I would love to, but the short of it is, if I don't have a phone, then I need to actually visit a person to talk to them. If they live far away, I need a car. Probably a bad example, but I'm trying to show that you really only have two choices: a) become a hermit, or b) give into it, and try complaining to the AG.
I agree with what you have to say. The fact of the matter is, the world is run by large companies. For example, I tried to get DSL from SpeakEasy. Verizon reported to them that I was too far away from a trump to get DSL. So I decided to check with Verizon, and sure enough I was close enough to get their DSL package. The cable industry, or the gas industry, or virtually any other industry is no different.
My point is, everyone here seems to think everything MS makes is lousy, because they have one bad experience. Very few people are open such as yourself. At least you were up-front about your intent, and taking issue with MS for morality reasons is respectable. Making fun of people simply because they like MS products really accomplishes nothing, and is actually detrimental to whatever advocacy the attacker had in mind.
Funny how it wasn't an MCSE. It's funny too when an Oracle Administrator needs to call Oracle to resolve problems, or when the Network Administrator needs to call Cisco support (hmm . . . didn't the/. admins have to do this when they had that network outage some time ago?)
So, even if he was an MCSE, what the hell does that have to do with anything? Just as is with all types of tests, there's people that really know what they're doing, and there's though that are trained to take the test (SAT reviewers make a ton of money off this). But I assume you know that, and opted to take the low road since it was MS.
And I've spent many an hour helping buddies recovering from botched Linux installs. Does that mean I should blacklist Linux and write it off as no good, even though lots of other people have it running fine?
Why is this guy considered a troll? Because he makes MS sound not so bad? The guy above him gives his own numbers (and took the liberty of omitting the "less than" part), and he's considered "Informative". Seems/. is full of double standards.
Praetell, how is Bill Gates as evil as Bin Laden? Last time I checked, being successful was not evil. But it does invoke jealousy in a lot of people . . .
Why do we need to get more people running linux? Seriously. Will "Windows lusers" really add that much to the community? Oh, so now we have more users, more quality software will be made for linux? Wait, nope. All we'll get is the same crappy software as there exists on Windows. And no one will pay for it anyway. So, why does it matter? Use linux, be happy, and give it a break.
This will be bad for Debian and difficult for Cygwin.
Why will this be bad for Debian?
The software will all be limited by the poor design of the OS underneath, and will give a bad impression in the best of worlds.
Last time I checked, Windows was closed source, except to certain educational institutions. So, unless you've actually seen the source, it's very difficult to comment on the design (you only know what you've been told). So, sounds more like a case of "the OS is not open, so the design sucks."
Just a point of information, the Win32 API is the best documented API I have ever seen. Just because the source is closed doesn't mean MS makes it difficult for people to code for it. I suggest you take a gander on the MSDN.
My closest brush with stuff like this was Exceed, the X port to Win32. It made me think X sucked, and I never learned a thing. Why? Because half of it was broken by the suck OS underneath and I had no reference to the way things were supposed to work.
Try Cygwin. I've gotten X and KDE up on Cygwin, and it was really cool. I was writing docs with LyX just as if I were under any X Windows system (which for some reason/.'ers think only exists under linux).
A year later I learned to program the Win95 API and understood how things had shifted around under the shiny binary.
And? Oh yeah, there's plenty of successful X servers available for Win32 (PC Xware, ReflectionX, etc.).
I suggest you take a look at Cygwin lately to see how far it has progressed. It is very useful.
Loss32 would be a good name for Win32 TM.
Yeah, and GNU isn't a trademark. Oh wait, yeah it is. But believe you me, you're childish rants about Suck OS and M$ are great for advocacy and will convert millions of people instantly!
False. Not everything has a political agenda behind it. Yes, promoting free software is good (although I personally like the BSD license better). But arguing because people don't call linux GNU/Linux achieves nothing, and at the end of the day, no one really cares.
False again. I realize how much he has done. And I fully appreciate it. I use GNU tools on a daily basis. I rely on them. My point is that the whole OSS movement seems to be just one huge circus of politics, and he always seems to be at the front. I agree with a lot of things he has to say, but a lot seem ludicrous at best (such as this w32 moniker).
I remember when this was first discussed on debianplanet, and a lot of people started flipping out. There's simply some places (such as the work office), where one is forced to use a Win32 OS, and cannot dual-boot. Besides, dual-booting is a PITA. If I can "dpkg -i" a package under cygwin, and get to using the gimp VS photoshop, I'll do it in a heartbeat.
At best, one can say that this will deter people from linux. But then again, everyone loves linux because of all the OSS available for it. And if the whole goal is to promote OSS, why neglect the largest user base? Then when people get sick of Windows, they can convert to FreeBSD or Linux or whatever without there being a huge learning curve involved.
I don't think I really agree with the port being called w32 though. win32 is not a moniker that promotes Windows as a winner, it's just the first syllable of the word, just like a lot of nicknames are formed. I wish RMS would spend more time coding than trying to be a politician:)
Writing and releasing such worm is a criminal offense, and such people should be prosecuted. But you seem to have nullified your entire point by contradicting yourself from sentence to sentence.
But Microsoft isn't willing. They have a long history of paranoia about having any other product competing in, or even adjacent to, their 0wn market space, and an equally long history of killing off those products by fair means or foul.
So, rather than be the better man, Linux should stoop down to the lowest common denominator? I can tell you right now that I find Linux advocates to be far more condescending and invasive in their OS advocacy.
Idealism is nice, but realism contributes more to survival.
And realistically, if Joe Schmoe uses Win9x or Linux, it won't affect you much one way or the other, as I pointed out before. The successful Linux community now will remain the successful Linux community, regardless of what MS does with OEMs. It's the way it has realistically has always been.
Whatever happened to Linus saying Linux doesn't care what MS does? I thought there was no competition. Seems like a lot of people need to grow up. The Linux community has always operated on its own. Why does it need to attract every MS user in the world? I use Linux. Will I all of a sudden get higher quality software because more neophytes are using the OS? Regardless of what MS does, Linux will always exist, in the same elitist circle it exists in now.
pretentious pretentious (pr-tnshs)
adj.
Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified.
So, how can you say that MS programmers are pretentious? Upper management != programmers. I personally know several MS programmers and they are far from pretentious. Seems like just a little more slander from the Linux group (great advocacy I might add).
And from this definition, it seems that Linux is pretentious. That, or the Linux community is a bunch of hypocrites. I hear time and time again that Linux isn't doing anything above and beyond, but rather just what an OS should do. So where is the justification for all this merit?
Yeap, I definitely was using the nvidia driver (I even got the nice splash screen). I was using it on a variety of processors, ranging from a K6-2 350 to a K7 - 1.3 GHz. And a range of kernels from like 2.4.5 to 2.4.10 (I know agpgart had some make-overs, so I don't know if that had anything to do with it).
I am using the latest nvidia drivers. Though, I admit last time I tried was about two months ago, since I was so disgusted with performance. And I run debian sid, so my software versions for things like X-Windows are usually as recent as they can be. And when I tried Mandrake 8.0, my frame rate was even half that as it was under debian (still haven't figured this one out, since I had the same "packages" installed, and used the same config files.)
Now, as a linux user, the real question is, what do I have to gain by lying?
Is it not possible that people experience different results under different systems? I typically get 3x the framerate on Windows than I do on linux with my TNT2 Ultra. And I've had a lot more crashes with games under linux than under Windows.
Does that mean that you'll have the same problems? No. It's just people talking from experience. That is not trolling. What you and the previous poster have done is construed as trolling, but since you're carrying the linux battle flag, you don't see it as that.
What are you going to win? Linux zealots crack me up. They promote all the same stuff they say they hate Microsoft for, just from the opposite side. You're using linux. Isn't that enough to make you happy? Does your mother's best friend's daughter's boyfriend really need to be running linux to make you feel better? I never hear the Windows crowd or the Mac crowd trying to jam their OSes down my throat (note i said crowd, not companies). And I respect those people ten fold than I do those that try to tell me I'm dumb for not running linux. Every OS has its strengths and its weaknesses. Linux has its benefits. FreeBSD has its benefits. Windows has its benefits. Pick which ever one suits your needs and be done with it. The only war waging here is the one begun by pre-pubescent fools that hate Bill Gates for being a business genius (totally neglecting the fact that Linus Torvalds says there is no competition).
Read the thread and you'll understand. A Win32 program crashes and it's MS's fault. A linux program crashes and it's just poor coding. Quite the double standard. Like MS is responsible for a poorly written program that doesn't free() its memory or something.
I have my web browser start up page point to freshmeat. So I check it out every time my browser starts up. *gasp* That means I even check it multiple times in a day *deeper gasp*
Once you drag your foot out of your mouth maybe you'd like to explain exactly which user tasks need to be performed as root. I'll make it easier you could even pick one from Multics or VMS...
And when you pull your head out of your arse, you'll realize what you said about UNIX having a mechanic's key. Then tell me what user tasks you need to run as Administrator for on WinNT-based systems?
This is the usual situation. Even for many home/hobbiest machines. Obviously you've never used a machine you don't own, either at work or in education. (And if you get caught trying to force the locks expect someone to be doing a good impersonation of the BOfH.)
Yeah, this is the case in a work environment, where upper management would rather the developer's develop than to spend their time configuring their computer. And this is usually more of a case because the network probably employess NIS and uses NFS, so there's a central point of information. In this case, it's really the network being configged, and your computer gets a slight config to use that information. Say what you want, but I don't know anybody who wants to have someone come to their house all the time to config their computer because they're not sure of what they're doing, and don't want to blow a hole in their foot.
Of course, no matter what I say, you'll refute it, because you have the typical slashdot attitude that MS should die. I personally run debian gnu/linux and freebsd. I only support MS because so many people make so many pre-pubescent moronic comments, which is not the way to advocate your OS of choice. Open your eyes, and you'll see a whole hell of a lot better.
Slashdot Mirror
I'd rather wait 6 hours and get a working copy, then not being able to access the site at all.
And all these anti-MS posts are basically the same thing, just different people posting.
I would love to, but the short of it is, if I don't have a phone, then I need to actually visit a person to talk to them. If they live far away, I need a car. Probably a bad example, but I'm trying to show that you really only have two choices: a) become a hermit, or b) give into it, and try complaining to the AG.
I agree with what you have to say. The fact of the matter is, the world is run by large companies. For example, I tried to get DSL from SpeakEasy. Verizon reported to them that I was too far away from a trump to get DSL. So I decided to check with Verizon, and sure enough I was close enough to get their DSL package. The cable industry, or the gas industry, or virtually any other industry is no different.
/. je pense.
My point is, everyone here seems to think everything MS makes is lousy, because they have one bad experience. Very few people are open such as yourself. At least you were up-front about your intent, and taking issue with MS for morality reasons is respectable. Making fun of people simply because they like MS products really accomplishes nothing, and is actually detrimental to whatever advocacy the attacker had in mind.
Alas, c'est la
Funny how it wasn't an MCSE. It's funny too when an Oracle Administrator needs to call Oracle to resolve problems, or when the Network Administrator needs to call Cisco support (hmm . . . didn't the /. admins have to do this when they had that network outage some time ago?)
So, even if he was an MCSE, what the hell does that have to do with anything? Just as is with all types of tests, there's people that really know what they're doing, and there's though that are trained to take the test (SAT reviewers make a ton of money off this). But I assume you know that, and opted to take the low road since it was MS.
And I've spent many an hour helping buddies recovering from botched Linux installs. Does that mean I should blacklist Linux and write it off as no good, even though lots of other people have it running fine?
Why is this guy considered a troll? Because he makes MS sound not so bad? The guy above him gives his own numbers (and took the liberty of omitting the "less than" part), and he's considered "Informative". Seems /. is full of double standards.
Praetell, how is Bill Gates as evil as Bin Laden? Last time I checked, being successful was not evil. But it does invoke jealousy in a lot of people . . .
Why do we need to get more people running linux? Seriously. Will "Windows lusers" really add that much to the community? Oh, so now we have more users, more quality software will be made for linux? Wait, nope. All we'll get is the same crappy software as there exists on Windows. And no one will pay for it anyway. So, why does it matter? Use linux, be happy, and give it a break.
This will be bad for Debian and difficult for Cygwin.
/.'ers think only exists under linux).
Why will this be bad for Debian?
The software will all be limited by the poor design of the OS underneath, and will give a bad impression in the best of worlds.
Last time I checked, Windows was closed source, except to certain educational institutions. So, unless you've actually seen the source, it's very difficult to comment on the design (you only know what you've been told). So, sounds more like a case of "the OS is not open, so the design sucks."
Just a point of information, the Win32 API is the best documented API I have ever seen. Just because the source is closed doesn't mean MS makes it difficult for people to code for it. I suggest you take a gander on the MSDN.
My closest brush with stuff like this was Exceed, the X port to Win32. It made me think X sucked, and I never learned a thing. Why? Because half of it was broken by the suck OS underneath and I had no reference to the way things were supposed to work.
Try Cygwin. I've gotten X and KDE up on Cygwin, and it was really cool. I was writing docs with LyX just as if I were under any X Windows system (which for some reason
A year later I learned to program the Win95 API and understood how things had shifted around under the shiny binary.
And? Oh yeah, there's plenty of successful X servers available for Win32 (PC Xware, ReflectionX, etc.).
I suggest you take a look at Cygwin lately to see how far it has progressed. It is very useful.
Loss32 would be a good name for Win32 TM.
Yeah, and GNU isn't a trademark. Oh wait, yeah it is. But believe you me, you're childish rants about Suck OS and M$ are great for advocacy and will convert millions of people instantly!
False. Not everything has a political agenda behind it. Yes, promoting free software is good (although I personally like the BSD license better). But arguing because people don't call linux GNU/Linux achieves nothing, and at the end of the day, no one really cares.
False again. I realize how much he has done. And I fully appreciate it. I use GNU tools on a daily basis. I rely on them. My point is that the whole OSS movement seems to be just one huge circus of politics, and he always seems to be at the front. I agree with a lot of things he has to say, but a lot seem ludicrous at best (such as this w32 moniker).
I remember when this was first discussed on debianplanet, and a lot of people started flipping out. There's simply some places (such as the work office), where one is forced to use a Win32 OS, and cannot dual-boot. Besides, dual-booting is a PITA. If I can "dpkg -i" a package under cygwin, and get to using the gimp VS photoshop, I'll do it in a heartbeat.
:)
At best, one can say that this will deter people from linux. But then again, everyone loves linux because of all the OSS available for it. And if the whole goal is to promote OSS, why neglect the largest user base? Then when people get sick of Windows, they can convert to FreeBSD or Linux or whatever without there being a huge learning curve involved.
I don't think I really agree with the port being called w32 though. win32 is not a moniker that promotes Windows as a winner, it's just the first syllable of the word, just like a lot of nicknames are formed. I wish RMS would spend more time coding than trying to be a politician
Writing and releasing such worm is a criminal offense, and such people should be prosecuted. But you seem to have nullified your entire point by contradicting yourself from sentence to sentence.
But Microsoft isn't willing. They have a long history of paranoia about having any other product competing in, or even adjacent to, their 0wn market space, and an equally long history of killing off those products by fair means or foul.
So, rather than be the better man, Linux should stoop down to the lowest common denominator? I can tell you right now that I find Linux advocates to be far more condescending and invasive in their OS advocacy.
Idealism is nice, but realism contributes more to survival.
And realistically, if Joe Schmoe uses Win9x or Linux, it won't affect you much one way or the other, as I pointed out before. The successful Linux community now will remain the successful Linux community, regardless of what MS does with OEMs. It's the way it has realistically has always been.
Whatever happened to Linus saying Linux doesn't care what MS does? I thought there was no competition. Seems like a lot of people need to grow up. The Linux community has always operated on its own. Why does it need to attract every MS user in the world? I use Linux. Will I all of a sudden get higher quality software because more neophytes are using the OS? Regardless of what MS does, Linux will always exist, in the same elitist circle it exists in now.
pretentious
pretentious (pr-tnshs)
adj.
Claiming or demanding a position of distinction or merit, especially when unjustified.
So, how can you say that MS programmers are pretentious? Upper management != programmers. I personally know several MS programmers and they are far from pretentious. Seems like just a little more slander from the Linux group (great advocacy I might add).
And from this definition, it seems that Linux is pretentious. That, or the Linux community is a bunch of hypocrites. I hear time and time again that Linux isn't doing anything above and beyond, but rather just what an OS should do. So where is the justification for all this merit?
Yeap, I definitely was using the nvidia driver (I even got the nice splash screen). I was using it on a variety of processors, ranging from a K6-2 350 to a K7 - 1.3 GHz. And a range of kernels from like 2.4.5 to 2.4.10 (I know agpgart had some make-overs, so I don't know if that had anything to do with it).
I am using the latest nvidia drivers. Though, I admit last time I tried was about two months ago, since I was so disgusted with performance. And I run debian sid, so my software versions for things like X-Windows are usually as recent as they can be. And when I tried Mandrake 8.0, my frame rate was even half that as it was under debian (still haven't figured this one out, since I had the same "packages" installed, and used the same config files.)
Now, as a linux user, the real question is, what do I have to gain by lying?
Is it not possible that people experience different results under different systems? I typically get 3x the framerate on Windows than I do on linux with my TNT2 Ultra. And I've had a lot more crashes with games under linux than under Windows.
Does that mean that you'll have the same problems? No. It's just people talking from experience. That is not trolling. What you and the previous poster have done is construed as trolling, but since you're carrying the linux battle flag, you don't see it as that.
What are you going to win? Linux zealots crack me up. They promote all the same stuff they say they hate Microsoft for, just from the opposite side. You're using linux. Isn't that enough to make you happy? Does your mother's best friend's daughter's boyfriend really need to be running linux to make you feel better? I never hear the Windows crowd or the Mac crowd trying to jam their OSes down my throat (note i said crowd, not companies). And I respect those people ten fold than I do those that try to tell me I'm dumb for not running linux. Every OS has its strengths and its weaknesses. Linux has its benefits. FreeBSD has its benefits. Windows has its benefits. Pick which ever one suits your needs and be done with it. The only war waging here is the one begun by pre-pubescent fools that hate Bill Gates for being a business genius (totally neglecting the fact that Linus Torvalds says there is no competition).
This is far from insightful.
Read the thread and you'll understand. A Win32 program crashes and it's MS's fault. A linux program crashes and it's just poor coding. Quite the double standard. Like MS is responsible for a poorly written program that doesn't free() its memory or something.
It's funny that when linux progs segfault that it's not linux's fault.
I have my web browser start up page point to freshmeat. So I check it out every time my browser starts up. *gasp* That means I even check it multiple times in a day *deeper gasp*
And when you pull your head out of your arse, you'll realize what you said about UNIX having a mechanic's key. Then tell me what user tasks you need to run as Administrator for on WinNT-based systems? This is the usual situation. Even for many home/hobbiest machines. Obviously you've never used a machine you don't own, either at work or in education. (And if you get caught trying to force the locks expect someone to be doing a good impersonation of the BOfH.)
Yeah, this is the case in a work environment, where upper management would rather the developer's develop than to spend their time configuring their computer. And this is usually more of a case because the network probably employess NIS and uses NFS, so there's a central point of information. In this case, it's really the network being configged, and your computer gets a slight config to use that information. Say what you want, but I don't know anybody who wants to have someone come to their house all the time to config their computer because they're not sure of what they're doing, and don't want to blow a hole in their foot. Of course, no matter what I say, you'll refute it, because you have the typical slashdot attitude that MS should die. I personally run debian gnu/linux and freebsd. I only support MS because so many people make so many pre-pubescent moronic comments, which is not the way to advocate your OS of choice. Open your eyes, and you'll see a whole hell of a lot better.