If this is your first visit, be sure to check out the FAQ by clicking the link above. You may have to register before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages, select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below. |
|
|
Thread Tools | Rate Thread | Display Modes |
#16
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 02/04/2011 13:42, BillW50 wrote:
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 Not so. Linux Netbooks were being sold alongside XP Netbooks at about the same cost. At least they were here. And Linux netbooks were outselling the Windows ones even so. And suddenly they disappeared... only came with Linux on them. You couldn't buy a netbook back then with Windows on it. As there just wasn't any. Oh yes there were. I bought one of the very fist Netbooks - a Toshiba NB100 and there were Windows netbooks being sold alongside it... |
Ads |
#17
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 04/02/2011 02:49 PM, Gordon wrote:
On 02/04/2011 13:42, BillW50 wrote: 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 Not so. Linux Netbooks were being sold alongside XP Netbooks at about the same cost. At least they were here. And Linux netbooks were outselling the Windows ones even so. And suddenly they disappeared... only came with Linux on them. You couldn't buy a netbook back then with Windows on it. As there just wasn't any. Oh yes there were. I bought one of the very fist Netbooks - a Toshiba NB100 and there were Windows netbooks being sold alongside it... Bill eats MS FUD for breakfast, lunch and dinner. -- Alias |
#18
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 4/2/2011 8:23 AM, Alias wrote:
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? I don't care what you care or believe in -- you are nothing, zero, not worth anything. |
#19
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 04/02/2011 03:22 PM, Big Steel wrote:
On 4/2/2011 8:23 AM, Alias wrote: 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? I don't care what you care or believe in -- you are nothing, zero, not worth anything. Then why do you keep replying to my posts? -- Alias |
#20
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 4/2/2011 8:27 AM, Alias wrote:
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. I don't care if it was last week. If you think something made by man can't be attacked by another man, you are really are a big time fool. |
#21
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 4/2/2011 9:24 AM, Alias wrote:
snipped a fool's babble You fool..... |
#22
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 04/02/2011 03:25 PM, Big Steel wrote:
On 4/2/2011 8:27 AM, Alias wrote: 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. I don't care if it was last week. If you think something made by man can't be attacked by another man, you are really are a big time fool. Never said that. What I *have* said is that Linux is bulletproof *compared* to Windows. Having said that, those vulnerabilities were patched long ago, please try to keep up or can you with that big steel shoved up your sorry ass? -- Alias |
#23
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
In ,
Gordon wrote: On 02/04/2011 13:42, BillW50 wrote: 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 Not so. Linux Netbooks were being sold alongside XP Netbooks at about the same cost. At least they were here. And Linux netbooks were outselling the Windows ones even so. And suddenly they disappeared... No, no! I was watching all of this very carefully. And you could see it on eBay clear as a bell. The Linux ones were not selling and the Windows ones sold like hotcakes. You also saw a lot of them that originally had Linux on them, but was selling on eBay with Windows installed. You could tell them from the keyboard (no Windows key, just the Linux Home key instead) and the missing Windows stickers. only came with Linux on them. You couldn't buy a netbook back then with Windows on it. As there just wasn't any. Oh yes there were. I bought one of the very fist Netbooks - a Toshiba NB100 and there were Windows netbooks being sold alongside it... Your first netbook doesn't count (as Toshiba was a late comer). The first netbooks were made by Asus and nobody else back in 2007. And they only came with Xandros Linux and Windows XP drivers and nothing else. There were no other options. Yes I bought a few of them. Even though they didn't include Windows, many users were putting Windows on them anyway. And many other manufactures realized they missed the boat (most experts said netbooks would never sell) and virtually all of them scrambled to come out with their own netbooks. Which started to appear in early 2008. About this same time, Windows also started to appear on some of the netbooks. And when people had a real choice between Windows netbooks and Linux netbooks, Windows ones were far outselling Linux ones. I know, I was there. The only reason why Linux ones sold so well at first is because Linux netbooks were very easy to find. And Windows ones were hard to find since they sold out very fast. So many bought Linux ones (including me) and put on their own Windows on them. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) Centrino Core Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3 |
#24
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 4/2/2011 9:32 AM, Alias wrote:
snipped a fool's babble You fool..... |
#25
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 4/2/2011 9:36 AM, Alias wrote:
snipped a fool's babble You foolish fool...... |
#26
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 04/02/2011 03:35 PM, BillW50 wrote:
In , Gordon wrote: On 02/04/2011 13:42, BillW50 wrote: 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 Not so. Linux Netbooks were being sold alongside XP Netbooks at about the same cost. At least they were here. And Linux netbooks were outselling the Windows ones even so. And suddenly they disappeared... No, no! I was watching all of this very carefully. And you could see it on eBay clear as a bell. The Linux ones were not selling and the Windows ones sold like hotcakes. You also saw a lot of them that originally had Linux on them, but was selling on eBay with Windows installed. You could tell them from the keyboard (no Windows key, just the Linux Home key instead) and the missing Windows stickers. only came with Linux on them. You couldn't buy a netbook back then with Windows on it. As there just wasn't any. Oh yes there were. I bought one of the very fist Netbooks - a Toshiba NB100 and there were Windows netbooks being sold alongside it... Your first netbook doesn't count (as Toshiba was a late comer). The first netbooks were made by Asus and nobody else back in 2007. And they only came with Xandros Linux and Windows XP drivers and nothing else. There were no other options. Yes I bought a few of them. Even though they didn't include Windows, many users were putting Windows on them anyway. And many other manufactures realized they missed the boat (most experts said netbooks would never sell) and virtually all of them scrambled to come out with their own netbooks. Which started to appear in early 2008. About this same time, Windows also started to appear on some of the netbooks. And when people had a real choice between Windows netbooks and Linux netbooks, Windows ones were far outselling Linux ones. I know, I was there. The only reason why Linux ones sold so well at first is because Linux netbooks were very easy to find. And Windows ones were hard to find since they sold out very fast. So many bought Linux ones (including me) and put on their own Windows on them. I have nuked Windows on net books and installed Linux on dozens of net books for people unhappy with Windows and all the malware it gets. You, as usual, don't know what the **** you're talking about. -- Alias |
#27
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 4/2/2011 9:39 AM, Alias wrote:
On 04/02/2011 03:35 PM, BillW50 wrote: snipped Can you stop yanking the clown Alias' chain BillW50? He is not talking about anything but Linux being parked up his John Brown behind parts. |
#28
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
In ,
Alias wrote: Never said that. What I *have* said is that Linux is bulletproof *compared* to Windows. A Linux virus gains root control by a simple buffer overflow. So how is it bulletproof compared to Windows? Gee that is how Windows viruses does it too. Maybe Linux should try another bulletproof vest? ;-) Having said that, those vulnerabilities were patched long ago, please try to keep up or can you with that big steel shoved up your sorry ass? Gee Windows doesn't get patches too? Funny that is what I thought those Windows Updates are for. ;-) So when did Linux become Gold and there is no more holes in Linux to be found? I missed that announcement, so can you show it to us? Because the last I heard is that Linux had holes in it since the beginning, three years ago, today and long into the future. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) Centrino Core Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3 |
#29
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
In ,
Alias wrote: I have nuked Windows on net books and installed Linux on dozens of net books for people unhappy with Windows and all the malware it gets. You, as usual, don't know what the **** you're talking about. The truth is the pot is calling the kettle black again. Okay Alias, show us the data that supports your claim? As the last data I saw Linux was still less than 1% of desktop users. -- Bill Gateway M465e ('06 era) Centrino Core Duo 1.83G - 2GB - Windows XP SP3 |
#30
|
|||
|
|||
Linux
On 04/02/11 06:09 am, BillW50 wrote:
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. I used Warp 3 and Warp 4 on many different machines, and for many years now I have been using its OEM successor, eComStation, on modern hardware. (Why be surprised that Warp4, released in 1996, doesn't have drivers for much-newer hardware?) The machine on which I am typing this is running eComStation 2.0 on a 3GHz dual-core machine with a mixture of SATA and SCSI drives; the on-board sound and Gigabit networking work. It also runs fine on a ThinkPad T61. The only trouble I've ever had installing it was from an IDE optical drive on a machine with a weird combo IDE/FireWire chip, but once I installed an SATA optical drive eCS installed and ran just fine -- on a 3.4GHz quad-core machine (OS/2 had support for 64 CPUs from way back). Perce |
Thread Tools | |
Display Modes | Rate This Thread |
|
|