A user saving a file, not looking at where they're saving it, then calling me pissed that this stupid box lost their work.
A user clickint the mouse several dozen times in an attempt to make the file open up faster then bitching that Windows locked up again.
A user complaining that their PC won't turn on even though they hit the button several times. All that happens is the light turns green but the screen stays black. (That's when I have them hit the button on that box on the floor...)
I'm saddened (and a little afraid) to admit that, at the time, that one flew right past me. I blame hard work and little sleep.
I apologize to the original poster and will (being a fan of well played sarcasm) will spend the next few minutes quietly enjoying the wonderful jab I so ingraciously trampled.
The notion that there was a time when you could happily work at a job for life is a LIE.
I have a father, an uncle, and a grandfather who all did just that. My dad worked for GM for 36 years and left with a pension that pays him exactly what he was paid when he worked there (around $23 an hour) plus cost of living raises. My uncle and my grandfather both worked at Chrysler for 30+ years. They each had enough seniority to make it through the "outsourcing" of the auto industry.
I find it almost humorous that I find myself in the same boat (only with far less seniority) in my chosen profession. I also find it ironic that I have two sisters who have much more stable jobs in factories making more than I do in IT.
So are you suggesting that Windows comes bundled with Norton Antivirus/Firewall, that you shouldnt get a choice, and that we should add another $50 to the cost?
Nope. I'm suggesting they scrap this train-wreck of an OS and rebuild from the Kernel up. With all they've learned about security patching maybe next time they can get it right.
That's kind of funny when you consider that most XP crashes are because of bad drivers too (or misbehaving malware).
That's kind of funny when you consider I'm a System Administrator, I keep my Windows box up to date and as squeaky clean as is possible, and I still experience crashes.
Most XP crashes are Software/Hardware related, not user error. I've spent the last five years having to apologize to my users for some of the screwy, quirky things that Windows does.
On the flip side I'm sitting here at a PC in a large company whose IT department is mainly run by college grads. I myself am self-taught.
It's running an unpatched version of Windows XP with wide open internet access (via IE) and an installation of McAfee Viruscan that can't be updated because, as a user (actually a new SysAdmin/Support person) I can't change the incorrect Repository settings. However I am configured as a local Administrator (apparently necessary on their system to correctly configure Outlook).
My point? A college education doesn't bar you from stupidity. Many come out and implement only what they were taught (and can still remember) in school.
Many who are self-taught will find it easier to learn from mistakes and are a little more flexible with their ideas of how things work.
Perhaps instead of sneering and ridiculing him behind his back you might have sent him some constructive criticism.
You seem to be going on assumptions rather than actual experience.
The only possibly difficult part of installing Slackware would be partitioning, which always needs a bit of explanation (Windows XP is in the same boat). The average user will always get tripped up by this but a little reading will get them through.
The rest of the Slackware install would be what you'd call point and click only its menu driven. Pretty != Ease of use. You can go through, choose all of the default options, and have a functioning Slackware system within ten minutes (I just reinstalled Slackware 10 on my laptop in just this way last night and it took 9 and a half)
As for not having all of the bells and whistles... with Slackware, the bells and whistles are not only there but also highly and easily configurable.
If by bells and whistles you mean it doesn't automatically boot to a pretty login screen, no it doesn't by default, but altering the default run level in/etc/inittab (which is well commented) can quickly change that (as it did when I wanted my Mandrake install to boot to a command prompt).
If by bells and whistles you mean it doesn't have all the programs the other distributions have, wrong again. I've been 99% successful at installing nearly everything I want (I'm a Sys Admin and so I tend to want a lot!) whether it be by the default Slack packages or (my preferred method) from source. I usually compile from source and install it to the/usr/local/ directory, create a symbolic link to the binary in/usr/local/bin and away it goes. I never have to worry about where the hell did it install and why can't I find a shortcut to it?
Because it's not hellbent on giving the end-user a flashy graphical experience designed to grip the heart and burn the retinas, Slackware has been far and away the easiest distro I've come across to customize.
I just find it amazing that, after all of the space games, fantasy games, action/adventure games, sports games, etc... all people really wanted was a game that attempts to simulate real life in all of its monotonous glory.
For that matter, you could just get a copy of Windows 2003 server and run Windows Terminal Services and save time and trouble with Citrix.
My company is currently phasing out Citrix in favor TS just to save on the extra licensing for Citrix. Really the only extra thing Citrix has (at least that we miss) was true load balancing but with just one or even a couple of servers that won't really be necessary.
Of course if you don't want to spend a bundle on hardware and software but you want something that'll run on cheap PCs with little or no fuss just grab a version of Knoppix, customize it to your needs, pop it into the CD drive of a cheap machine, and go to town.
Since "guests" can't unmount a mounted CD you won't have to worry about anyone taking it and since it's CD based you won't have to worry about anyone screwing up the configuation. If the CD dies you just burn another one.
Microsoft would have never reached the level of penetration they have to date. Keep in mind that everything that was done in personal computing in the mid- to late-80s was easier on a Mac than on a WinTel platform - hands down, no argument.
No argument there. Microsoft beat out the Mac because it ran on the cheaper x86 hardware.
The cost of hardware these days is irrelevant. The cost of software, however, is becoming increasingly relevant.
Are you seeing a pattern here? Let me draw the lines in... Mac was easier to use than Windows but Windows was cheaper to run. Windows is supposedly easier to use than Linux but...
Are you saying that in that five years you won't upgrade your Windows software? Apply patches, upgrade hardware?
Perhaps it's not quite as trivial a thing to do with Linux though I've been running Slackware (for a home network with only a few logons) and I've not run into anything major while keeping my boxes current. To be fair I've only gone from kernel 2.2 to 2.6 on Slack 8.0 to 10.0, which isn't five years, but I really don't see an issue with keeping it up to date over the next three to five years.
As for upgrading Windows 3.51 to Windows 2000, I'll not ask what you were running on it that it went that smoothly. In my shop, we recently went from NT4 to 2000 and while it went fairly smoothly it did take an entire weekend to get everything pu and running and there were some stumbling blocks such as being without email for two days and some other little irritations (try having to go back through Active Directory and manually re-enter user specific information so that it shows up in the Global Address List for over 400 users sometime). Not bad, but not a lot of fun.
I agree and postfix is very easy to set up. It's just a text-file that you modify. Once you have done it a few times, it is really, really easy and it can be done remotely.
What?!!! You have to look at a text file?!! You mean to tell me you actually have to read?!!!
Sounds to me like you actually might have to do a little reading to set up a linux box properly.
As someone who is in the midst of getting his MCSE (however reluctantly) through self study, it seems to me the ones blubbering about Microsoft products being "easier and more intuitive" are probably the same ones who sat in an actual classroom learning how to use it or did a whole lot of reading to get it to work properly (and to get those nifty certifications).
So why then do all the MS techs (including my bosses) all balk at anything that might involve a command line and a different approach to the same tasks?
Frankly I put it down to ignorance born of laziness.
Oh, and to answer anyone who has asked (can't count the number of times) why they should use Linux when Windows is so much easier? Check your wallet. The difference is in there (or if you're using Microsoft, it's not in there).
Guns have legitimate uses also. Does that mean some legislation isn't in order to prevent them from being misused?
How sad is it that?
They'll condemn P2P software with statements like, "has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed" and yet, has P2P software ever killed anyone?
Seems to me they should be saying the same things about guns (and no, I'm not an anti-gun fanatic, just drawing a parallel).
Is this the beginning of the NP2PA? Are we soon to have actors turned P2P fanatics at rallies strategically timed to coincide with P2P tragedies holding up burned music CDs and shouting "NOT FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!"?
Not the point. The point is, in Linux, to install the program you download you have to first make it executable which is apparently too difficult for some folks. After it's executable you can run that Realplayer bin file any way you want.
The difference is, even if you inadvertently download something malicious you generally don't have to worry about it executing itself because you haven't specified it as an executable file on your system.
This is why Linux succeeds as an Operating System.
Granted it would be easier if you could just click on a file and have it execute but then you would wind up with all of the security flaws inherent in Windows.
Is it really so difficult to learn a few commands and/or type them in verbatim?
Nearly everyone in the Linux community agrees that the way to get Linux on the desktop is to entice the big-name software developers to write more programs for Linux.
Then, when one of the most well-known (even if not well liked) companies jumps up and does it, everyone cries and whines about it. Frankly Realplayer didn't do anything a dozen or more other software companies did/still do. They just got caught.
As for Realplayer, my advice would be to download it even if you don't install it. When a company like that supports Linux it's a good idea to at least look like we're supporting them back as a flag to any other companies that may be watching from the fence.
By that logic I should have gone back to Windows the first time my first Redhat installation died.
I didn't, I looked around until I found something more stable. It turned out to be Slackware using ReiserFS on an AMD900 with "cheap RAM" and I have had 0 problems in the year and a half It's been running (and it's my main desktop PC/workhorse).
Basically, how the **** do I install / update programs?!? (I know, I RTFM; but why do I have to read a different friendly manual for each distribution I trial run?)
WTF is an emerge, and if its so great, why does only gentoo use it? What is an RPM? Exactly HOW do I install or upgrade on mandrake (realy; i have no idea!) What is a modprobe - and why should I need to know? For a desktop OS, _no_ configuration change should be commandline only... (like samba; I got it working no problems, but had to go to a root prompt and edit a file in vi - WTF?)
Yep, I had the same questions when I first started using linux. I got frustrated and installed FreeBSD only to run into the same questions (though they were answered differently) so I started poking around to figure it out. It took me about 2 months of reading, digging around, and playing with various things (including different distros) to figure things out and find a direction.
Oddly enough, I also had these same questions when I bought my first (pentium) computer back in '96. I'd been away from computers since the 286 era and had no idea what this Windows animal was.
It took me about two months of digging around, reading a lot, and playing with stuff (including several reinstalls and by several I mean at least twice a week) to finally get a handle on it and figure things out. Now I can make most Windows OSs dance to my tune (insofar as is possible).
The point? Most "dumb" users out there can barely answer those questions in Windows. All platforms have a learning curve.
Windows claims to be the easiest to use but in truth that's only because it's been exposed to more people. My sisters can (with some accuracy) answer my Dad's questions about how to use Windows XP. The more people using it the more help you have.
With Linux, once I found Linuxquestions.org and a few other sites, I got up to speed pretty quickly. I found there were alternate ways of doing things than in Windows but when you think about it they're really no less or more efficient. Just different.
I use Slack and tend to prefer to compile from source when possible but I have the option to use the package installer to install pre-compiled binaries. More difficult than using Microsoft's Installer? Not particularly. Different, yes.
Were I to have started out using Linux rather than Windows I might boot up Windows and wonder where in the hell I'm supposed to log in or how I'm supposed to compile my program's source code so I could install programs.
I have a sister who answers my Dad's questions about AOL email but spent MONTHS running a computer that took literally ten minutes to boot and two just to open a program because she had absolutely no idea how to uninstall programs. Granted it's an old Pentium 266 running Windows 98 but after I saved her stuff, blew the old stuff away, and reinstalled Windows 98 it runs like a champ doing everything she needs it to. She still doesn't know how to uninstall programs simply because she doesn't want to know. If Windows is so simple and user friendly shouldn't it already know what she wants and do this stuff for her?
To conclude, just because you're familiar with one environment doesn't mean it's any better or any worse than any other environment. It's just different. The more work you put into learning it the more you'll get out of it.
Oh, and just to stay on topic, Spatial blows goats. The first thing I did after installing Windows was to make sure everything opened in the same window. The first thing I do in Mozilla/Firefox is configure tabbed browsing. If I could get every application/browser/everything to open in one tabbed window I'd be there! Multiple windows = Die die die!
why is it i cringe when i see open source apps GUI's in a "screenshot" everytime i read the spec get all excited then i see the screenshots and think "nahh ill stick with OSX/WinXP
Because you think being a power user is using Outlook rather than Outlook Express?
Because you ditched that baby AOL stuff and signed up with Earthlink DSL, so now you're the hacker in the family?
No, no, lemme guess... you ordered the Slackware disks but when you put one in your CD drive it wouldn't Autostart so you decided it sucked.
Slashdot Mirror
A user saving a file, not looking at where they're saving it, then calling me pissed that this stupid box lost their work.
A user clickint the mouse several dozen times in an attempt to make the file open up faster then bitching that Windows locked up again.
A user complaining that their PC won't turn on even though they hit the button several times. All that happens is the light turns green but the screen stays black. (That's when I have them hit the button on that box on the floor...)
Need I go on?
I'm saddened (and a little afraid) to admit that, at the time, that one flew right past me. I blame hard work and little sleep.
I apologize to the original poster and will (being a fan of well played sarcasm) will spend the next few minutes quietly enjoying the wonderful jab I so ingraciously trampled.
The notion that there was a time when you could happily work at a job for life is a LIE.
I have a father, an uncle, and a grandfather who all did just that. My dad worked for GM for 36 years and left with a pension that pays him exactly what he was paid when he worked there (around $23 an hour) plus cost of living raises. My uncle and my grandfather both worked at Chrysler for 30+ years. They each had enough seniority to make it through the "outsourcing" of the auto industry.
I find it almost humorous that I find myself in the same boat (only with far less seniority) in my chosen profession. I also find it ironic that I have two sisters who have much more stable jobs in factories making more than I do in IT.
So are you suggesting that Windows comes bundled with Norton Antivirus/Firewall, that you shouldnt get a choice, and that we should add another $50 to the cost?
Nope. I'm suggesting they scrap this train-wreck of an OS and rebuild from the Kernel up. With all they've learned about security patching maybe next time they can get it right.
That's kind of funny when you consider that most XP crashes are because of bad drivers too (or misbehaving malware).
That's kind of funny when you consider I'm a System Administrator, I keep my Windows box up to date and as squeaky clean as is possible, and I still experience crashes.
Most XP crashes are Software/Hardware related, not user error. I've spent the last five years having to apologize to my users for some of the screwy, quirky things that Windows does.
On the flip side I'm sitting here at a PC in a large company whose IT department is mainly run by college grads. I myself am self-taught. It's running an unpatched version of Windows XP with wide open internet access (via IE) and an installation of McAfee Viruscan that can't be updated because, as a user (actually a new SysAdmin/Support person) I can't change the incorrect Repository settings. However I am configured as a local Administrator (apparently necessary on their system to correctly configure Outlook). My point? A college education doesn't bar you from stupidity. Many come out and implement only what they were taught (and can still remember) in school. Many who are self-taught will find it easier to learn from mistakes and are a little more flexible with their ideas of how things work. Perhaps instead of sneering and ridiculing him behind his back you might have sent him some constructive criticism.
You seem to be going on assumptions rather than actual experience.
/etc/inittab (which is well commented) can quickly change that (as it did when I wanted my Mandrake install to boot to a command prompt).
/usr/local/ directory, create a symbolic link to the binary in /usr/local/bin and away it goes. I never have to worry about where the hell did it install and why can't I find a shortcut to it?
The only possibly difficult part of installing Slackware would be partitioning, which always needs a bit of explanation (Windows XP is in the same boat). The average user will always get tripped up by this but a little reading will get them through.
The rest of the Slackware install would be what you'd call point and click only its menu driven. Pretty != Ease of use. You can go through, choose all of the default options, and have a functioning Slackware system within ten minutes (I just reinstalled Slackware 10 on my laptop in just this way last night and it took 9 and a half)
As for not having all of the bells and whistles... with Slackware, the bells and whistles are not only there but also highly and easily configurable.
If by bells and whistles you mean it doesn't automatically boot to a pretty login screen, no it doesn't by default, but altering the default run level in
If by bells and whistles you mean it doesn't have all the programs the other distributions have, wrong again. I've been 99% successful at installing nearly everything I want (I'm a Sys Admin and so I tend to want a lot!) whether it be by the default Slack packages or (my preferred method) from source. I usually compile from source and install it to the
Because it's not hellbent on giving the end-user a flashy graphical experience designed to grip the heart and burn the retinas, Slackware has been far and away the easiest distro I've come across to customize.
Sorry, but for me Slackware = warm fuzzies
From what the site says, you need to apply voltage for it to perform as a window.
So in the future it's going to cost money to open your windows?
I just find it amazing that, after all of the space games, fantasy games, action/adventure games, sports games, etc... all people really wanted was a game that attempts to simulate real life in all of its monotonous glory.
For that matter, you could just get a copy of Windows 2003 server and run Windows Terminal Services and save time and trouble with Citrix.
My company is currently phasing out Citrix in favor TS just to save on the extra licensing for Citrix. Really the only extra thing Citrix has (at least that we miss) was true load balancing but with just one or even a couple of servers that won't really be necessary.
Of course if you don't want to spend a bundle on hardware and software but you want something that'll run on cheap PCs with little or no fuss just grab a version of Knoppix, customize it to your needs, pop it into the CD drive of a cheap machine, and go to town.
Since "guests" can't unmount a mounted CD you won't have to worry about anyone taking it and since it's CD based you won't have to worry about anyone screwing up the configuation. If the CD dies you just burn another one.
Microsoft would have never reached the level of penetration they have to date. Keep in mind that everything that was done in personal computing in the mid- to late-80s was easier on a Mac than on a WinTel platform - hands down, no argument.
No argument there. Microsoft beat out the Mac because it ran on the cheaper x86 hardware.
The cost of hardware these days is irrelevant. The cost of software, however, is becoming increasingly relevant.
Are you seeing a pattern here? Let me draw the lines in... Mac was easier to use than Windows but Windows was cheaper to run. Windows is supposedly easier to use than Linux but...
Oh, right... well there's this thing you have to do with it first... it's called an installation...
Are you saying that in that five years you won't upgrade your Windows software? Apply patches, upgrade hardware?
Perhaps it's not quite as trivial a thing to do with Linux though I've been running Slackware (for a home network with only a few logons) and I've not run into anything major while keeping my boxes current. To be fair I've only gone from kernel 2.2 to 2.6 on Slack 8.0 to 10.0, which isn't five years, but I really don't see an issue with keeping it up to date over the next three to five years.
As for upgrading Windows 3.51 to Windows 2000, I'll not ask what you were running on it that it went that smoothly. In my shop, we recently went from NT4 to 2000 and while it went fairly smoothly it did take an entire weekend to get everything pu and running and there were some stumbling blocks such as being without email for two days and some other little irritations (try having to go back through Active Directory and manually re-enter user specific information so that it shows up in the Global Address List for over 400 users sometime). Not bad, but not a lot of fun.
I agree and postfix is very easy to set up. It's just a text-file that you modify. Once you have done it a few times, it is really, really easy and it can be done remotely.
What?!!! You have to look at a text file?!! You mean to tell me you actually have to read?!!!
Sounds to me like you actually might have to do a little reading to set up a linux box properly.
As someone who is in the midst of getting his MCSE (however reluctantly) through self study, it seems to me the ones blubbering about Microsoft products being "easier and more intuitive" are probably the same ones who sat in an actual classroom learning how to use it or did a whole lot of reading to get it to work properly (and to get those nifty certifications).
So why then do all the MS techs (including my bosses) all balk at anything that might involve a command line and a different approach to the same tasks?
Frankly I put it down to ignorance born of laziness.
Oh, and to answer anyone who has asked (can't count the number of times) why they should use Linux when Windows is so much easier? Check your wallet. The difference is in there (or if you're using Microsoft, it's not in there).
Ignorance isn't cheap.
Guns have legitimate uses also. Does that mean some legislation isn't in order to prevent them from being misused?
How sad is it that?
They'll condemn P2P software with statements like, "has too many times been hijacked by those who use it for illegal purposes to which the vast majority of our consumers do not wish to be exposed" and yet, has P2P software ever killed anyone?
Seems to me they should be saying the same things about guns (and no, I'm not an anti-gun fanatic, just drawing a parallel).
Is this the beginning of the NP2PA? Are we soon to have actors turned P2P fanatics at rallies strategically timed to coincide with P2P tragedies holding up burned music CDs and shouting "NOT FROM MY COLD, DEAD HANDS!"?
Now, would that be slander or libel? (as I'm sure the target of that epithet is probably not a female dog)
Who's crying and whining? There's almost nothing but positive comments in this thread.
You forgot the delimiters.
Not the point. The point is, in Linux, to install the program you download you have to first make it executable which is apparently too difficult for some folks. After it's executable you can run that Realplayer bin file any way you want.
The difference is, even if you inadvertently download something malicious you generally don't have to worry about it executing itself because you haven't specified it as an executable file on your system.
This is why Linux succeeds as an Operating System.
Granted it would be easier if you could just click on a file and have it execute but then you would wind up with all of the security flaws inherent in Windows.
Is it really so difficult to learn a few commands and/or type them in verbatim?
Funny, I've noticed that too.
Nearly everyone in the Linux community agrees that the way to get Linux on the desktop is to entice the big-name software developers to write more programs for Linux.
Then, when one of the most well-known (even if not well liked) companies jumps up and does it, everyone cries and whines about it. Frankly Realplayer didn't do anything a dozen or more other software companies did/still do. They just got caught.
As for Realplayer, my advice would be to download it even if you don't install it. When a company like that supports Linux it's a good idea to at least look like we're supporting them back as a flag to any other companies that may be watching from the fence.
By that logic I should have gone back to Windows the first time my first Redhat installation died.
I didn't, I looked around until I found something more stable. It turned out to be Slackware using ReiserFS on an AMD900 with "cheap RAM" and I have had 0 problems in the year and a half It's been running (and it's my main desktop PC/workhorse).
Sometimes it is just the hardware.
Seems to me they didn't do very good research on these lists.
Apparently they've never run into Neoware Thin Clients running Linux?
Basically, how the **** do I install / update programs?!? (I know, I RTFM; but why do I have to read a different friendly manual for each distribution I trial run?)
WTF is an emerge, and if its so great, why does only gentoo use it? What is an RPM? Exactly HOW do I install or upgrade on mandrake (realy; i have no idea!) What is a modprobe - and why should I need to know? For a desktop OS, _no_ configuration change should be commandline only... (like samba; I got it working no problems, but had to go to a root prompt and edit a file in vi - WTF?)
Yep, I had the same questions when I first started using linux. I got frustrated and installed FreeBSD only to run into the same questions (though they were answered differently) so I started poking around to figure it out. It took me about 2 months of reading, digging around, and playing with various things (including different distros) to figure things out and find a direction.
Oddly enough, I also had these same questions when I bought my first (pentium) computer back in '96. I'd been away from computers since the 286 era and had no idea what this Windows animal was.
It took me about two months of digging around, reading a lot, and playing with stuff (including several reinstalls and by several I mean at least twice a week) to finally get a handle on it and figure things out. Now I can make most Windows OSs dance to my tune (insofar as is possible).
The point? Most "dumb" users out there can barely answer those questions in Windows. All platforms have a learning curve.
Windows claims to be the easiest to use but in truth that's only because it's been exposed to more people. My sisters can (with some accuracy) answer my Dad's questions about how to use Windows XP. The more people using it the more help you have.
With Linux, once I found Linuxquestions.org and a few other sites, I got up to speed pretty quickly. I found there were alternate ways of doing things than in Windows but when you think about it they're really no less or more efficient. Just different.
I use Slack and tend to prefer to compile from source when possible but I have the option to use the package installer to install pre-compiled binaries. More difficult than using Microsoft's Installer? Not particularly. Different, yes.
Were I to have started out using Linux rather than Windows I might boot up Windows and wonder where in the hell I'm supposed to log in or how I'm supposed to compile my program's source code so I could install programs.
I have a sister who answers my Dad's questions about AOL email but spent MONTHS running a computer that took literally ten minutes to boot and two just to open a program because she had absolutely no idea how to uninstall programs. Granted it's an old Pentium 266 running Windows 98 but after I saved her stuff, blew the old stuff away, and reinstalled Windows 98 it runs like a champ doing everything she needs it to. She still doesn't know how to uninstall programs simply because she doesn't want to know. If Windows is so simple and user friendly shouldn't it already know what she wants and do this stuff for her?
To conclude, just because you're familiar with one environment doesn't mean it's any better or any worse than any other environment. It's just different. The more work you put into learning it the more you'll get out of it.
Oh, and just to stay on topic, Spatial blows goats. The first thing I did after installing Windows was to make sure everything opened in the same window. The first thing I do in Mozilla/Firefox is configure tabbed browsing. If I could get every application/browser/everything to open in one tabbed window I'd be there! Multiple windows = Die die die!
Thank you.
Right, symbolic... it was late, I was tired. Thanks for the correction. :)
why is it i cringe when i see open source apps GUI's in a "screenshot" everytime i read the spec get all excited then i see the screenshots and think "nahh ill stick with OSX/WinXP
Because you think being a power user is using Outlook rather than Outlook Express?
Because you ditched that baby AOL stuff and signed up with Earthlink DSL, so now you're the hacker in the family?
No, no, lemme guess... you ordered the Slackware disks but when you put one in your CD drive it wouldn't Autostart so you decided it sucked.
(yeah, yeah, I know... don't feed the trolls...)