Why I no Longer Use Windows 7.

On 10/25/2010 4:19 PM, Alias wrote:
On 10/25/2010 06:51 PM, Boscoe wrote:
On 25/10/2010 5:20 PM, Alias wrote:
On 10/25/2010 06:12 PM, Boscoe wrote:
On 25/10/2010 10:59 AM, RonB wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:21:41 +0200, Alias wrote:

On 10/25/2010 05:24 AM, RonB wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 19:33:33 -0700, Frank wrote:

Alright sheep-****er...tell us all what you use that toy POS linux
for
and what you use Windows 7 for.

He probably uses Windows 7 to attract viruses. He uses Linux to
destroy
them.


I use Windows 7 for gaming. I use Linux for everything else.

That works too. As long as you can limit Windows' access to the
Internet
it will probably be okay-ish.



Thicko. Just because you're an amateur is no excuse to spread FUD. Put
your own house in order first. Two of many...


http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/208452/two_vulnerabilities_provide_root_access_on_linux.h tml




From this site:

"could allow a local attacker" BFD. If I have local access to your
computer, I could hack it too.




http://www.pcworld.com/businesscenter/article/208305/attack_page_scam_lurks_in_firefox_and_chrome.html




Um, that only applies to Windows. You're 0 for 2, chum.


Nice snip, troll. Where's the other link gone? Never mind!! Linux trolls
always have an excuse. Strange that.

I didn't snip anything. Read your original post. Most everyone else can,
except maybe Frank and Valorie.

heheh...what's wrong, you sheep-****ing, stupid piece of useless ****,
babba still has a headache?
Figures!

On 10/26/2010 02:29 AM, chrisv wrote:

"Alias" wrote in message
...
On 10/25/2010 10:12 PM, Valorie *~ wrote:

"bugbuster" wrote in message
news On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 11:51:26 -0700, Valorie *~ wrote:


"chrisv" wrote in message
...
bd wrote:

Democrats control congress and have since 2007. Only democrats can
stop
him from getting a bill to sign.

Wrong.

Are you so ignorant that you've not heard of a filibuster?

The dems had 60 votes. How could a filibuster stop them?

They only had 60 votes for a short time. And the Republicans used
blocks and secret blocks to bring the Senate to a halt. The crazy
Senate rules allow a single senator to block a vote (even a vote for
cloture) without having to identify himself.

A year and a half is a short time? They could have passed anything they
wanted. Their legislation was blocked or delayed by fellow democrats!
The kings of filibuster were the democrats during 6 of the Bush years.

Oh no, Valorie's morphed into a Christine O'Donnell! Bush raped the
land, lady, and you're lucky he wasn't allowed to pillage more for his
rich "base". Why was there a economic crisis? Two wars unpaid for.
Cheney. Wall Street allowed to run wild. Bush and his daddy's friends.
You're lucky there's a middle class left. Had McCain won, you'd see
30% unemployment now with companies being very, very picky about who
they hire and how long they get to keep their job. Big business like
to pick employees and pay them as little as they can get away with.

That's an interesting rewrite of history.

Not a rewrite even if you say so.

--
Alias

On 10/26/2010 03:59 AM, Zoolook wrote:
On 26/10/2010 00:25, Alias wrote:
On 10/25/2010 11:42 PM, Zoolook wrote:
On 24/10/2010 17:55, Alias wrote:

Web stats are not reliable because they only monitor certain sites,
not the entire web.

they do not have to monitor "the entire web" - ever hear of something
called statistics? probably not since it involves math that is beyond
your ability.

Of course I have and I know they can be manipulated to tell you just
about anything. Some of my favorites were put out by the tobacco
companies, 9 out of 10 doctors recommend Kools.

So you note that statistics can be misrepresented and skewed to support
a particular claim.

Precisely.


Again, if you were to take the USA out of the picture, Linux usage
would be much higher.

and if there was no such thing as gravity we could all fly to work.

Unlike gravity, the USA could be taken out of the picture.

And then try to boost Linux reported usage by removing a country (in
your opinion) that has a high non-Linux usage from a statistical
analysis.

Yes, it would give a different picture.


Oh the irony!


What, that most Americans use Windows and are denizens in most of the
net bots that serve us spam?


Not so much that, but more that someone can suggest that statistics cant
be relied upon, then tries (openly) to skew statistics.

You might as well say that "100% of my Linux desktop machines run Linux,
so desktop Linux must obviously have a higher %age of usage then other
OS's"


My usage is a bit different than the world's usage minus the USA.

--
Alias

some idiot forging chrisv wrote:

That's an interesting rewrite of history.

Ignore the forger.

some idiot forging chrisv wrote:

Plus Leiberman.

Ignore the forger.

On 10/26/2010 02:35 PM, chrisv wrote:
some idiot forging chrisv wrote:

That's an interesting rewrite of history.

Ignore the forger.


Some people can't deal with their own identity I guess.

--
Alias

On 10/25/2010 12:48 AM, Valorie *~ wrote:

"Glenn Hall" wrote in message
...
Linux is just more well planned and thought out in my opinion.

After this total nightmare with W-7, all it's problems and the MS
security crap that I can't get rid of for good... our next PC will be a
MAC. We've had it. :-(

Enjoy your over-priced, under-powered machine, troll.

On 10/26/2010 06:21 PM, milt wrote:
On 10/25/2010 12:48 AM, Valorie *~ wrote:

"Glenn Hall" wrote in message
...
Linux is just more well planned and thought out in my opinion.

After this total nightmare with W-7, all it's problems and the MS
security crap that I can't get rid of for good... our next PC will be a
MAC. We've had it. :-(

Enjoy your over-priced, under-powered machine, troll.

Not to mention:

http://www.pcworld.com/article/20854...us_threat.html

--
Alias

On 10/25/2010 1:43 AM, RonB wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 00:56:25 -0500, Valorie *~ wrote:

BINGO!!!!!!!!!! In asking some of my friends questions about computers
this past month, I find they know almost nothing. One friend doesn't
even have anti-virus software on her old XP PC. How does she do it?
When they have a problem they run them into the shop in town = $$$$.
They don't add software because they don't buy or download any. They do
email and surf the web... that's about it. So they're happy...........

And, if that's all you're doing with your computer (and that's all a lot
of people are doing with their computers), then you can install Linux and
not have to worry a about viruses or malware, or the registry getting
corrupted. You're friends would be the perfect candidates for Linux.


No they wouldn't. Since they don't understand computers there is no way
on Earth they could handle Linux has soon as it did something really
weird or require some arcane command line commands to get something
running. Actually a Mac would be better for them. Macs are for people
that don't want to learn computers and just like spending money.

On 10/26/2010 06:25 PM, milt wrote:
On 10/25/2010 1:43 AM, RonB wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 00:56:25 -0500, Valorie *~ wrote:

BINGO!!!!!!!!!! In asking some of my friends questions about computers
this past month, I find they know almost nothing. One friend doesn't
even have anti-virus software on her old XP PC. How does she do it?
When they have a problem they run them into the shop in town = $$$$.
They don't add software because they don't buy or download any. They do
email and surf the web... that's about it. So they're happy...........

And, if that's all you're doing with your computer (and that's all a lot
of people are doing with their computers), then you can install Linux and
not have to worry a about viruses or malware, or the registry getting
corrupted. You're friends would be the perfect candidates for Linux.


No they wouldn't. Since they don't understand computers there is no way
on Earth they could handle Linux has soon as it did something really
weird or require some arcane command line commands to get something
running. Actually a Mac would be better for them. Macs are for people
that don't want to learn computers and just like spending money.


Funny, I haven't opened a terminal in YEARS. Linux Mint is far more user
friendly for non techs than Windows 7. In Valorie's case, she would need
Windows installed for her as well as Mint but once Mint's set up, it's
point and click all the way.

--
Alias

On 10/24/2010 2:52 PM, Glenn Hall wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 14:04:46 -0500, Bob I wrote:


Only reason to "nuke" Windows and install Linutz is that the Windows
installation was pirated, and the user wasn't bright enough to turn in
the pirate business that sold the computer.

Linutz?
Never heard of it.

Its another one of those Linux distros... there is so many of them I
wouldn't be surprised if one was actually called Linutz.

On Tue, 26 Oct 2010 11:21:58 -0500, milt wrote:

On 10/25/2010 12:48 AM, Valorie *~ wrote:

"Glenn Hall" wrote in message
...
Linux is just more well planned and thought out in my opinion.

After this total nightmare with W-7, all it's problems and the MS
security crap that I can't get rid of for good... our next PC will be a
MAC. We've had it. :-(

Enjoy your over-priced, under-powered machine, troll.

A troll? Yes. Over-priced? Most definitely. Under-powered?
Debatable. But it's a scenerio I'm seeing more and more.

A friend, who's been using Windows for 20+ years, just replaced his 5
year old Sony Viao notebook (Windows XP) with a 15" Mac notebook after
test driving a friend's for a day. He had been considering W7 machines
up to then. He's so happy with the performance that he's eventually
going to replace his 4 year old Vista desktop with a Mac, too. He said
it's worth the extra money not to have to deal with Windows' "problems."


Stef

On 10/26/2010 9:28 AM, Alias wrote:
On 10/26/2010 06:25 PM, milt wrote:
On 10/25/2010 1:43 AM, RonB wrote:
On Mon, 25 Oct 2010 00:56:25 -0500, Valorie *~ wrote:

BINGO!!!!!!!!!! In asking some of my friends questions about computers
this past month, I find they know almost nothing. One friend doesn't
even have anti-virus software on her old XP PC. How does she do it?
When they have a problem they run them into the shop in town = $$$$.
They don't add software because they don't buy or download any. They do
email and surf the web... that's about it. So they're happy...........

And, if that's all you're doing with your computer (and that's all a lot
of people are doing with their computers), then you can install Linux
and
not have to worry a about viruses or malware, or the registry getting
corrupted. You're friends would be the perfect candidates for Linux.


No they wouldn't. Since they don't understand computers there is no way
on Earth they could handle Linux has soon as it did something really
weird or require some arcane command line commands to get something
running. Actually a Mac would be better for them. Macs are for people
that don't want to learn computers and just like spending money.


Funny, I haven't opened a terminal in YEARS. Linux Mint is far more user
friendly for non techs than Windows 7.

That is a LIE that only you believe...if in fact you actually believe it.
Of course, believing ones own lies is a true marker of are pathological
LIAR...like you!
Oops!

In Valorie's case, she would need
Windows installed for her as well as Mint but once Mint's set up, it's
point and click all the way.

Point an click to where? No where?
Figures! You are a pathological LIAR and a professional spamming, lying,
linturd troll.
Get lost asshole...you're time in here has expired long ago, as has your
creditability.

On 10/26/2010 9:35 AM, milt wrote:
On 10/24/2010 2:52 PM, Glenn Hall wrote:
On Sun, 24 Oct 2010 14:04:46 -0500, Bob I wrote:


Only reason to "nuke" Windows and install Linutz is that the Windows
installation was pirated, and the user wasn't bright enough to turn in
the pirate business that sold the computer.

Linutz?
Never heard of it.

Its another one of those Linux distros... there is so many of them I
wouldn't be surprised if one was actually called Linutz.

It is said that there are more linux distros than actual users!

Alias wrote:
On 10/25/2010 06:01 PM, Quantum Leaper wrote:
Alias wrote:
On 10/25/2010 05:22 AM, Quantum Leaper wrote:
Alias wrote:
On 10/24/2010 06:06 PM, Quantum Leaper wrote:
Alias wrote:
On 10/24/2010 04:17 PM, Quantum Leaper wrote:
I am glad you like Linux but most people don't upgrade the OS
other than getting a new Computer.

I assume you mean most people in the USA. Here in Spain, most
people buy computers to order unless it's a laptop and I know
many people who own laptops and the first thing they did was
nuke Windows and install Linux.
If that was the truth, then way does Linux have less then 5% of
the desktops?



Let's see, how did you come up with that figure? Supposedly, there
are about 1 billion computers on line in the world which would
mean, according to your figures, that there a 50 million Linux
users. Fact is, however, that no one knows how many Linux
installs there are because Linux doesn't need to be activated or
become "genuine" and there are no store receipts to count like
there is with Windows. I suspect if you take the stats of the
backwards USA out of the picture, the user share for Linux would
be much higher. After all, only the USA could have such ignorant,
biased bigots running for congress like there are today. Those
same supporters of Beck, Limbaugh, Palin, O'Donnell and Rand Paul
don't know any better than to order a computer from Best Buy with
Windows preloaded.

I was being nice when I said 5%, most websites say less then 1%.
http://linux.slashdot.org/story/10/1...-Linux-Is-Dead

Slashdot wasn't the only one reporting... You can spin the data
anyway you want but Linux on the desktop isn't going far, unlike
in the server room.

Linux on the desktop has already gone far and is growing. Live with
it and get the **** over it.


I gave you where I got my info, now how about you showing where you
got your numbers, if you can?

From you.

I said less then 5%, you know I could have meant anywhere from 0% to 4.9%,
which is LESS than 5%, so if you agree with my numbers you know Linux on
the desktop is really just about 1%, thanks for agreeing with me...


I agree Linux is growing in the backroom but not on the desktop,
advocates have been saying this is the Year of Desktop Linux, then
when the year ends, it now where to be seen.

False, at least in Spain. I see computer chains installing Ubuntu or
Mint. I see books about Linux in the department stores. I know dozens
of people who use it. I didn't see that a few years ago.

One last thing, I would love to see Linux on everyone desktop,

Then install it on one.

Why, too hard to get my games to run under Linux, also I had it
installed on this computer until I lost my 230G HD a month or so ago.

I use it
for my data server, in fact I just got a 'new computer' that will
make a nice upgrade from my old one.



Are you going to put Linux on it?

I just got it a couple of days ago, and my router, cable modem and HD all
died within 2 weeks of each other and I have not replaced the router yet.
Hopefully I will be getting a new router soon. As soon as I get a router,
I will be putting Linux on my 'new' Dell computer.