do when your Windows computer system breaks and you're a complete tech luddite? You destroy the damn machine because it takes away jobs from honest, hard-working people doing all the math, you know, the computers?... |
| TxtEdMacs Nov 18, 2008 7:17 PM EDT |
No humor here, however, in a NYT piece a supposed consultant threw away his machine and bought a replacement when it becomes so mucked up (beyond repair)* as S.O.P. [I am assuming this was still XP, because Vista was relatively new.] I am awe struck by how obvious incompetents have such an excess of funds they can be so mindlessly extravagant. It is a wonder too that this could be written with a straight face and not be laughed out of town. The Wisdom of Idiots, I presume. * This is not the article I remember, but it seems to have the same or similar content: http://www.nytimes.com/2005/07/17/technology/17spy.html?hp&e... |
| tracyanne Nov 18, 2008 8:00 PM EDT |
@Txt, nothing about that surprises me. I must getting more cynical in my old age. |
| tracyanne Nov 19, 2008 12:56 AM EDT |
So I'm logged in remotely to this computer (it runs WinXP) we use in the office for processing media files, when suddenly I'm logged out with a message that states, "another user has taken over this session", and I'm booted out. You see Windows is a single user OS, and only one person can be logged in at a time, don't you just love it. |
| Sander_Marechal Nov 19, 2008 2:30 AM EDT |
@tracyanne: I don't think that's the reason. IIRC it's an artificial, arbitrary limit placed by MS. You need to buy a stack of CALs to do it with multiple users. |
| nalf38 Nov 19, 2008 3:45 AM EDT |
Everyone's mileage varies, I guess. I thought Ubuntu ran like a three-legged dog on my laptop, so I tried another distro and it works great. Yes, after years of Gentoo, I went over to the dark side of OpenSuse. What pisses me off about these extremely negative reviews is that the author almost always says they tried some version of Linux a few years prior, in this case 2006. Windows users don't seem to understand that Linux is a moving target, and that it gets better and better every year. They're so used to seeing the same old lame operating system for years on end, and then seeing huge dramatic changes every 5 years or so. Linux just isn't like that. Firefox WAS slow on Linux...two years ago. But that's not the case now. OpenOffice is even better at rendering MSOffice documents than it was two years ago, and its startup time has decreased dramatically. Wireless networking is infinitely easier than it was two years ago, unless you own a Broadcom card like I do. So he can't use Chrome or iTunes or whatever. He should have taken that into account before he switched, not after. |
| DiBosco Nov 19, 2008 5:59 AM EDT |
Quoting: What pisses me off about these extremely negative reviews is that the author almost always says they tried some version of Linux a few years prior, in this case 2006. You see this over and over again. "Oh, I am a user of Linux, but..." then later on in the article turns out they used Red Hat 7 or something like that. I find myself sucked in to trying to explain how incredibly quickly Linux evolves and improves. I guess the issue is that if we didn't get on and point out stuff like this, the FUD and/or ignorance would carry on unchallenged. BTW, I just installed Mandriva 2008.1 to dual boot a load of Acer laptops for work and I am pretty sure they had Broadcom wifi that I got working with minimum effort. I'll double check next time I have my hands on them, but if you're still struggling with wifi, you might want to try Mandriva. |
| gus3 Nov 19, 2008 3:44 PM EDT |
@Sander:Quoting:@tracyanne: I don't think that's the reason. IIRC it's an artificial, arbitrary limit placed by MS. You need to buy a stack of CALs to do it with multiple users.Huh? Windows is a multi-tasking, single-user OS. It runs some services for multiple users (file serving, print serving, login domain management) but only one user can be logged in, launching programs this way and that. Or can more than one user be running Firefox, on that system? (Virtualized systems don't count; I'm talking about a stock installation of Windows.) Windows' preferred execution model is distributed, and with good reason. Too much load on a Windows system causes instability. Unix and Linux have no preference; programs can be run locally or centrally, on CLI or in a GUI. Then again, think of all the hard-earned cash companies have to throw down the rat-hole, in order to have Windows in their offices. One Windows system on each desktop, plus a bigger Windows system for file and print serving, plus one Windows system for email, plus one even more monstrous Windows system for SQL Server... and then the endless upgrade cycle... It's times like this I really want to violate LXer's TOS or engage in minor acts of physical violence. |
| NoDough Nov 19, 2008 3:57 PM EDT |
Quoting:Or can more than one user be running Firefox, on that system? (Virtualized systems don't count; I'm talking about a stock installation of Windows.)Yes they can, through Windows Terminal Server and/or Citrix. Even a stock Windows Server without Terminal Server allows two (I think it's two) additional logins via RDP. |
| jezuch Nov 19, 2008 4:28 PM EDT |
Quoting:Windows is a multi-tasking, single-user OS. You must be stuck in a world where Windows 95/98 is the latest and greatest. Windows 2K and later are based on Windows NT, which does, really does have a multi-user, multi-tasking kernel. As much as I dislike Windows I have to admit at least that. I did a lot stuff in Remote Desktop two jobs before (arounf 2001), so I have a first-hand experience with that :) |
| gus3 Nov 19, 2008 6:33 PM EDT |
Oh my. You mean Windows finally got something that Unix has had since, oh, 1973? @jezuch: The kernel may have been multi-user, but for a long time there was no super-structure to allow multiple logins. So, while individual processes may have had different user ID's, there weren't actual users associated with them. I guess you could say it was more "multi-privilege" instead. Yes, I'm splitting hairs. So shoot me. I'll shut up now. |
| rijelkentaurus Nov 19, 2008 6:41 PM EDT |
Even XP can do multiple logons, so long as you do a reg hack and a couple other things. Doesn't run real well, and of course it's a gigantic license violation..... |
| Sander_Marechal Nov 19, 2008 7:10 PM EDT |
Quoting:Or can more than one user be running Firefox, on that system? Yes. We use stock XP and Server 2003 with multiple people logging in over RDP. It doesn't work terribly well, but it does work. |
Posting in this forum is limited to members of the group: [ForumMods, SITEADMINS, MEMBERS.]
Becoming a member of LXer is easy and free. Join Us!