Linux
 

Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and
eSata enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with
OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.

xxx

Linux
 

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and
eSata enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with
OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.

xxx

Missed the boat with WHAT?

Linux
 

On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:40:37 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and eSata
enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.

xxx

Missed the boat with WHAT?

Evidently, marketing. IMHO, that was IBM's shortcoming with OS2 - they
had a better product.

Linux
 

On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 04:00:48 +0000, Student wrote:

Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

Intrigued? In what way?

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and eSata
enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with OS2.

In what way? Were you expecting it to be more like Windows this time
around? From your previous experience with Linux, you should have known
that would not be the case.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.

"Use what works best for you" has always been my advice when people ask
me which OS is "best."

From an AmigaOS-skipped-Windows-entirely-and-went-directly-to-Linux-10-
years-ago user,

Stef

Linux
 

In ,
ray wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:40:37 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and eSata
enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.

xxx

Missed the boat with WHAT?

Evidently, marketing. IMHO, that was IBM's shortcoming with OS2 - they
had a better product.

No way! I ran OS/2 v2.x and I was a beta tester for OS/2 v3. And the
beta testing things were doing just fine. But just like in IBM's style,
they screwed up in the released version. They changed many of the
drivers and a huge amount of beta testers couldn't even get it to
install (including myself).

Better product, my eye! I have at least a dozen computers right in this
room alone. And I can take that Warp install CD and I can guarantee you
that it will not install on any of them. Then there was all of those
FixPaks! Most of them broke more than they fixed. And old bugs were
coming back to haunt OS/2. That is because every time IBM tried to fix
something, they made it worse than ever before. Then they would plug
back the old code that had the old bugs.

It wasn't a failure of IBM's marketing! Hell IBM spent 2 billion dollars
on OS/2 alone. It was a failure of IBM's programmers couldn't program
their way out of a wet paper bag. And IBM made promises they couldn't
keep. This later became well known as FUD.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era)
Centrino Core Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3

Linux
 

On 04/02/2011 12:09 PM, BillW50 wrote:
I have at least a dozen computers right in this
room alone.

Why do you have so many?

--
Alias

Linux
 

ray wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:40:37 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and
eSata enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with
OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.


xxx
Missed the boat with WHAT?

Evidently, marketing. IMHO, that was IBM's shortcoming with OS2 -
they had a better product.

Marketing is a factor, sure, but that alone doesn't explain why a system
costing $100 to $300 overwhelms one that is free. Progress in Linux
seems to be a measure of how closely it imitates Windows.

--
Crash

"The real question is not whether machines think but whether men do."
~ B. F. Skinner ~

Linux
 

On 04/02/2011 01:15 PM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
ray wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:40:37 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and
eSata enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with
OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.


xxx
Missed the boat with WHAT?

Evidently, marketing. IMHO, that was IBM's shortcoming with OS2 -
they had a better product.

Marketing is a factor, sure, but that alone doesn't explain why a system
costing $100 to $300 overwhelms one that is free. Progress in Linux
seems to be a measure of how closely it imitates Windows.


Sorry, but it's the other way round. Beryl and Compiz came out before
Aero and is much more configurable. A mini view from the task bar of
open apps came out in Linux long before Vista had it. Linux has had
multiple imaging programs long before Windows 7 had it. Linux had a UAC
long before Vista. Windows has yet to have multiple desktops without
third party programs. Windows has yet to have one source for updates.
Windows has yet to have the architecture that Linux has to prevent
malware. The reason that Windows is number one is not quality but
marketing and FUD, FUD which you seemed to have swallowed whole.

--
Alias

Linux
 

On 02/04/2011 12:15, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:


Marketing is a factor, sure, but that alone doesn't explain why a system
costing $100 to $300 overwhelms one that is free. Progress in Linux
seems to be a measure of how closely it imitates Windows.


So can you explain why Linux netbooks, that were OUTSELLING the
equivalent Windows ones, suddenly disappeared from the shelves?
Surely retailers give their customers what they want to buy, and they
wanted Linux Netbooks and yet, suddenly, they all disappeared, with only
XP netbooks available, all of a sudden.
Now I wonder WHY that happened?

Linux
 

On 4/2/2011 7:21 AM, Alias wrote:
On 04/02/2011 01:15 PM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
ray wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:40:37 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and
eSata enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with
OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.


xxx
Missed the boat with WHAT?

Evidently, marketing. IMHO, that was IBM's shortcoming with OS2 -
they had a better product.

Marketing is a factor, sure, but that alone doesn't explain why a system
costing $100 to $300 overwhelms one that is free. Progress in Linux
seems to be a measure of how closely it imitates Windows.


Sorry, but it's the other way round. Beryl and Compiz came out before
Aero and is much more configurable. A mini view from the task bar of
open apps came out in Linux long before Vista had it. Linux has had
multiple imaging programs long before Windows 7 had it. Linux had a UAC
long before Vista. Windows has yet to have multiple desktops without
third party programs. Windows has yet to have one source for updates.
Windows has yet to have the architecture that Linux has to prevent
malware. The reason that Windows is number one is not quality but
marketing and FUD, FUD which you seemed to have swallowed whole.


You can keep that little pipe dream going about how Linux as an
architecture to prevent malware. I no more belive than I believe you.

Linux
 

On 02/04/2011 12:38, Big Steel wrote:


You can keep that little pipe dream going about how Linux as an
architecture to prevent malware. I no more belive than I believe you.


Pipedream eh? So that's why well over 50% of the world's web servers are
Linux and yet, strange to seem, they don't get infected - the Windows
ones DO?

Linux
 

On 4/2/2011 7:45 AM, Gordon wrote:
On 02/04/2011 12:38, Big Steel wrote:


You can keep that little pipe dream going about how Linux as an
architecture to prevent malware. I no more belive than I believe you.


Pipedream eh? So that's why well over 50% of the world's web servers are
Linux and yet, strange to seem, they don't get infected - the Windows
ones DO?

Bull****, the Linux Web servers are being compromised all of the time.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/141651/attack_against_linux_apache_servers_intensifying.h tml

Linux
 

On 04/02/2011 01:38 PM, Big Steel wrote:
On 4/2/2011 7:21 AM, Alias wrote:
On 04/02/2011 01:15 PM, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:
ray wrote:
On Fri, 01 Apr 2011 09:40:37 +0100, Gordon wrote:

On 01/04/2011 05:00, Student wrote:
Linux has always intrigued me and I have tried many distros.

I now have a computer with eSATA. I had a spare hard disk and
eSata enclosure.

To pass my time I tried Linux again tonight.

I tried Ubuntu, Mint gnome and Mint debian based.

Honestly Linux missed the boat just as IBM missed the boat with
OS2.

I am firmlly entrenched in windows 7 at home and xp at my office.


xxx
Missed the boat with WHAT?

Evidently, marketing. IMHO, that was IBM's shortcoming with OS2 -
they had a better product.

Marketing is a factor, sure, but that alone doesn't explain why a system
costing $100 to $300 overwhelms one that is free. Progress in Linux
seems to be a measure of how closely it imitates Windows.


Sorry, but it's the other way round. Beryl and Compiz came out before
Aero and is much more configurable. A mini view from the task bar of
open apps came out in Linux long before Vista had it. Linux has had
multiple imaging programs long before Windows 7 had it. Linux had a UAC
long before Vista. Windows has yet to have multiple desktops without
third party programs. Windows has yet to have one source for updates.
Windows has yet to have the architecture that Linux has to prevent
malware. The reason that Windows is number one is not quality but
marketing and FUD, FUD which you seemed to have swallowed whole.


You can keep that little pipe dream going about how Linux as an
architecture to prevent malware. I no more belive than I believe you.


And the reason you think I would care what someone who has some big
steel stuck up his ass believes?

--
Alias

Linux
 

On 04/02/2011 01:49 PM, Big Steel wrote:
On 4/2/2011 7:45 AM, Gordon wrote:
On 02/04/2011 12:38, Big Steel wrote:


You can keep that little pipe dream going about how Linux as an
architecture to prevent malware. I no more belive than I believe you.


Pipedream eh? So that's why well over 50% of the world's web servers are
Linux and yet, strange to seem, they don't get infected - the Windows
ones DO?

Bull****, the Linux Web servers are being compromised all of the time.

http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/141651/attack_against_linux_apache_servers_intensifying.h tml


Puhlease, the above article is three years old.

--
Alias

Linux
 

In ,
Gordon wrote:
On 02/04/2011 12:15, Dave "Crash" Dummy wrote:


Marketing is a factor, sure, but that alone doesn't explain why a
system costing $100 to $300 overwhelms one that is free. Progress in
Linux seems to be a measure of how closely it imitates Windows.

So can you explain why Linux netbooks, that were OUTSELLING the
equivalent Windows ones, suddenly disappeared from the shelves?

That is an easy answer. As I have four of those netbooks that came with
Linux on them. Because none of them came with Windows at first and they
only came with Linux on them. You couldn't buy a netbook back then with
Windows on it. As there just wasn't any.

Windows could run on them, but they didn't sell netbooks with Windows on
them because Windows licenses would add too much of the cost of the
netbook. They did include Windows drivers if you wanted to put Windows
on it (which you had to provide yourself). And that is what most people
did.

Then Microsoft came along and told the manufactures if you want Windows
on them, we'll give you netbook pricing for Windows. They jumped at the
deal. And all of those Linux netbooks suddenly became unsellable. As
nobody wanted a Linux netbook if they could get a Windows one for a few
bucks more.

Surely retailers give their customers what they want to buy, and they
wanted Linux Netbooks and yet, suddenly, they all disappeared, with
only XP netbooks available, all of a sudden.
Now I wonder WHY that happened?

Customers didn't want Linux netbooks, they wanted Windows netbooks. And
once became available and affordable for netbooks, Linux netbooks
disappeared.

There has been a number of manufactures who refuses to sell any machines
with Windows on them (including IBM for a time). All had to learn the
hard lesson that Linux machines don't sell and virtually nobody wants
them.

--
Bill
Gateway M465e ('06 era)
Centrino Core Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3